America has had more than its share of delusions about energy. The latest concerns the “smart grid” – that this bright new technological miracle will help us overcome reality.
Al Gore, Thomas Friedman, Amory Lovins and Silicon Valley are the predictable originators of this story, but corporate America has quickly jumped into the game. General Electric is now running an ad that suggests how “the smart grid” will help us transcend the difficult – but reality-based – choice of whether to power our country with coal or nuclear.
Here’s how the ad goes. A flaxen-haired girl of about ten is standing in front of a clothes dryer, “It says to wait until 10 p.m.,” she declares. Then she is in front of a wall outlet: “It only takes what it needs.” Then she is standing in front of a distribution box: “It talks to the others.” Finally she is in front of a window: “It brings power from far away.”
Now a voiceover informs us: “With the smart grid, energy is more intelligent than ever. Now we can manage electricity more efficiently, save money by using energy at off-peak hours, and even distribute alternative energy from one part of the country to another, simply by listening to what the smart grid has to say.”
Back to the girl, now standing in front of a window gazing at a waning half moon: “It says it’s sunny in Arizona.”
Let’s take a look at what’s going on here. The first premise is that, by conveying real-time pricing the smart grid will encourage people to redistribute their consumption of electricity to off-peak hours of the day. This will “level loads” and solve the perennial problem of utilities in meeting demand that occurs a few hours of the day or a few days of the year.
The second premise is that the smart grid will help integrate wind and solar energy - the two balky “renewables” that have the disadvantage of not being dispatchable when we want them. With the smart grid, wind and solar generation will always be available somewhere and so can be conveyed to where it’s needed.
But these are different things. The true “smart grid” will be a digitalized distribution system that conveys real-time information. Incorporating remote wind and solar, on the other hand, will require an upgraded grid, something entirely different. Our present 345-kilovolt AC transmission wires can’t do it without unacceptable line losses. We will need to rebuild to 765-kilovolt DC system – something that could take decades and easily cost several trillion dollars.
One has very little to do with the other. However, they are often described as the same thing. For instance, Thomas Friedman effortlessly conflates them in Hot, Flat and Crowded when he writes:
[The smart grid] has made large-scale renewable energy practical for the first time ever. Why? Because the flatter your utility’s load profile gets, the more it is able to go out and buy or generate renewable energy and sell it to you and your neighbors instead of energy powered by coal or gas.
This is not true. A flattened utility profile has nothing to do with incorporating wind and solar. In fact it is just the opposite. The one great virtue of solar energy is that it peaks exactly when it is needed – in mid-afternoon and on hot summer days. If we level loads, we will be taking away solar electricity’s greatest advantage.
Let’s go back and examine these issues one at a time. First, start with the premise that the smart grid will enable us to redistribute energy consumption throughout the day. It’s fitting that the girl is standing in front of a clothes dryer because that and washing dishes are the only examples anyone has ever been able to come up with about how residential users are going to “redistribute” their energy consumption.
What else can they do? Are they going to wait until after midnight to watch television? Are they going to heat up dinner at 4 a.m.? Are they going to turn on lights at sunrise instead of when it gets dark? And how about air conditioning, that most voracious consumer of electricity? One suggestion floated by the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) in “The Green Grid,” a study published last June, is that people might “pre-cool” their homes by running the air conditioning in the morning in anticipation of hot afternoons. This may indeed level peak loads. But it will also consume more energy, since some of the pre-cooling will obviously dissipate.
There’s one more thing about drying your clothes at 10 p.m. Have you ever noticed what happens if you leave wet clothes sitting in the washer? They start smelling a little moldy, don’t they? Maybe this idea about drying your clothes just after you wash them isn’t such a bad idea…
Getting people to redistribute their energy consumption sounds suspiciously like those perennial suggestions for relieving rush-hour traffic by staggering work hours. It may look good on paper, but most people still like to get up in the morning, eat breakfast, work 9-to-5, come home, have dinner and go to bed again. And so rush hour traffic – and patterns of electrical consumption – will probably remain the same.
Although GE carefully avoids saying it, the underlying presumption of the smart grid is that it will somehow help us conserve significant amounts of energy. In that light, the EPRI study – although full of the usual enthusiasm – is a very sobering document.
First, the study examined all the possible smart-grid savings – from shaving residential voltage to 114 V from 120 V to not having to send meter readers out to homes every month. Even then, its most optimistic prediction was that by 2030 we could reduce electrical consumption by 7 to 11 percent below what is already being anticipated. (That wouldn’t even be absolute reduction, but only a slowing of its anticipated rise.) Second, as the study concludes, “shift[ing] load from on-peak to off-peak periods may not necessarily save energy.” It will only save money. Nor will it reduce carbon emissions. In fact, it will probably increase them.
Utilities don’t like peak loads because they have to meet them by building generators that may be used only two or three weeks of the year. These are almost always gas turbines – essentially jet engines bolted to the ground. Because they don’t boil water, turbines can be started up and adjusted almost instantly, enabling them to follow loads. Steam generators, on the other hand, may take the better part of an hour to get to full speed. But turbines run on natural gas, the most expensive fuel. In addition, they sit idle most of the year, a costly way to employ capital.
