Centralized electric Grids have enjoyed a century of increasing reliability but there have been environmental and social costs attendant with their growth, along with near exponential population increases in some areas.
As Siemens has termed our current situation, it is time to “sectionalize” the Grid to adapt better to situations exacerbated by climate change, like wildfires and storms and eventually improve overall Grid reliability. It is time to look at our permanent infrastructure of large-scale power plants as obsolete.
Like automobiles, I believe that a systematic phasing out of these fossil fuel power plants over the next 28 years is preferable. New exploration for fossil fuels is not desirable, in my opinion. Â Increased production of renewable energy projects to bring truly clean energy to the table is preferred and investing in energy efficiencies is still a profitable endeavor for utilities.
We are in a wartime situation and rationing of fossil fuels seems reasonable.
Right now, there is no political mechanism for a reduction of fossil fuels beyond the vague “net-zero” by 2050 hailed by many jurisdictions.
A colleague of mine, Klaus Jacob of Lamont-Doherty, coined the term “Nomadic Infrastructure,” back in 2013 and I have been exploring how to implement such portable and resilient systems for deployment in rural areas, as well as disaster sites.
I have written in several places that the Grid needs to focus on distribution of energy, rather than the production of energy. Some players have suggested that utilities become traders of energy and I have always felt that such a transition had the potential for becoming a slippery slope. The culture of utilities is conservative, bureaucratic and good ole boy network, and seems inherently incongruent with the trader mentality required to be a successful energy trader.
The regulatory layers of FERC, at the Federal level, and the various and sundry regional and local governing bodies of energy policy also seem arcane to the general public (myself, included). Â Evaluating utility projects with their renewable energy credits (RECs) and capacity payments for standby energy agreements feel somewhat contrived and convoluted.
What about producing energy and making a reasonable profit without these mechanisms?
Perhaps also getting rid of all subsidies for fossil fuels would be a good start. I have heard a worldwide figure of $5.3 trillion for fossil fuel subsidies. RECs for renewable energy would continue until utilities figure out how to handle renewable energy first and foremost, and fossil fuels finally take a back seat to renewables.
Yes, renewables need vast improvements in efficiency.
We need solar panels that are much more space efficient through a setback design of panels to get more cells through 3D building up of the photovoltaic cells. The 2012 MIT study showed that design is much more efficient. https://news.mit.edu/2012/three-dimensional-solar-energy-0327Â
Battery storage has to be more cost effective and enjoy the price declines which ideally follow according to Moore’s Law. Lithium is the far away winner for now, but there is hope for Zinc, Graphene and other substances. When I talk to engineers there is great hope and promise for green hydrogen fuel cell technology but most players see this at least five to ten years before it fully scales. Green hydrogen is the holy grail for many engineers but it still seems elusive given the fossil fuel mentality of many conservative organizations. Gas hydrogen is still more expensive than gas turbines.
Perhaps the best pivot for the utility industry is to oversee the transition toward renewable energy. To be the accountant that measures our transition to more renewable energy in the next 28 years so we can achieve net zero carbon emissions.
This transition would best be done, in my opinion, by having utility companies commission 3rd parties to plan, design, construct and operate large scale renewable energy microgrids. The utilities have to start prioritizing renewables over fossil fuels if we are to truly reduce carbon emissions.
There has been much talk about increasing nuclear power capabilities but as I have said before, I am only in favor of Thorium or molten salt nuclear reactors. As we have seen from the War in Ukraine, nuclear power plants become targets during wartime and this is disconcerting to say the least.
Resilience talks about N+1 backup systems so Grids do not fail.
N+1 is essential but so is placement of mechanical rooms to avoid flooding and other high profile targeting like in war time situations. A decade ago, I designed a 100-foot mechanical tower for the New York Wheel site that was about 18 feet above sea level and located as far away from the waterfront as possible. See the white circle toward the back of the right side of the site below. Back then, and probably now, fuel tanks had to be located on the first floor of any multi-level mechanical room.
The bottom line is that Utilities enjoy a legal monopoly through public regulation. They are a public benefit company.
The unfortunate situation, in many jurisdictions, is that they are highly opaque entities controlled by a relatively few powerful individuals who appear to care less about renewable energy than reliability and making capital improvements that generate profit for the utility and its shareholders. The new model would better serve as a true public benefit corporation immune to fossil fuel lobbyists and represented by all income groups and users of the utility’s services.
I think the most productive thing that Grid executives should think about is to have the perspective of someone who is thirty-something years old with a young family. What would they want the Grid to do for them? Now and in the future.
One can dream, can’t one?