The Measure of All Things

Alexander E. Braun’s blog focuses on current metrology issues and developments in the rapidly advancing fields of inspection, measurement and test, and evaluates their relevance and impact on the global semiconductor industry. Occasionally, he will growl, grumble and comment on other matters and subjects that may innocently and foolishly meander too close to his gunsights.

Advertisement

Profile

About Me

RSS Feed

Add this blog to your RSS newsreader!

Blog

The Measure of All Things

« Hurray for the Do-Gooders!... | Main | A Trillion Here, a Trillion Th... »

Wednesday, January 7, 2009

Of Sand and Power

Jan 7 2009 3:58PM | Permalink |Comments (15) |

No one will argue against the necessity of applying every known (and developing) source of renewable energy to meet our planet’s exponentially increasing need for electricity. However, it behooves us to look at where it is we’re going to jump before we actually implement on a fuller scale things like photovoltaics, wind, hydroelectric, and other so-called “green” energy sources. This also applies to other, less favored but proven ones such as nuclear which, eventually (albeit with clenched teeth and despite loud protestations), must be considered as part of the solution.

While the various advantages and disadvantages of each of these energy sources are heatedly debated, and cries go out for more government subsidies (bailouts?) for one or the other, there rarely seems to be any consideration given to the crucial link in the energy chain that can be viewed as one of the bigger energy wasters around and which, unfortunately, we cannot do without.

I refer to the power grid itself.

This is the distribution system composed of cables, towers, transformers, switches, and various assorted doohickeys that connect you to whichever source of power is at the other end, enabling you to get electricity from your walls. If one were of a mild nature and overly polite, the national power grid might be described as “antiquated.” The truth is that it is a ramshackle, tottering, patchwork compendium of hardware and rule-of-thumb techniques precariously maintained by an ever-declining and increasingly less skilled workforce. I’ve had more than one engineer from my local and other utility companies tell me that with very few (and minor) exceptions, the entire setup—from sea to shining sea—would be perfectly understandable to Thomas Edison who, well over a century ago, kick-started the whole thing with his killer app, the lightbulb; in fact, he could go to work as a field engineer with little or no training. So much for high-tech—in Silicon Valley or anyplace else!

Thomas Alva Edison and his killer app. If the old boy were still active today, he
would have no problems in understanding and working with our current power
grid. Source: National Archives.

If telephone technology had frozen where grid technology has, mechanical switches would still be activated by rotary phones, and things like cell phones and texting would be limited to science-fiction. There has been some talk and even less action about modernizing our fragmented transmission system into something resembling a nationwide intelligent grid system, that would use readily available and proven technology to improve energy efficiency, reduce consumer costs, and get us closer to the asymptotic Shangri-la of energy independence.

At present, the national power grid’s outdated technology results in transmission congestion, making the whole setup if not wholly unreliable, certainly extremely inefficient, requiring utility companies to keep adding plants to meet peak demand periods. While these peaking plants may operate just a few hours per day (or per year!) their construction, operation, and maintenance costs are billed to us, the consumers, not to mention the added environmental strain. Another cost associated with this is the addition of transmission lines, which can run as high as $10 million per mile. Reliance on an electric power grid still structured much as it was during the 1930s also subjects the system to massive failures, whether caused by weather, sabotage, or the type of cascading blackout that left 50 million Americans without power in 2003.

The nationwide power grid is the link between the source generating electricity
and your home. If things were as simple as this, we would not have much to worry
about, but the 21st century requires a power distribution system that is more
sophisticated and intelligent. Source: Think Safe.

The semiconductor industry has enabled the creation of smart technologies that could be applied to track electricity use in realtime and spread power availability more evenly to reduce demand during peak periods. This kind of efficiency demands a grid that carries not only electricity, but also information. Sensors could receive digital data from everywhere on the grid, showing how much power is flowing and how reliable it is. This would, for example, allow a real-time determination of when a line is about to become congested, leading to an instantaneous rerouting of power to lines that have the necessary capacity. This could considerably reduce the dependence on expensive sources, and benefit power generators by providing more potential buyers for their energy. (It should be remembered that limited electric transmission capacity reduces opportunities to transfer power between sellers and buyers over long distances.) It would also allow the application of things such as smart meters that tell consumers exactly how much electricity they are consuming and what is the real-time price of those kilowatts, enabling them to decide how to moderate consumption. An even larger bonus would be the capability to more efficiently use the power generated by intermittent power sources such as photovoltaic installations—whether on homes or commercial properties—as well as wind.

The least expensive and painful way to conserve and reduce the demand on our current power sources is through a nationwide modernization of the power grid. This could increase the efficiency of the use and distribution of electric power by orders of magnitude, preparing the consumer to truly benefit from greener sources of energy. This would give us the kind of conservation that does not require self-denial or a diminished way of life, where we’re cold in winter and hot in summer, or told to cut down on appliance use during certain times.