So if we shift more uses to off-peak hours, we may save the utilities lots of money. But we won’t be saving energy. At best, we’ll be using the same amount. If some kind of electrical storage is employed – another often mentioned component of the “smart grid” – then we will be consuming more energy, since power is always lost in the transitions. And if leveling loads means shifting consumption from relatively clean natural gas turbines to base-load coal plants, there will be an increase in carbon emissions.
Finally, as mentioned above, the great virtue of large-scale solar installations will be that they coincide with hours of peak demand. If we ever get to that point, we won’t want to flatten loads. We will want to keep them the way they are.
Wind, of course, is an entirely different animal. Although completely unpredictable, the wind does tend to blow stronger at night and in the fall and spring, exactly when it’s not needed. A strong, steady wind in North Dakota might allow Illinois to cut some coal consumption but it won’t obviate the need for fossil fuels because the wind will always need backup. “The Green Grid” concludes that wind will work best in tandem with those same gas turbines.
So the prospect that a smart grid is somehow going to save huge amounts of energy and pave the way for a solar future is an illusion. At best it will make electricity a bit cheaper and perhaps shave 5 to 10 percent off the anticipated growth in consumption. But even the smartest of smart grids can’t distribute power that isn’t already there.
William Tucker has written about environment and energy issues for twenty-five years. His work has appear in Harper’s, The Atlantic, National Review, New Republic, The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, and many other publications. His most recent book Terrestrial Energy (Bartleby) is about nuclear power. He is a regular guest contributor to The Infrastructurist.
February 23rd, 2009 at 3:34 am
[...] INFRASTRUCTURIST » Blog Archive » The Smart Grid — A Little Stupid? [...]
February 23rd, 2009 at 10:01 am
While I agree with some of your skepticism on the overall impacts- I think you discount too much the consumption reduction that such items as real time/peak pricing thru smart meters accomplish. As energy costs rise, the tangible feedback that such meters and pricing provide will ingrain thrift behavior into what has been up to now mindless consumption.
And for those who find it is too much trouble to delay starting the washer until 9 pm- then they will pay for it- dearly. Todays power consumption growth is arising from new large flat screen tvs and leaps in home pc capabilities plus increases in usage time per person- can you imagine a future when consumers may actually look at the ‘energyguide’ on the appliance before purchasing? With the various flexibilities/ incentives/disencentives the smart grid will provide- i’d expect this will provide a needed feedback to slowing then stopping energy consumption. And you did not mention the reality of peak oil and the strong possibility of curtailment of coal consumption due GHG issues–30 years in the future we will forced to consume much much less electricity per person whether we like it or not- and the only way to get there short of imposed rationing will be thru development of realtime feedback.
It’s not even clear that this will do it, in which case smart grid will help maximize sharing between regions and producers not to mention encouraging more local smaller scale alternative energy sources eg microturbines in buildings/dump or ag waste methane etc.
Let’s not find ourselves in a situation like Pakistan with the lights out 6 hours per day…..
February 23rd, 2009 at 12:37 pm
William;
It doesn’t take all that much creativity to find other ways to customize your electrical usage, but it will sometimes require people to change some of the ‘convenience driven’ expectations that have been the rule in this age of cheap abundant energy. Like Geoff, I’m one who suspects we’ve spent down the majority of that precious Trust Fund.
A lot of energy is used for cooking, and if people had the chance to save on their electric bill by doing so, they could cook foods overnight, baking or slow-cooking like crockpots, or programmable ovens/microwaves. Refrigerators could be designed with storage tanks for compressed refrigerant- sounds excessive, but then, grid prices are still pretty reasonable. Also with Home Heating, systems like Radiant Floors or Trombe-walls can let you use the cheap Predawn power to preheat your thermal mass.
Charging Electric Cars, Scooters and Bikes can of course be pretty flexible draws on your Utility Service, and could be built to vary the charging rate dependent on constant price signals. This would be a form of storage that could use Nighttime Power, Midday Power when the owner is at work.. (If we were smart enough to insulate the hot climates out of their massive A/C Dependency), and Fall and Spring times.. when we do actually still use power, and would be happy if it were largely supplanted by wind.
Finally, wind is only ‘completely unpredictable’ when you don’t pay attention to the patterns. There is variability, but also recurring patterns. Beyond that, we have a couple of forms of storage that could be built up to handle surplus wind, Pumped Hydro, Pumped Air.. and the possibility to use SmartGrid EV’s and other growing battery options for storage as well.
Some engineers are the type to say ‘It can’t be done’.. but I am left to wonder if they’re really saying ‘I just don’t want to do it, it’s too hard.’ It will be hard, and it will be expensive.. but I think the alternatives will only be worse.
Bob
February 23rd, 2009 at 2:16 pm
Air Conditioning is simple to do.
The Chinese make ice at night using the cool night air, so the heat pump doesn’t have to work so hard. This is insulated and then when cooling is required in the afternoon, the cooling circuit uses this to cool the building. THIS IS REAL BASIC STUFF if you think about it!
