Photo courtesy OZinOH via Flickr California's ambitious goal of obtaining a third of its
electricity from renewable sources by 2020 has spawned a green energy boom with
thousands of megawatts of solar, wind, and biomass power plants planned for ...
the middle of nowhere.
And therein lies the elephant in the green room: transmission. Connecting solar farms and geothermal plants in the Mojave Desert and wind farms in the Tehachapis to coastal metropolises means building a massive new transmission system. The cost for 13 major new power lines would top $15.7 billion, according to a report released in August by the state's Renewable Energy Transmission Initiative.
The initiative, called RETI, is an attempt to build a statewide green grid in an environmentally sensitive way that will avoid the years-long legal battles that have short-circuited past transmission projects.
But the rapidly evolving solar photovoltaic market may moot the need for some of those expensive and contentious transmission lines, requiring transmission planners to rethink their long-term plans, according to Black & Veatch, the giant consulting and engineering firm that does economic analysis for RETI.
In short, solar panel prices have plummeted so much as to make viable the prospect of generating gigawatts of electricity from rooftops and photovoltaic farms built near cities.
"This has pretty significant implications in terms of transmission planning," Ryan Pletka, Black & Veatch's renewable energy project manager, told me last week. "What we thought would happen in a five-year time frame has happened in one year."
That's prompted Pletka to radically revise the potential for so-called distributed generation -- solar systems that can plug into the existing grid without the construction of new transmission lines -- to contribute to California's need for 60,000 gigawatt hours of renewable electricity by 2020.
When Black & Veatch did its initial analysis last year, it predicted that photovoltaic solar could contribute 2,000 gigawatt hours, given the high cost of conventional solar modules and the fact that a next-generation technology, thin-film solar, had yet to make a big commercial breakthrough.
Pletka's new number is a bit of a shocker: Distributed generation could potentially provide up to 40,000 gigawatt hours of electricity, or two-thirds of projected demand.
"Certainly some of the new transmission lines will be needed but not as many as before," he says.
That analysis also calls into question the need for as many large-scale solar power plants. Currently there are about 35 Big Solar projects planned for California that would generate more than 12,000 megawatts of electricity.
A game-changer has been the rapid rise of thin-film solar. Thin-film solar modules are essentially printed on glass or other materials. Although such solar panels are less efficient at converting sunlight into electricity than traditional crystalline modules -- which are made from silicon wafers -- they can be produced more cheaply.
In the past year, utilities like Southern California Edison have signed deals with First Solar, the thin-film powerhouse, to buy electricity from four massive megawatt thin-film solar farms. And in September, China inked an agreement with the Tempe, Ariz., company to build a 2,000-megawatt power plant, the world's largest.
The next day, Nanosolar, a Silicon Valley startup, announced it had secured $4.1 billion in orders for its thin-film modules, which it claims will be even more efficient and cost less to produce than those made by First Solar.
Meanwhile, California's two biggest utilities, PG&E and Southern California Edison, this year each unveiled initiatives to collectively install 1,000 megawatts of distributed solar generation. SoCal Edison will put solar arrays on warehouse roofs throughout the Southland -- First Solar snagged the first big contracts -- while PG&E is focusing on ground-mounted solar systems near its existing substations.
So what's behind this rooftop revolution in solar?
Partly it's due to a glut in the solar panel market. The global economy collapsed last year just as solar module makers ramped up production. But it's also a result of technological innovation and economies of scale that have made thin-film solar, for instance, competitive. Strides have also been made in cutting installation costs, which typically account for half the price of photovoltaic systems.
The solar market, of course, is heavily dependent on government incentives -- in the United States and overseas -- and thus vulnerable to disruption. But the trajectory remains one of falling prices and thus Black & Veatch's projections pose a conundrum for transmission planners.
Given that transmission projects can take a decade to complete, power bureaucrats make their plans based on 10-year projections of energy costs according to Pletka. That wasn't much of a problem when planning transmission for, say, a grid supplied by natural gas-fired power plants as the technology or the market was not likely to change radically.
Not so for solar, where technological advances and fast-changing market conditions are shaking long-held views that photovoltaic power, or PV, is not ready for prime time.
"I've worked in renewables since the ‘90s and I myself had written off solar PV for years and years and years," Pletka says. "That's a firmly rooted mindset among everyone who works from a traditional utility planning perspective."
"We present this new information on photovoltaics to people and it's still not sinking in," he adds. "It would cause a major shift in how we plan."
While fewer massive transmission projects would be needed if California generates gigawatts of electricity from rooftops, the distribution network will need to be upgraded and a smart grid created to manage tens of thousands of pint-sized solar power plants.
Cities, Pletka notes, could become generators of electricity rather than consumers of power.
"It brings up questions people haven't had to talk about before," says Pletka.
The real price of cheap Walmart eggs?
This New Agtivist wants to grow food in old K-Marts
How bad are the next few years going to suck? 


Comments
Post a Comment +
Very interesting. Does anyone know what cost Black & Veatch assumed for thin-film PV in this study?
