"The Grid"- A Learning Moment

Or to cite the full title of the book, " The Grid: the Fraying Wires between Americans and Our Energy Future". It is a must-read for everybody, especially for those in the business. The author, a cultural anthropologist, whose expertise is examining human behavior when they reach the end of a familiar system. That description itself was a trigger for me to pick up the book. In her words: I am interested in what people do when the systems they rely upon stop working. Whether speaking of the end of political systems like communism, infrastructural systems like the electric grid...and what do people, diversely, make of things when all that is solid fades unexpectedly into the air.

Fades unexpectedly ?! Is that a fair way of describing the grid which, warts and all, was described as the most important invention of the 20th century by the National Academy of Engineers? Even more important than transistors, automobiles and jet planes. Something that we are so dependent on so much so that we have metrics to measure reliability and resilience? And I was chastened and disappointed. The latter because I wished it was an "inside" person who could have written so lyrically. I mean one of us engineers. But just when engineers need to step up their game and take ownership, we lapse into techno-jargon that frankly only confuses people more. She provides, sometimes in dramatic language, the birth, the progress and what she claims would be a slow death (a death spiral?) if we don't pay enough attention for its well-being. She eloquently traces the origins of the grid, how it became a vital part of the post-Industrial revolution, how the big names dominated, how the centralized model turned electricity into a commodity and leveraged the scaling advantages. The few big players who turned the business into what it is today—a monopoly and a monopsony. And a revelation to me: how creative and manipulative and innovative was Sam Insull in creating the grid of today. And as the author so eloquently points out: the grid was never meant to have a two-way flow of electrons as we wrestle today with renewable resources, net metering, and feed-in tariffs. She recognizes it to be an abstraction: ”... the grid rarely gets into larger conversations. At times, it is almost as if it does not exist. We all—you, I, our state and federal regulators, our business leaders and upstart entrepreneurs, even the world climate change experts—we just dream our dreams,..”. And we will ever regret that we uttered the words that continue to haunt us today: electricity will be too cheap to meter.

That was like cold water being splashed on our collective faces! Do we engineers ever bother to explain the greatest invention does need a makeover? Yes, renewable energy is in our future but the grid is the supplier of last resort. The amorphous thing called the grid has a role and function to play and its valuation must be done properly. Why is that engineers cannot make a persuasive case that the most important thing in our life can if neglected crumble? She is right in that its presence is felt when it is not present. I have read eloquent letters of interest from interested students in developing countries requesting admission to our Institute ruing about what those distribution lines were doing as they slept under the stars during one of the frequent outages many had to suffer. Face it, the way the grid was designed and the business models around it do need a serious re-look even as we bring more renewable resources. How refreshing that the author describes transformers a critical infrastructure which revolutionized transmission over long distances thus: “higher voltages can go farther than lower voltages.. it has a ‘higher quotient of desire’, it wants harder..”

So herewith are my rhetorical questions (and my answers) about why we are so misunderstood and why most of the time engineers are to blame for the poor communication.

1. Why are engineers so inept at explaining the grid?

The easy way out is that it is "too complex" because in our arsenal are a sheaf of laws (Maxwell's law, Ohm's law, etc.) that we commonly, and sometimes unthinkingly, resort to in explaining electricity. That could put anyone to sleep

2. Are engineers responsible for the policy uncertainties today? 

Yes. Of course, yes. If it is not clear to the ordinary consumer, why would we expect the policies around electricity to be clear? We are struggling today with a lack of a Federal policy and a quilt-work of state policies with differing definitions of what is renewable energy, what standards should they comply by and what would be the cost of changes which includes upgrading the grid. It is a step-sister nobody wants to acknowledge its required presence, let alone its elegance in enabling the product to come to our doorstep.

3. "Renewable is good, Fossil and Nuclear are bad!"

This may make for a fine poster but the facts are otherwise. According to the U.S. Department of Energy, nuclear- and fossil-fueled generation are a very healthy majority of our electricity generation today.. and several decades into the future. According to the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Energy Information Administration (EIA) projections for a 20-year planning horizon forecasts conventional generation to account for 85% [1] of the generated electricity. We cannot seem to live without them.

4. Why does the public tolerate integrated planning from utilities that project nuclear, coal and gas fuels to be the major workhorses for the next 15 -20 years?

The utilities are governed by State and Federal laws to supply electricity under a fuel mix that meets certain criteria (for example, state's renewable portfolio standard requirement) but also at a competitive price. U.S. electricity costs average $ 0.12/kWh one of the lowest in the developed world. Germany, Denmark, and Spain average more than $0.30/kWh. Some parts of the U.S.-- notably inland California and Hawaii-- pay a comparable amount as the Europeans. Even though renewable costs have come down dramatically and are the fastest growing of the resources, they are yet to meet "grid-parity" prices. Never mind their intermittency.

5. A few U.S. states -- New York, California-- are experimenting with a greater contribution of renewable resources in their mix. What will be the impact on prices?

New York and California are indeed at the forefront of a greener generation mix. Under the Reformed Energy Vision (REV), New York has planned several demonstrations that are likely to measure the impact of different levels of penetration of distributed resources and possibly the price impact. Similarly, California has mandated that each of the utilities provide storage capacity to smooth out bumps when solar/wind technology are not able to meet demand

Simply put, the grid is best explained by all; modifying it to meet new needs in a language understood by all. The business model revamp is best done by all, not just the utilities and the public commissions. If we are not inclusive we would end up with governing rules as enacted in the Energy Policy Act in 1992 to treat electricity and bananas identically from a market point of view.

[1] "The U.S. Energy Future". April 26, 2012. U.S. Energy Information Administration. https://www.eia.gov/pressroom/presentations/howard_04262012.pdf