February 23rd, 2009 at 9:31 pm
The North American power grid is the Achilles heel, and declining oil production will undermine the grid.
Global crude oil production peaked in 2008.
The media, governments, world leaders, and public should focus on this issue.
Global crude oil production had been rising briskly until 2004, then plateaued for four years. Because oil producers were extracting at maximum effort to profit from high oil prices, this plateau is a clear indication of Peak Oil.
Then in August and September of 2008 while oil prices were still very high, global crude oil production fell nearly one million barrels per day, clear evidence of Peak Oil (See Rembrandt Koppelaar, Editor of “Oil Watch Monthly,” December 2008, page 1) http://www.peakoil.nl/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/2008_december_oilwatch_monthly.pdf.
Peak Oil is now.
Credit for accurate Peak Oil predictions (within a few years) goes to the following (projected year for peak given in parentheses):
* Association for the Study of Peak Oil (2007)
* Rembrandt Koppelaar, Editor of “Oil Watch Monthly” (2008)
* Tony Eriksen, Oil stock analyst; Samuel Foucher, oil analyst; and Stuart Staniford, Physicist [Wikipedia Oil Megaprojects] (2008)
* Matthew Simmons, Energy investment banker, (2007)
* T. Boone Pickens, Oil and gas investor (2007)
* U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (2005)
* Kenneth S. Deffeyes, Princeton professor and retired shell geologist (2005)
* Sam Sam Bakhtiari, Retired Iranian National Oil Company geologist (2005)
* Chris Skrebowski, Editor of “Petroleum Review” (2010)
* Sadad Al Husseini, former head of production and exploration, Saudi Aramco (2008)
* Energy Watch Group in Germany (2006)
* Fredrik Robelius, Oil analyst and author of “Giant Oil Fields” (2008 to 2018)
Oil production will now begin to decline terminally.
Within a year or two, it is likely that oil prices will skyrocket as supply falls below demand. OPEC cuts could exacerbate the gap between supply and demand and drive prices even higher.
Independent studies indicate that global crude oil production will now decline from 74 million barrels per day to 60 million barrels per day by 2015. During the same time, demand will increase. Oil supplies will be even tighter for the U.S. As oil producing nations consume more and more oil domestically they will export less and less. Because demand is high in China, India, the Middle East, and other oil producing nations, once global oil production begins to decline, demand will always be higher than supply. And since the U.S. represents one fourth of global oil demand, whatever oil we conserve will be consumed elsewhere. Thus, conservation in the U.S. will not slow oil depletion rates significantly.
Alternatives will not even begin to fill the gap. There is no plan nor capital for a so-called electric economy. And most alternatives yield electric power, but we need liquid fuels for tractors/combines, 18 wheel trucks, trains, ships, and mining equipment. The independent scientists of the Energy Watch Group conclude in a 2007 report titled: “Peak Oil Could Trigger Meltdown of Society:”
“By 2020, and even more by 2030, global oil supply will be dramatically lower. This will create a supply gap which can hardly be closed by growing contributions from other fossil, nuclear or alternative energy sources in this time frame.”
With increasing costs for gasoline and diesel, along with declining taxes and declining gasoline tax revenues, states and local governments will eventually have to cut staff and curtail highway maintenance. Eventually, gasoline stations will close, and state and local highway workers won’t be able to get to work. We are facing the collapse of the highways that depend on diesel and gasoline powered trucks for bridge maintenance, culvert cleaning to avoid road washouts, snow plowing, and roadbed and surface repair. When the highways fail, so will the power grid, as highways carry the parts, large transformers, steel for pylons, and high tension cables from great distances. With the highways out, there will be no food coming from far away, and without the power grid virtually nothing modern works, including home heating, pumping of gasoline and diesel, airports, communications, and automated building systems.
Documented here:
http://www.peakoilassociates.com/POAnalysis.html
http://survivingpeakoil.blogspot.com/
February 24th, 2009 at 5:54 am
[...] has a piece by energy writer William Tucker on the ‘Smart Grid’ and its representation in popular culture - namely by GE, which has been running a striking [...]
March 10th, 2009 at 6:04 am
[...] Tucker at The Infrastructurist (perhaps my new favorite blog) has an article up in which he debunks the myth that the “smart grid” [...]
March 10th, 2009 at 6:08 am
[...] Tucker at The Infrastructurist (perhaps my new favorite blog) has an article up in which he debunks the myth that the “smart grid” [...]
March 10th, 2009 at 2:05 pm
How many more times will I hear “peak oil is now” before it really happens? People have been making that claim since before I was born.
March 16th, 2009 at 4:08 am
@ Kimmo:
Which “Chinese” do you know? The Chinese I know and live among keep the air conditioning on full strength and at freezing temperatures. They use inefficient AC curtains - a strong blast of air - at the entrance of retail shops rather than using automatic doors.
The Chinese word for AC literally means “cold air” and most people over here have taken that to heart. Rather than conditioning the air, they make it so cold that office workers leave sweaters & jackets in the office year round.
October 27th, 2009 at 5:18 pm
[...] Realities of power generation/storage/consumption [...]