I skimmed the RETI report, could not find any mention of cost assumptions for PV. Levelized costs would be very helpful, if we can get them to share their assumptions. Whatever the unit, perhaps they could disclose their cost assumptions for all renewables, compared?
Also, for how long will these new low-costs of thin-film hold? If there is a glut in world supply today, for how long can we expect prices to remain low?
Todd -- did the Black & Veatch report initially estimate 2,000 megawatt hours or 2,000 gigawatt hours for distributed generation? Typo, or truly mind-boggling shift in viability?
I wonder if this study included a computer model of a distributed renewable grid? That San Diego solar rooftop study is looking more and more prescient now.
This is great news, they forgot a really big potential part of a distributed grid though, heliosatat fields over factory parking lots and buildings and even over surrounding farm land. All the energy could be focued on a solar furnace tower to supply factory heat, then the heat can be stored to generate power all night long.
Even malls and other big buildings could host solar furnace distributed generation and storage. By adding enough of these into the grid and relying on waste stream biogas backup generation, distributed at farms, landfills, food processing plants, and sewage plants, solar really could supply a sunny region with enough power with much less extra transmission capacity.
But long distance HVDC should still be used as a way for these sunny regions to export their excess power. And import wind power in case of extended cloudy weather. These desert projects look problematic though, it would be better for California to go with a buried HVDC system that connects its different regions with different solar, wind, and biogas resources.
Offshore wind, wave, and ocean current power could be huge there. Far enough offshore on floating platform energy "ships" it would be past NIMBYs POV and it could even desalinate extra water for the state.
The Focus of RETI has primarily been to identify Competitive Renewable Energy Zones,(CREZs) inside,and now outside of the borders of California. This includes a mix of Solar, Wind, Biomass, and Geothermal. The study is currently refining the earlier study results to access the "Low Hanging Fruit" of resources that are remotely clustered, in hopes that subsequent planning and investment in transmission will prove to have "No Regrets".
Most of the identified in state resources has been in the Mohave and Colorado deserts, and the Tehachapi area. Much uncertainty exists in the capital investment and transmission planning aspects of this approach. Question remains: What comes first, high capacity transmission, or central station generation. The state cannot justify stranded costs... neither can rate payers afford it.
The study has never really examined how distributed renewable resources located close to or in Load Centers would not only affect future Load Forecasts, but possibly offset the need for some of the buildout to location constrained renewable resources. The efficient use of existing wires is overlooked.
California energy policy and statute identify that localized Distributed Generation are higher priority in the Loading Order than Infrastructure buildout solutions. It is certainly encouraging that Black and Vetch is finally "considering" the benefits of local based solutions. The RETI study should have looked at renewable DG from the start and ...read more
It looks like computer simulation with various levels of distributed generation and storage operated through a smart grid would be helpful Ron.
It's a shame it hasn't already been done. Any California graduate students out there looking for a project? Maybe the energy secretary could arrange some Lawrence Livermore super computer time to devote to this? Wedge it in between the virtual nuclear weapons testing maybe?
Not that I'm complaining, better to have virtual nukes exploding than real ones. But this would seem so obvious a pressing research task to start designing a California grid upgrade that can adjust to changing technology and renewable energy market dynamics.
R and D on this whole topic seems to be on the back burner somewhere, when it should be fundamental to new energy economy planning. Maybe wait for chinese R and D and just buy a whole new smart grid built there? I guess they'll put it on our credit card eyyh?
RETI has been a spearhead effort that from it's conception has concentrated on Utility Scale centralized generation and transmission. RETI stands for Renewable Energy TRANSMISSION initiative. The vast majority of the participants are energy industry stakeholders. I doubt that these folks really want to see too many behind the meter solutions implemented.
I suspect the reason why there has not been comprehensive analysis of DG and localized solutions are primarily a matter of funding and political will. RETI for example "manages" inputs by narrowly focusing on "Stakeholder Interests", which to date are limited and exclusive. The ends were predetermined, this study is looking at how to tease out the cost drivers and implement the means to that end. It appears that the FACT that the growth of PV located at load is becoming hard to ignore. However RETI to date has NOT inputed High DG scenarios into their analysis.
This approach is really a reflection of greater issues of how financial and industrial interests coupled with consumer apathy and indifference are really becoming insurmountable barriers to effectively addressing Climate Change. We have become a culture that expects powerful interests to solve this problem,meanwhile the number of local and community based solutions are ignored, ridiculed, and lack equal incentives for implementation. We are really experiencing the results of this approach on a global level.We rely on this structure for life's ...read more
For an update on RETI and an idea on the initiatives current inertia...
http://www.energy.ca.gov/reti/steering/2009-11-03_meeting/documents/
As suggested in the posted docs, I certainly hope and await that there will be meaningful dialog and outreach to the folks who ultimately will pay for this.
We really need to get behind this R and D issue Ron. We need a computer model that studies the transition (that would happen over the next 20 years) as greater penetration of renewable DG and S (distributed generation and storage) starts to shut down centralized fossil and finally nuclear power. Boulder and Austin have real live smart grid projects to study too.
We can't even seem to get a Grist report on how things are going in Boulder. You just know main stream media will not cover it.