If we are to create a sustainable energy future, we must start at the foundation of the power infrastructure—the grid; otherwise, as Matthew warns, we “shall be likened to a foolish man, which built his house on sand.”

* * * *
On a different tack, I've been warned that unless one posts a picture of one's critter, one is not considered to be a true blogger. Not wanting to be deficient in this respect, it gives me great pleasure to introduce you to Gypsy, the cat who owns us and who graciously allows us to live in her house and serve her.

Her Royal Highness, Gypsy, enthroned in her bay window.

Reader Comments

at 1/7/2009 9:35:53 PM, SiGuy said:
I think that your message is starting to get through. I've heard this from several people already. Love your cat! Happy New Year!

at 1/8/2009 9:18:34 AM, No Name said:
I have worked as a Con Edison engineer for more than 10 years and I can tell you that things are far worse than what you say.

at 1/8/2009 11:04:52 AM, 1Geek said:
You'd think that the politicians would invest on this instead of bailing out failing mismanaged companies. How much could be done with those $700 billion?

at 1/8/2009 12:23:31 PM, T. Wayne said:
The use of dangerous nuclear reactors can not be justified, no matter what the reason!!!

at 1/8/2009 12:33:10 PM, GB said:
Dear T. Wayne,
No one is proposing the use of "dangerous" nuclear reactors. The safety track record of the nuclear power industry in the USA is exemplary. Our nukes have been extremely safe, and I have no reason to believe this will change.

at 1/8/2009 3:13:25 PM, LOOKCLOSER said:
GB is totally right, more nukes could go a long way to make us more energy independent. It's like nobody want to look at the whole picture. Cute kitty. :)

at 1/8/2009 3:52:41 PM, Walt Rutenbar said:
So much could be accomplished by just maintaining or slightly improving the country's infrastructure. I guess it's not glamorous enough for the politicians and too dull for the media to focus on.

at 1/9/2009 9:16:36 AM, WGS said:
Does anybody think that the average person has ANY idea of where their electricity comes from and what it takes to get it to them? People want more and cheaper electricity but don't want new power plants built. Right!

at 1/9/2009 2:24:18 PM, John Higashi said:
We need more engineers not in utility companies but in Congress. There is no understanding of technology there or of what it takes to maintain the country's infrastructure, or of what those in high tech need to help solve these problems.

at 1/9/2009 2:42:31 PM, P. Ehrmann said:
When it comes to urging the government to do something truly useful that will be of benefit for generations, Mr. Braun, you and others like you are "a voice crying in the wilderness." :-)

at 1/12/2009 12:14:44 PM, Jayna Sheats said:
Much of what you have proposed (regarding sensors, efficiency monitors, etc.) is already being done by startups and (relatively) small companies; of course it could be accelerated by sensible government industrial policy but up till now that phrase has been regarded as equivalent to communism.

I would make one point about the relation of grid to distributed power: it isn't all or nothing. PV, solar thermal, and wind energy are well suited to intermediate scale facilities. Exchange of power according to local need can still be done without sending it over thousands of miles. If Mr. Obama's push for infrastructure actually did include money for the electric grid, it should be weighted toward these kinds of generating facilities.

The problem with nuclear power is not safety of the plants (though ensuring it raises costs to marginal competitiveness). The problem is the lack of waste disposal which is socially and politically acceptable, and the specter of proliferation. Not to mention that the huge concentrated facilities now require the most expensive grid. It just does not add up economically.

at 1/15/2009 12:13:09 PM, David Levenson said:
Not only would Edison understand the current electric system, he would be appalled! Edison was a DC man and what we have is Tesla's AC system, with the losses and instabilities that old Thomas feared. It is well past time to re-think everything.

at 2/8/2009 8:57:16 PM, Markus said:
We can easily use nuclear power and fusion is the clear way to go. We have a power plant that has run for billions of years with no accidents, downtime, strikes, natural disasters and runs 24/7. Solar thermal, PV, Wind at all derivative of fusion. No need for building dirtier fission plants with proliferation risks

at 2/13/2009 4:43:31 AM, ls said:
Markus - if Fusion was easy, we would have it. The "best" plan now is going to cost multiple billions and might be on line in 30 year or 40 years. In the meantime, the sun is shining every day and even with clouds, solar works. The cost will drop like it did for chips as soon as this moves to large scale. And, it puts power generation near to use. If we commit to solar today, in just a few years, we will see the benefits and it is clean. What other technology can offer that?

at 3/9/2009 4:44:11 PM, Sacha Potapenko said:
Grids are dumb all over the world. There is much work to be done.

The Measure of All Things

Profile

RSS Feed

Recent Posts

Recent Comments

Most Commented On

Archives

By Category

Blog

Wednesday, January 7, 2009

Of Sand and Power

Reader Comments

Post a comment

Please visit these other Reed Business sites

Display Name

Change Image Before submitting this form, please type the characters displayed above. Note the letters are NOT case sensitive.