$3.4 billion for the smart grid. Yawn?
Just icing on the cake?Yesterday, the President announced $3.4 billion in grants to help fix our "antiquated" electric grid.
"There's something big happening in America in terms of creating a clean-energy economy," Obama said.
Yet, I cannot help ask, is there really something big happening? In recent years, for instance, I've heard Al Gore put the cost of a new smart grid at $400 - $700 billion. So, $3.4 billion is a step, but not even a baby step.
Likewise, at the announcement many reporters noticed how energy inefficient was the President's motorcade, as members of the motorcade sat in large parked - but running - gas-guzzlers to avoid the Florida sunshine. Even for the President's clean-energy entourage, convenience and comfort trump clean energy.
And that's the case for 90-some percent of Americans as well. Is there any way to address that without selling America's future to China?
Labels: clean energy, smart grid
posted by Dahcredyns at
8:10 AM
26 Comments:
With the fedral deficit being at it's highest level in history, and the need for additional federal dollars for important programs like health care.......... can we really expect the federal gov't to foot the entire bill for a new smart grid?
I don't know.
I think we need a national dialogue that includes costs and benefits.
Up front it seems obvious the government can't afford to foot the bill. However, the long term benefits of such a grid probably would recover their costs in a couple of decades.
Of course, Americans don't want, or like, to think long term.
Still, in my opinion, America's economic future is dependent upon energy efficient technologies. However, the longer we wait the less competitive we'll be.
How can the President, or anyone for that matter, inspire the country to look at the big picture?
And, look at our health care system. How many of the problems are caused by the same desire for convenience and comfort above all else?
If an American has high blood pressure, most don't change their diet and exercise habits, they opt for a pill.
Look at all the fat pills that have hit the market over the years. We don't want to take responsibility for our lives in many situations. Instead, we prefer quick fixes.
Still, i think most Americans know these are faulty solutions, but complacency and the status quo is just so easy to maintain.
How can change be inspired?
Change (of any kind) is inspired by a combination of positive an negative reinforcements.
The gov't has the "ability" to provide both, but do they have the courage?
Sadly, probably not if they want to be re-elected.
Did you ever get the feeling you wanted to write about something but just didn't feel you were qualified? That's how I feel writing about this subject. If it wasn't so darned important I would just keep my mouth shut [well fingers actually] and go get ready for lunch, LOL
A smart grid is a very simple thing. It basically allows a utility to shut off certain things in your home like an electric water heater, air conditioner or stop the charging of your plug-in hybrid during peak grid hours. Not very difficult to do and in fact some utilities in Southern California are already installing meters which do exactly that in one [1] million homes.
California in many respects is leaps and bounds ahead of my state Arizona. We still have lots of coal plants, some nuclear, a little hydro and some solar which is finally starting to grow. But in comparison to California we are still 10 years behind the curve.
Why a smart grid? Well in an ideal world [LOL] the electrical grid would be level loaded, lets say the national grid was level loaded at 1.2 trillion watts. You could plan for the power generation you needed and never have a brown/blackout again. Ah yes the ideal world. Instead what we have are local grids that need to carry 26,000 mega watts at 4:00 p.m. and 16,000 at 1:00 a.m.
Now a smart grid is never going to get us to a perfectly level grid level but it can help.
There are other things that can help. Solar on everyone's roof helps because that's less load on the grid.
There are currently 100's of mega watts of solar panels being installed on the roofs of industrial buildings in California and that of course will also help.
What else can help? How about conservation and improved energy efficiency? Yup that also works.
What else must we do if we are ever going to become energy independent? We must change the behavior of the American people and that is our biggest challenge.
That my friends is the challenge we face. I believe it was Lee Iaccoca that said it best - we desperately need LEADERSHIP. Someone who can convince the American people that driving a 2 ton SUV with one person in the vehicle to work is not in the best interest of our country and OUR PLANET. Someone besides Al Gore who lets his SUV idle to keep it cool while he lectures us about greenhouse gasses and global warming. Someone besides a corporate executives who fly their private jets to Washington to beg for taxpayer money.
We have a long way to go don't we.
Tom G.
If a "smart grid" is really smart then it would be even better than revenue neutral over the longer run and if that is true then it needs to be sold on that basis.
In other words - it's not what it will cost us - it's want it will save us - and you have to make that case at the homeowner level.
The reason California "works" is because it has decoupled the rate structure - which means - the utility companies make the same amount of money even when conservation measures that "work" are put into place.
In states not "decoupled", a "smart grid" will end up costing the utility profits.
You cannot shove something like this down people's throats nor the utility companies.
The proposal has to have a "win" for each stakeholder if you want it to go forward without huge opposition and/or a backlash.
What people WILL DO - is - they'll let you turn off their water heater or even replace it with a tankless water heater IF their bill stays the same or even gets lower.