Without a sophisticated model that fills out the vision of new energy economy possibilities/probabilitieswe will continue to face moronic anti-renewable talking points ad nauseum. Get ready for anti-climate cure teabaggin'.
A model could also help estimate required investment/subsidy, manufacturing and job growth from greening the economy. Does anyone around the Grist thread have a connection to the energy secretary? He likes super computers, right? Hehey.
Dr X, It seems ridiculous to call it a Smart Grid if all it ends up being is a bigger cumbersome version of the century old Westinghouse model, without meter readers. A real paradigm shift needs to occur with consumer and the industry alike. The energy market is like a really big ship, slow to turn around... maybe jumping ship is a better option?
The R&D itself that would model a true overhaul of the system would probably require a herculean effort. There is little Political will or willing investors. There are just an enormous number of factors, and primary dominant interests. In California alone there are some huge barriers to coordinated planning. While the regulators and system operators are cognitive the lack of coordination,to date, uncertainty seems to be the only certainty.
ISOs and RTOs have the software and the ability to model the grid from a very diverse range of perspectives and inputs. This can be incredibly complex and specialized knowledge is requisite.
The DOE, NREL, and a number of universities have done studies on increasing the penetration of renewables, smart grid, demand response, PHEV etc. etc. but I'm aware of none that are done in coordination and would be considered a comprehensive package. Heck, I've even seen contrary reports coming out of the same labs, go figure. New data or funding issues? I guess it is kinda the gist of Todd Woody's article.
As you point out, Renewable DG and Storage are key factors to reducing ...read more
Yeah Ron, I agree on coming at this from the individual independent end, if each home or building has backup and storage built in, that would make a positive cash flow regional renewable source that could break into utility markets. A wedge like the one here in Wisconsin made by a utility is effective, they voluntarily pay 23 cents per kwh to customers for their solar power. Make a supergrid national that could serve as a free market, regulated of course, and we would be looking at booming investment in renewables.
Here is where we are at now. 10% of us want to go green power, even grid disconnected green power. Less that 1% are now doing than. As the slim percentage that are proving renewables work get more youtube and mass media exposure, the rest of us 10% of renewable belivers will jump in. That will create a huge societal change where corporate mass production really kicks in behind green.
I think a super computer model that tests varying mixtures of indivdual renewable distributed generation and storage homes, buildings, farms, and factories connected together using distributed smart grid switching compared at varying levels interconnected with existing baseload power would be vital. It could present a transitional timeline that would inform investment, R and D, and subsidy.
Replacements for baseload like great plains wind farms or offshore wind/wave power could also be taken into the modeling.
DR X, I like your optimism, and some parts of your vision. There are just so many factors that unwittingly conspire to make a healing, transparent national energy plan very hard to fathom. Not the least of which are these; a lack of an articulate climate change legislation, financial realities that create investor reluctance and reductions the number of providers in the RE generation market, complex entrenched regulatory structures that move slow, environmental concerns about sprawling energy facilities, dilution of innovative technologic vision and efficiencies due to profit concerns, the complexity of transmission rights, and utility solvency.
Energy markets are monstrosities, I wish I could be more optimistic that it would reform, but I can not get my small mind around how this really happens with positive results. Meanwhile, simplicity seems like the place to run to. Simplified siting, permitting, installation, and billing or lack of.
Make it, store it, use it, all at the same place. Probably not very visionary, or currently relevant in some eyes...
From the perspective of someone who has made their own, stored their own, and been disconnected from the grid for the last 20 years, I don't see an "each home/building" the right way to go.
Energy systems take some maintenance. It wouldn't be very efficient to locate, say, a battery bank in every house and then have to have it serviced by someone going from house to house to check water levels, clean terminals, change out batteries at the end of their life, ....
I suspect a much better model is "neighborhood" storage with a combination of centralized and (perhaps) distributed generation. I'm uncertain about putting PV on individual houses. Will they get washed and adjusted throughout the solar year? Will snow get cleaned off when needed? Nano Solar thinks it makes more sense to put solar in local solar farms rather than spread across residential roofs.
Creating storage on moderate scale at many places on the grid would mean less load on the grid and the ability for an area to maintain some flow in the event of transmission disruption. Use some lower cost real estate such as played out manufacturing space or industrial park. Install flow batteries and later on "80%" EV batteries. Make the installation large enough to support a trained maintenance staff.
That way less expensive power could be fed into the storage unit and fed back out during peak hours. Less need for big pipes into the area in order to service the total peak load. And the ...read more
Bob,
Storage; the holy grail or holy nightmare ? Convenience; blessing or curse?
I too know the joys of maintaining an F.L.A. battery. I also realize it's not everyones cup of tea. I'm not really supposing that such an approach would be widely adopted, but the basic elements remain. With generation and storage, does being wired into a network remain necessary or beneficial?
Does a hybrid, not unlike the architecture of the internet make sense?
Could you get in storage device and go for a drive?
I admire and actually advocate for your ideas of distributed storage. Really, it would be a natural and intuitive "Smart Grid" addition.
But the unfortunate reality today is that small scale energy storage devices struggle for parity in todays grid operations, and energy market. These are yet to be defined beyond pilot programs.
Tomorrows "Neighborhood" storage is a great concept. But ask yourself, How does it go from concept to reality in todays model, or even next year, or next decade. I think the closest mechanism would be a community aggregator the sells into some ancillary service or demand response market, How much capacity would be an acceptable scale financially? Do you and you neighbors act as market participants or does the aggregator? Maybe this should just be another utility service and charge? Should the utility own the PV on your roof or other generation device as well? Should these devices just be out of the way?
My point is; dilution ...read more
Bob,
Storage; the holy grail or holy nightmare ? Convenience; blessing or curse?
I too know the joys of maintaining an F.L.A. battery. I also realize it's not everyones cup of tea. I'm not really supposing that such an approach would be widely adopted, but the basic elements remain. With generation and storage, does being wired into a network remain necessary or beneficial?
Does a hybrid, not unlike the architecture of the internet make sense?
Could you get in your storage device and go for a drive?
I admire and actually advocate for your ideas of distributed storage. Really, it would be a natural and intuitive "Smart Grid" addition.
But the unfortunate reality today is that small scale energy storage devices struggle for parity in todays grid operations, and energy market. These are yet to be defined beyond pilot programs.
Tomorrows "Neighborhood" storage is a great concept. But ask yourself, How does it go from concept to reality in todays model, or even next year, or next decade. I think the closest mechanism would be a community aggregator the sells into some ancillary service or demand response market, How much capacity would be an acceptable scale financially? Do you and you neighbors act as market participants or does the aggregator? Maybe this should just be another utility service and charge? Should the utility own the PV on your roof or other generation device as well? Should these devices just be out of the way?
My point is; dilution ...read more
Bob, Ron here's my model.
It involves extreme sacrifice, low power electricty only and even lower emergency power with battery storage (new Oasis lead acid battery, 1500 cycle life, no maintenance) and biogas backup. Heat and cold storage built into the building (an insulated tent), air and water pressure stored for washing, solar and biogas cooking, composting toilet, solar cogeneration (electricty and heat), small scale wind (vertical rotor), ground source heating/cooling, wood burning backup for heating, cooking, and electricty (with a thermocouple).
These individual dwellings would be interconnected with a grid that is also connected to a few larger buildings with more solar panels and batteries, bigger biogas systems, and bigger wind machines.
One of the main factors is how much sacrifice people will be comfortable with. A local system like this with say 20 of the smaller dwellings and three larger shop/greenhouse, library/kitchen, and meeting hall like structures, ought to be able to produce a surplus at times that could not all be stored.
By that time maybe my local utility would let me connect that local grid with theirs. It would tend to smooth out low power situations, so emergency power would only be needed in storms. And allow the surplus to get onto the grid.
This is the sort of scenario to start out with i think, in real life for me, and in a computer simulation. It would show how the smart grid could be built up layer after ...read more
"It involves extreme sacrifice, low power electricty only and even lower emergency power with battery storage (new Oasis lead acid battery, 1500 cycle life, no maintenance) and biogas backup. Heat and cold storage built into the building (an insulated tent), air and water pressure stored for washing, solar and biogas cooking, composting toilet, solar cogeneration (electricty and heat), small scale wind (vertical rotor), ground source heating/cooling, wood burning backup for heating, cooking, and electricty (with a thermocouple)."
Well, good luck getting more than a handful of people signed up for that trip. You could probably get a few energetic and highly concerned twenty-somethings, but don't look for Joe Sixpac and your Aunt Nellie to join.
The solutions which I think will be widely adopted are those which are "easy" for the end user to implement, cost only a tiny bit more or ideally less, and if they involve lifestyle changes make life more comfortable.
I think we will see some "individual" power storage as EVs come to the market and smart meters are installed. I think people are going to find it so little work to plug in each night that they will accept that new chore. Given the large "fuel" savings provided with EVs and some financial incentives from utility companies they'll find that 15 seconds to plug the cord to their car when they get home.
Then down the road, I think we'll see very affordable 'plug in robots'. There are already robotic ...read more
Ok Bob (evidently Ron too), so I guess you won't be in the small minority that would sacrifice for the future of the biosphere. No problem, we only need to convince 10% of us to join up.
I figure that 10% are ready right now and would jump at the chance to actually experience this sort of green living, at least on vacation. This is all it takes to start a trend.
The problem is not that going green can't be done, it just can't be done in time (to head off the worst effects of GHG climate change) unless the citizens of wealthy nations are willing to sacrifice to do it. Rich and poor alike will need to squat on composting toilets, in fact that's a perfect example of how the gas guzzling, coal burning culture needs to come back down to earth, literally.
Oh yeah, I forgot to add plugin vehicles. And eco-clothes washing needs some innovation. All these green fixes will need scaling up to apply to cities and large apartment buildings (or the organically squeamish who can't abide the thought of not wasting gallons of water on each flush), in the case of composting toilets, the suction flush system.