Ditto with the utility companies. They will promote conservation if their interests are not seriously harmed either.
this is not impossible but it is not easy either and it requires an equal sharing so that one side does not "win" at the expense of others.
this is what leadership is about IMHO.
this is what makes good leadership - a very valuable thing and a lack of or bad leadership ...bad karma...
that's my story and I'm sticking to it...
yeah, tom, it does seem we have a long way to go.
interestingly, all of us have talked about leadership.
when you look at political campaigns, the amount of money needed to win a major election has become quite extreme. to me that means paybacks one way or another.
can such a system produce the right kind of leadership, especially considering the separation of powers in our government?
In my view? Nope. Money infests our political process.
When I hear you guys talking about your expectations for our leaders to do the right thing - I cringe....
Many folks consider campaign donations as 'free speech'.
my view is that this is ludicrous because these are corporations not individuals and even then - they essentially charge you extra for the money they use to influence campaigns and then they turn around a second time and write it off as a business expense.
So you and I are paying for the corporations to "buy" our "leaders" and to buy those ADs you see on TV promoting misinformation about GHG, etc.
Their main goal is to scare the public into thinking that these kinds of changes are threats to them and their families and then to buy the appropriate number of elected to "make it so".
want to know how I REALLY think about our system?
"Revenue neutral - Changes in the tax laws that result in no change in the amount of revenue coming into the government's coffers. For example, a provision may require individuals to pay less tax, but corporations will pay correspondingly more taxes."
By definition it must apply here as well. If we want a smart grid then by definition we must/should be revenue neutral. That means we need to spend less for something else like maybe government [military] expenditures to protect oil interests in foreign countries. Or how about decreasing everyone's Social Security checks, Medicare payments to doctors or how about if we pass Cap and Trade to even out the revenue stream.
For me the even BIGGER question regarding this posting is:
WHY is the government paying for the smart grid in the first place? Does the federal government NOW CONTROL our electrical grid? When I travel through California and look at the transmission towers they usually have a metal sign indicating which utility owns that tower. Silly me I must have missed the part where we all voted to have the government take over control of the electrical grid. I wonder if they plan on controlling all of the sub-stations and transformers in the US as well?
Tom G
larry,
i don't know if its expectations of our political leaders, i think its our hopes.
i think those of us on this thread recognize that politics is often a dirty business, as do most americans, at least according to the polls.
Tom - the "government" does not "pay" for the smart grid or anything else.
and Corporations do not pay either - they pass along he costs.
Revenue neutral in my mind - means that the changes result in the long run in savings...
and that the problem is the up-front costs..
like trying to convince people to replace their incandescent bulbs with CFs or LEDs that cost 10 times more - but over the longer run are much, much more efficient and cheaper.
In other words.. it's the longer term return-on-investment that is the rub for folks who don't have or can't afford the up-front costs.
so.. you might have a solar array that will save money over 10 years but you just don't have the 20K to put it in.
In this case - it's a win-win if there is a way for you to get that grid installed because over the longer run - it IS not only revenue neutral.. but it saves you money...
and it saves the utility company money also because they don't have to finance new plants....
this is _different_ that the idea of re-prioritizing money by having some folks claim that Smart Grids are "worth" more than Humvees ..
that's a losing argument in my view...
or let's put it this way.. it's easier to make the case about saving money and energy than it is to attempt to change national policy on Defense.
I'm not opposed to it. I think we waste money hand over fist on the military and getting ourselves involved in things that are hugely expensive and that we probably are better off not being involved in - at least at the levels we seem to think we need to be involved in.
But saying, in essence, that trying to protect Israel is what is keeping us from a Smart Grid is a loser of an argument on the merits - again IMHO.
re" dirty politics
well.. if you believe that most of our politicians take money from Corporations..
why would you think they'd vote against what those corporations want?
I'm just a skeptic on this.
money changes those that receive it and not in good ways sometimes.
tom-
i think the government is just trying to promote innovations in the smart grid space, otherwise, they'll have to come up with a lot more money.
anyway, here's my crazy idea: focus on the consumer.
instead of subsidizing corporations to invest in next gen technologies that are more efficient, etc. - give the power of the purse to the people.
if it costs a company an extra $200 to make something that will save a homeowner 20 percent, don't give the company a massive subsidy, give that subsidy to consumers and let companies compete.
subsidized corporate innovation often doesn't lead to much real innovation.
look at hybrid cars for instance. the clinton admin gave Detroit more than a billion to try to develop hybrid cars and EVs. this actually forced toyota and honda to take such products seriously.
yet, when the detroit spent the money, they mothballed all the projects. toyota, on the other hand, launched the prius.
couple that with the tax credits for hybrid cars. imagine if those credits had not been capped.
the prius would be far hotter than it already is. toyota would have had to increase its production plans much sooner.
likewise, the big 3 would have had to come up with legitimate prius contenders. they couldn't just let toyota have all those credits.
and, had the big 3 had to compete with the prius back in 2004, they would have been far better prepared for the gas shock of 2008.
incentivizing consumers to make efficient choices could have driven the market to a more well-rounded product portfolio.
larry-
and that's not dirty?
and it isn't just corporate money that makes it dirty. it's the whole system, such as when a senior senator can force a junior senator - of the same party - to vote a certain way or risk losing the party support necessary to be re-elected.
sometimes its not even about money, just power.
just look at the history of politics in america and the political machines. our political system was built on corruption.
makes we wanna go out and read the plunkett of tammany hall again!