You guys keep on blogging all about how things are hopeless and can't change though. Meanwhile I will be hanging out with the green revolutionaries. We will be adding the safe, clean compost back into the soil, thank you. No need for sewer pumping trucks. Hehey.
Get real X...
"It involves extreme sacrifice, low power electricty only and even lower emergency power with battery storage (new Oasis lead acid battery, 1500 cycle life, no maintenance) and biogas backup. Heat and cold storage built into the building (an insulated tent), air and water pressure stored for washing, solar and biogas cooking, composting toilet, solar cogeneration (electricty and heat), small scale wind (vertical rotor), ground source heating/cooling, wood burning backup for heating, cooking, and electricty (with a thermocouple)."
I live in a house that I built. It has 2x6 framing so that I could increase the amount of insulation in the walls. It is designed so that in the coldest part of the year I can close off everything but the living room/kitchen and heat only that part. Not just "close the door". There's insulation in the walls and ceiling between those parts of the house. All windows are low-e, double paned with fiberglass frames.
I heat exclusively with wood. I make about 90% of my electricity with solar. I've shaved my electrical usage down to a minimum. I've evolved from a desktop and CRT monitor that pulled over 200 watts to a netbook that uses 14.
I pump water when I have extra solar power and store it in tanks 80' higher than the house, then use gravity to bring it back under pressure as I need it.
I haven't owned a clothes dryer since the 1970s when I bought a house that came with one. Even then I rarely used it.
...read more
Yeah,
Who'd wanna "sacrifice" ?
Plug in robots, could sure make life better!
Unless it's quick easy and doesn't break into meaningful big screen tv time, it ain't gonna happen...
BTW, terminology update: Its now "Joe 12 pack" and Aunt "Whalie".
A sad state, that is reflected across the spectrum of our culture, and the condition of our planet.
Lots of interesting discussion here. One of the biggest reasons for smart grid development that's not been mentioned here is the importance of appropriate price signals.
DOE Secretary Chu recently noted that consumers are going to have to get used to the idea of paying higher rates during peak load periods. TOU is mandatory for commercial customers in many markets, but the PUC's have been reticent to require TOU tariffs for residential. A national law (a la PURPA) is likely to give them political cover to 'do the right thing' in the near future. Just as cap-and-trade will appropriately allocate societal costs to electricity production, TOU and real-time pricing tariffs will appropriately allocate power costs according to the customer's load profile. Those who need to use power on peak will pay dearly (or install solar panels), and those who tend to use more power off-peak, or who can load-shift, will benefit.
The key to mandatory residential TOU and real-time price tariffs is an autonomous means for the home to react to price signals. As one of the pioneers in the home automation industry, I worked on these problems 25 years ago (we didn't call it smart grid then, but I was involved in one of the protocols now used by smart meters). However, without TOU tariffs to drive demand for smart products that could respond to price signals, the market never materialized.
Fast forward 25 years. The utility communications infrastructure that can achieve this is ...read more
Interesting. I can see the easy selection "now" vs. "cheap" settings. Some people won't take it any further than that, I would imagine.
Ideally everything can be run by PC/cellphone/gadget which will allow people to tinker with their settings and get online suggestions tailored to their situation.
I can see an online analysis feature that would take a look at how you had your house set up the previous month and show you how you might adjust your settings to achieve maximum savings.
Looks like Whirlpool is committed to manufacturing one million smart electric clothes dryers by the end of 2011.
Sure seems like were on our way to a more efficient future.
http://www.nytimes.com/gwire/2009/09/29/29greenwire-home-appliances-are-starting-to-wise-up-39537.html
I'm not quite as optimistic.
Reading the article about Whirlpool and GE on the verge of introducing smart appliances almost makes me angry. I spent nearly 8 years of my life working on inter-product communications standards (CEBus) that would have enabled advanced load control (and many other useful applications) two decades ago if consumer product manufacturers had simply been willing to lift their heads out of the sand and smell the roses.
I recall one debate about CRC vs checksum that went on for months because the appliance manufacturers balked at the processing overhead required to support CRC error correction protocols necessary for robust communication. This was at a time when digital controls had begun to show up in top-of-the-line appliances. White-goods manufacturers had standardized on low cost 4-bit COPS embedded processors that were incapable of running CRC. More forward thinking companies argued that 8-bit processors were already becoming a commodity and that by the time the standard we were working on would take effect, 16-bit processors would be ubiquitous and we'd all be wondering why we ever had this argument. One engineer from a well-known appliance company once told me that even adding 25 cents to the production cost of a dishwasher or washing machine was a non-starter. That obviously raised the question of why they bothered to attend the meetings!
As pointed out in the article, putting a smart appliance in the market has always been ...read more
"As pointed out in the article, putting a smart appliance in the market has always been (and will always be) a chicken-or-the-egg proposition. Why would a manufacturer add communications capability to its products if there's nothing out there to communicate with?"
Well, as we know, the chicken evolved from an egg-laying non-chicken bird, so we know the egg came first.
Looks like Whirlpool and GE are volunteering to be "eggs". They're going to produce smart products.
On the other hand, several companies are producing smart meter "eggs". So it might not even be a question anyone getting to market first with a basket of eggs. Perhaps both kinds of chickens have decided to lay eggs in unison.
Here's a bit from Wikipedia about one area where smart meters are already part of the grid....
"Austin Energy, the nation's ninth largest community-owned electric utility, with nearly 400,000 electricity customers in and around Austin, Texas, began deploying a two-way RF mesh network and approximately 260,000 residential smart meters in 2008. More than 165,000 two-way meters have been installed by spring 2009, and integration with AE's meter data management system is underway. A previous project in 2002 exchanged approximately 140,000 mechanical meters for smart meters at residential apartments, condos, and other high meter density locations."
Yup, smart meter deployments (not just AMR technology) have been growing by leaps and bounds. Now if Whirlpool and GE can just get consumers to buy these smart appliances. I don't know the details, but I bet the communication feature won't be included in the lowest price models. Also, keep in mind how often people buy new appliances.
Electric water heaters are probably the biggest challenge because they haven't made the transition to digital control. The only solution is a big honking relay, and unless a digital interface is embedded in the water heater, an electrical contractor has to install the relay.
I consulted with Square D many years ago on a line of remote control circuit breakers. In that case, it's not just the price of the breaker but the low-voltage control pigtail has to have something to connect to.
Some assorted thoughts...
There is a point in manufacturing at which it becomes less expensive to include a feature in all models rather than having to create two types of components. All dryers/whatever need an electronic control unit. It might be least expensive to design and manufacture only one unit but to make "multi models" through firmware, disabling some functions not needed in entry level model.
For example, my entry level washing machine does not have a "soak" feature, but there's no reason to make a separate controller for those machines. Just program the chips differently.
--
If Federal/State governments or utility companies deem it desirable to get people to buy or trade for smart appliances they can offer education and rebate programs. We had exactly that sort of program here in CA some time back and got rid of a lot of older inefficient refrigerators.
--
Stuff does wear out. And these days it's (sometimes)getting cheaper to replace than to repair. I don't know the life expectancy of clothes dryers, but let's assume 20 years on average. Twenty years from now all clothes dryers could be smart if we use nothing but natural lifecycles.
--
"Electric water heaters are probably the biggest challenge because they haven't made the transition to digital control. The only solution is a big honking relay, and unless a digital interface is embedded in the water heater, an electrical contractor has to install the relay."
Put the ...read more
David, Thanks for injecting the topic of load management. Until recently, the energy industry looked at any reduction of load or load forecasts as bad news. It seems reasonable from a business standpoint. But growth has its ramifications. The tariff changes could give a needed boost to conservation efforts. Conservation is THE most important and economical measure we can take!
Locally, TOU metering, demand response, and a number of conservation programs have been implemented, and are administered through the local utility. I understand participation is low, with the greatest numbers in the higher tier consumer categories. How do you suppose folks will feel when and if this is mandated?
Locally, I hear the constant diatribe like "they wanna take my light bulbs, my big screen,and they ain't gonna control my thermostat".
From where I'm standing, this is the main barrier. We have become a consumer nation first and foremost, with decreasing levels of goods produced, unless you count credit swaps,derivatives, and such etherial products. Furthermore we want our toys. While some gadgits improve our lives, more and more of them are imported,frivolous and are taxing our collective resources and apparently our minds. To each His own, but when it affects all of us, some measures must be taken.
Take a look at this excerpt from the EIA 2009 Energy Demand report:
'Household Use of Electricity Continues To Grow
Residential electricity use has increased by 23 ...read more
Ron, from the utility's perspective, there's a big difference between general energy conservation as opposed to peak-load conservation and load-shifting. The former mostly eats into revenues (and is only practiced to satisfy PUC mandates), while the latter reduces costs at the margin and eliminates (or at least delays) the need for new generating capacity. An electric utility that can align its rates with marginal costs while at the same time, flatten its peak, can actually reduce its overall rate base (total regulated revenue) while increasing its profit margin and lowering its risk -- all in one fell swoop.
Likewise, from the customer's perspective, there's a big difference between direct load control (as described in the the Whirlpool article) and price signaling (e.g., TOU and/or real-time pricing). In the latter case, smart appliances and controls will empower users to minimize their energy costs at whatever level of service they're willing to pay for. With very few exceptions, no direct load control program has ever been mandatory.
Will utility customers like having TOU shoved down their throats? Absolutely not. But regulators have known for years that this would eventually have to happen. Cap-and-trade virtually ensures it will happen sooner than later, and the state PUC's won't have to fall on their swords to make it happen. It will come from the feds.
Once the appropriate price signals exist, you'll be amazed at the creativity that will be ...read more
David,Thanks for your comments, I'm inspired to learn more about the topic.
So the smart grid from the consumers perspective could be, "ouch that smarts" or "I gotta be smart or have some one with knowledge in the ways of the energy market retrofit my home or business to keep my bill as reasonable as possible."
While I've no doubt the development of the Smart Grid would likely be an improvement over todays system,
with improved efficiencies.There does appear to be a lot of square peg round hole dilemmas ahead for the big retrofit(s).