Oh.. there's lots not to like.. I agree.. but the money is particularly corruptive in my view.
there's always going to be power hungry folks around.. both in govt and just as likely where-ever you work or play.. there are those types... who have to have things their way or else...
but that's not the same as what amounts to legalized bribery in my view.
maybe i'm just skewed by my time living in chicago!
I just love this blog. 6 posts in less than an hour :-)
So how much more do we need to give to the consumer to get them to bite the bullet and do solar?
Here is the recent costs for a COMPLETE 4KW system for the do-it-yourself installer = $13,598. Take away my 40% Arizona tax or maybe your utility credit of say $3.00/watt in your area and you have about $8,158 left. Then take away the 30% Federal Tax credit and you end up at about $5711.16 + permit fees + installation if you don't want to do the job yourself. How cheap does solar need to get guys? Even Wells Fargo will do a signature loan for $5 grand.
http://www.dmsolar.com/solar-gridtie-system.html
But as I remember; some little birdie on this site suggested we should also have an extra credit for individuals who charge their plug-in hybrids from THEIR own solar arrays. Now that is a darn good idea. Have we circulated the petition yet - I want to sign it.
Tom G.
Tom - the average consumer wants a unit installed, maintained and a warranted by a responsible party.
I would equate this to a do-it-yourselfer trying to install a backup generator with a transfer switch.
Solar has to transition from a back-yard mechanic to a guy knocking on your door from the utility company telling you that their smart grid connection to your house told them that your solar panels has a problem and they are there to fix it.
Remember.. we're living in a world where many folks - believe it or not - do not know how to do things like calculate the MPG on their car or know what to look for in an energy efficient LCD TV.
Larry - you mean LED don't you? My sister has a 42" plasma that dims her lights when she turn it on; well not really but that sucker does run hot.
My family room 42" LCD is Energy Star rated and takes 121 watts operating and .45 watts in standby. Not to bad I guess.
LED's are even better from what I've read. I didn't take the time to look it up but I am guessing the new Samsung is below 100 watts.
Tom G.
Tom - yes.. it don't matter too much what you call it - as much as you know that some kinds and models are electrical vampires and some are not.
and since I mentioned the backup generator I had a question for ya'll.
In terms of an integrated smart grid that coordinates and mixes and matches different sources in a real time environment - in ADDITION to being able to turn off select applicances - if some/all homes had NG/LPG Backup generators that could ALSO be turned on remotely -
especially in a scenario like a cloudy or windless day when the renewables drop below thresholds or even in a casualty mode involving major plants like Nukes or Coal ...
got my drift?
one of the big expanding businesses these days is - guess what? standby backup power generators...
ya'll were talking about the possibilities of using plug-ins as battery backups to the grid -
what about homes that have BOTH Solar and NG/LPG standby backup generators AND a SMART GRID to mix and match, slice and dice to advantage?
Larry my answers are:
Yes,
yes,
maybe, and;
yes LOL
I also have a backup generator. My purpose for maintaining that generator is to keep my butt cool when it is 115 degrees outside in the middle of summer. It is not grid tied and never will be.
Tom G.
sorry i'm commenting so late, but the flu or something else is making its way through my household...
while larry brings up some great reasons why consumers aren't up to the solar installation task, i think the numbers tom presented show how close we could be to change.
and, as alcatholic pointed out the other day, there are some interesting business models being created around solar.
exciting times.
the legitimate role of the government in my mind is to encourage/incentivize INVESTMENT into things that actually have a positive return but it's the up-front costs that discourage the investment at the start.
These things are not only doeable things but in the end could become a core part of the new economy of this nation...
i agree larry, but it seems to me - at a national level - that this conversation is largely driven today by co2 and cap and trade.
certainly, those are legitimate issues, but poll after poll demonstrates these issues just don't really resonate with the public.
foreign oil dependency, however, resonates quite well. as does anything that helps consumers, etc. save money.
consequently, i think the messengers, especially those in the obama admin. need to seriously rethink their messaging and packaging to appeal to the american people.
right now it seems we're trying to appease the world community. i say let's be selfish. let's focus on messaging that appeals to america, not the world.
in the short term i'd wager that the best gift america could give the world is ending our dependence on foreign oil. moreover, any such program would, nonetheless, have a huge impact on co2 reductions.
you gotta separate the money issues from the patriotic issues.
folks are in favor of energy independence until you tell them the price.
folks STAY in favor of energy changes if it directly saves them money..
and unfortunately or not - money is the relevant factor - not patriotism because we all know if Patriotism was the guiding force - we'd make the necessary financial sacrifices
.. just ... follow the money...
cap & trade is a fearful concept right now because - rightly or wrongly - people believe that it will harm them financially...
agreed.
that's why i threw in the "as does anything that helps consumers, etc. save money."
i'm not claiming to have figured it out, just a different approach.
Post a Comment
<< Home