If indeed Cap & Trade becomes law, and TOU is mandated, do you see a reform of ratemaking processes to a National authority? How would locational pricing be affected?
Lets assume for a moment that the FERC or some NEW conductor finally gets the whole orchestra playing the same national tune, and all the sections are marching together in a coordinated dance. The playing field is groomed and level.
How long till the new band uniforms and instruments are cost recovered ?
Doesn't there come a point where a person might settle for the out of tune, one man band?
You know, maybe opting out would be prohibited.
As you say we got a "few decades" to think about it, and see what the market place brings...
In the foreseeable future, I can't imagine a federal agency ever replacing the regulatory authority of state PUC's. I doubt many would even advocate for that. However, there are already many issues where federal laws and regs preempt or dictate what state regulators do.
I almost fell out of my chair when I first heard Secretary Chu's comments on residential TOU. I can't seem to find the quote where he says something along the lines that "consumers will have to get used to paying higher prices for electricity during peak periods" but it was probably in the September time frame. Here's a couple of comments he made in front of the Senate Environmental and Public Works Committee on Oct 27:
"The first thing that will happen with smart grid, especially with homeowners... is to let homeowners know in real-time how they are using their electricity,"
"As we transition to real-time pricing of electricity... we can peak-load-shift that last 5% (of peak power), which we can do without any disruption or change in lifestyle."
As far as I know, none of the proposed climate bills broach time-based tarrifs. In Arizona, utility regulators (the Arizona Corporation Commission) are elected, so I can't imagine they would ever mandate TOU for residential without the political cover of federal preemption. I'm sure that's true in many other states as well.
Mandatory TOU is probably not the best way of expressing what needs to happen. No electric utility needs encouragement to ...read more
Suppose you are a non-public company distributing electricity and your retail price is fixed at $0.10 per kWh. Peak hours and off-peak hours, you can't charge more than ten cents. And your shareholders like making a profit.
Now suppose you have two supply sources, wind farms that you own and cost you $0.03 per kWh and "peakers" who won't sell for less than $0.20 per kWh regardless of their cost. It's a free market, after all. (I've seen reports of peak wind demanding an $0.18 per kWh price.)
So, during the peak hours you might not make much money if you've got to buy a lot of power for 100% more than you can sell it for. But if you were to drop your off-peak rate to $0.08, give up a couple of pennies, and get significant load shifted away from that twenty cent hurt....
DrX,
Does the term sacrifice mean to get with the program? Who's program is that?
Our household is off the grid, I get 100% of our electricity from solar, I do not use a back up generator.We apply sustainable food growing on our land, and grow organic apples for trade. All of our household and human waste is composted. The refuse our of purchases are 95% recycled.We are intentional about what we do buy to be locally produced whenever possible. Very tough to do nowadays. We make efforts to keep driving to the bare minimum.We hope to see the day when our future transportation needs will be provided by fresh sunshine,not ancient.
Despite all these efforts, I do not consider my lifestyle symbiotic with the planet. Humans stopped being so when we left the Hunter Gatherer era. However,I cant see how huge amounts of technology or industrialization no matter how "smart" will change that. I tend to feel that collective human endeavors that fuel the insatiable desire to consume with convenience and inconsideration are our biggest threat. Maybe continuing reliance on this model will speed up the humbling process that is urgently needed. We can all get by with less, but obviously this doesn't compute for the society and it's current economic reliance on debt fuel.
David,
To the topic of how consumption will be affected by "Smart Grid" apps. Obviously there will need to be some significant changes that blur that bright line between state and federal regulatory ...read more
> It sure looks like there is going to be a long bumpy ride to what maybe a cumbersome system full of ancillary participants
Ron, you're preachin' to the choir. California is a great example. They already have experience with ridiculously high electric rates and yet there hasn't been a beeline to use automation to manage energy. I'd be interested to know if any of the CA utilities have put 100% of residences on TOU yet, and if so, how that has played out.
Ron -
"Load shifting on the utility scale is in the works, existing 1212MW capacity pumped storage..."
Pump-up storage has been in use for close to 100 years. And more is being installed. We've also got CAES (compressed air energy storage) on line with more being added.
But what I (think I) was talking about is residential/end user load shifting. (It's sometimes really hard to follow discussions with the format of this forum).
I was talking about getting Ms./Mr. Typical to run their dishwasher at 2AM rather than right after dinner at 7:30PM. And dry their clothes at 3AM. And run their pool sweep at 4AM. That sort of load shifting. The stuff that can move a lot of demand off of peak hours and into low demand periods.
"Wind goes off peak here in California. This utility owns the pumped storage and will likely fully own the transmission. There goes access to cheap/clean off peak energy."
Energy storage will always have a cost. Shifting the times of running the pool sweep or charging the EV costs essentially nothing. It will be worth something to the utility company to move user demand rather than store energy to supply it.
California has rates about 20% higher than the national average. And that average is pulled down by states burning lots of coal, coal that needs to go away.
Up to this point California has dealt with those higher kWh rates by working with customers to cut usage. We've had inefficient appliance buyback programs and we can buy CFLs for under $1 thanks to utility company subsidies. We just passed legislation to require future large screen TVs to be efficient.
We have the lowest electricity usage per capita in the nation. We use about half the median amount of electricity and only one fourth what the largest consuming state uses.
(There are seven states with higher electricity prices than ours.)
We're just starting to install smart electricity meters. I doubt that TOU billing will show up soon. Most likely it will happen after meters are in place and there has been a good education program about how to use them to load shift.
Bob, I do know about Title 24. I was involved as a commenter when the previous iteration was being developed. But your comment "seven states with higher electricity prices" caught my attention. I have a copy of a Summer 2006 utility bill from a friend in San Jose where his marginal rate was about 36 cents (300% over base tier). That's gotta be among the highest in the country! I realize that's not the same as average rate, and I'm guessing that might have been at a time when some craziness was going on. However, when we start taking about TOU, it's the marginal rate that really matters.
David - $0.36 is high. Thanks for sharing that. I had no idea that TOU rates were getting up that high. Is San Jose doing TOU billing? I thought all the state was flat rate (with some amount of use adjustments).
I haven't paid a utility bill in over 20 years, so I'm not up to date on how things are run now.
I'd think that the utility companies might be very interested in switching loads off peak ASAP. And if I were paying TOU I'd definitely be doing stuff to cut down on my peak hour use.
--
But, that said, thirty-six cents is only about double of the average rate of Hawaii, Connecticut and New York.
Bob, I knew that Hawaii was high, but it would be interesting to compare residential tariffs for several of the major utilities in new England and CA on an apples-to-apples basis. State-wide averages can be misleading.
The 36 cent rate was not TOU. It was the *marginal* rate for energy 300% of the baseline, defined as 333 kwh. This is a stepped system where you pay a higher rate for higher usage. I was able to paste the table into this message, but the Grist engine strips the extra spaces and applies a proportional font, so the columns don't line up properly:
07/21/2006 - 08/17/2006
Baseline Quantity 333.20000 Kwh
Baseline Usage 333.20000 Kwh @ $0.11430
101-130% of Baseline 99.96000 Kwh @ $0.12989
131-200% of Baseline 233.24000 Kwh @ $0.21981
201-300% of Baseline 333.20000 Kwh @ $0.30292
Over 300% of Baseline 544.40000 Kwh @ $0.34648
Net Charges $391.88
David - Here's a list of electricity price by state (2009).
It's going to be very interesting watching the rate in Hawaii over the next ten years or so. Hawaii (I believe) uses oil to generate a lot of their power, but has very good wind, solar, and geothermal potential. They probably will move fastest to renewables as oil prices climb even higher.
http://www.neo.ne.gov/statshtml/115.htm
And here's a usage by state, not quite as current (2005).
I find it most interesting to compare neighbor states such as Wyoming (27.8) and Montana (14.4). Or Kentucky (21.4) and Virginia (14.4). One would assume that heating/AC needs would be similar, yet there's a great difference in usage.
And Montana pays only a penny or so more for their power. Kentucky under two cents less. Something more than cost seems to be driving consumption levels.
http://www.swivel.com/graphs/show/20089995?limit_modifier=all&graph;[limit]=52&commit;=>
If PG&E was charging thirty-six cents per kWh I wonder what they were paying?
Anyone happen to have any peak/off-peak prices data? I haven't found anything on line.
Those charts include all sectors. Wyoming has so few people that large commercial/industrial/institutional loads tend to increase per-capital numbers. That happens a lot in WY!
The EIA calculates the all-sector kwh rates in your first link by dividing gross revenues attributed to power sales by the number of kwh sold. This masks the fact that most non-residential customers pay a capacity or demand charge based on highest instantaneous load during each billing cycle, so their their kwh charges often make up less than half of their bill. However, in total, a large user stills ends up paying less per kwh than a residential user. Small commercial users may pay more.
Here's a chart that breaks out the sectors for the latest month (August):
http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/epm/table5_6_a.html
Within a state, and even within a given utility, the average kwh rate paid by a given home can vary widely due to the flat charges and stepped rates. California probably has the most aggressive step-rates, which helps explain why their average price is not as high as NY and CT. Interestingly, California also has one of the few geothermal power districts (Imperial Valley). I used to work for a company in El Centro and our electric rates were probably half the state average at that time!
Getting at peak cost per kwh is difficult. Rate case applications filed with the PUC's reveal this data, but you can spend a career just figuring out how to interpret the reams of ...read more
Right. When I use state residential use from this linked page WY and MT come out about the same.
http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/states/sep_sum/html/sum_btu_res.html
--
Can you make a generalized comparison of peak/off-peak costs?
After a walk in the woods, I felt compelled to apologize for the confrontational aspects of my previous comments. Walking helps me shake the crustiness, and inflexibility the the years have brought on.
David and Bob, the both of you are taking the realistic and best approach going to mitigate the impacts of an archaic system I do hope that in the long haul those benefits are realized. I know the ideas are sound and would probably provide the most relief to hurting rate payers,in the least cost, greatest benefit manner.
DR X keep on envisioning, the market place needs fresh ideas...
Ron