The Smart Grid Trojan Horse (Planted by the Green Movement)

Perhaps you've heard of the Smart Grid initiative. Perhaps you understand that the goal of the initiative is to improve and modernize the nation's power transmission and distribution networks. Maybe your electric utility has even installed a Smart Meter at your home or business. What you probably don't know is that the Smart Grid movement is the Trojan Horse of the green agenda, a step toward Cap & Trade.

Since the time of grid pioneer Samuel Insull, the goal of utilities everywhere has been to balance generation capacity against electrical demand to ensure system integrity. Curiously, this goal is shared in modern times by the green movement. The difference is in how the goal is accomplished.

For decades, utilities satisfied unbridled energy demand growth by constructing new generating plants. The concept was pleasantly simple: Predict the pace by which energy consumption would increase and build generating plants to keep ahead of it. Then came environmentalism and its evil twin, mindless anti-capitalism, both rooted in the counterculture of the 1960s. Thereafter, utilities began to evolve at the point of a gun. Every aspect of generating electricity came into question under a variety of federal energy acts and environmental regulations. Power plant construction would never again be easy or cheap. Energy efficiency and conservation would have to save the day in accord with the Green agenda. Meanwhile, many state Public Utility Commissions established Renewable Portfolio Standards (RPS). These standards required utilities to incorporate high-cost renewable energy sources into their portfolio of low-cost conventional generation assets (never mind the consequences).

Now comes the Smart Grid initiative. In truth, the initiative is but a collection of programs captured in the form of federal standards that separately and jointly advance the Green agenda without raising many eyebrows. The first effort involves replacing conventional electric meters with Smart Meters. Smart Meters are key, because they can be programmed to total your energy consumption by time-of-day (among other sophisticated capabilities). This feature facilitates the application of Time-of-Use (TOU) billing tariffs, euphemistically called "dynamic pricing"in marketing circles. These tariffs vary energy charges depending on when energy is used. Conventional meters do not include the time-of-day feature. They are very modest devices that have little calculation capability. They simply total kilowatt-hour consumption (energy) for monthly billing calculation purposes with no regard to when energy is consumed. This simple metering approach met, and still meets, the operational needs of utilities that bill against a simple flat cost-per-kilowatt-hour tariff. That would be the majority of utilities.

To be clear, existing conventional dumb meters have ample sophistication for simple flat-rate billing purposes. For more complex billing tariffs, a more complex meter is necessary -- the Smart Meter. So why do utilities need more complex billing tariffs? Simple: to better and more subtly mine your wallet for the funds needed to uphold renewable energy sources and other costly Green initiatives. Of course, that's not the official reason.

In fact, Smart Meters will be collecting and transmitting real-time energy consumption data, your data, to servers at (or controlled by) your host utility. The data will be conveyed via the internet, and accordingly, you'll be able to examine this data at will via a home display or online. An iPhone application is already available.

According to Smart Meter proponents, by having access to real-time consumption data, consumers will be better-informed about their energy use and will therefore spend time and effort finding ways to reduce consumption. I would not call this a lie so much as a yet-to-be-validated truth that falls well short of "full disclosure." On examination, one might agree that energy cost "savings" are plausible. Meaningful savings is a different story altogether. Rarely do you hear the words "return on investment" in the context of Smart Meters.

Ironically, even while Smart Meters are being deployed by the millions at a cost of billions in stimulus grants, the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) has yet to complete a collection of "demonstration projects" launched specifically to gauge the value of providing consumers with real-time energy data. As of this writing, there is no hard evidence that shows a per-household return on the Smart Meter "investment" you unwittingly made and are continuing to make via taxes and utility charges. In fact, the DOE's Smart Grid Information Clearing House website posts this note in red at the top of the home page: "We expect to officially launch the site in Fall 2010."

I suspect EPRI and the utilities deploying Smart Meters already know that few consumers will avail themselves of the promised data, and that even those rare birds who diligently and aggressively pursue savings will be bitterly disappointed by the results. Actually, the anecdotal evidence is already plain and convincing. So why the ruse? Uncovering the details takes a fair understanding of the subject.

Typical flat-rate billing tariffs are not remotely representative of how generation costs are accrued in the real electricity market. They would be so only if utility costs were similarly flat across each day, each week, each month, and each season -- but they are not.

Operationally speaking, utilities have two basic "types" of generators: base load and peaking. The fundamental difference between the two is in how they are deployed. Base load generators are intended to run constantly with a fairly high, flat output. They satisfy fundamental consumer demands and are relatively inexpensive to own and operate. On the other hand, peaking generators run only to meet electrical demand spikes, like those that occur on particularly hot summer days. Peaking generators therefore cost utilities more per generated kilowatt-hour because the asset is often sitting idle while ownership and maintenance costs tick.

All that said, a thoughtfully designed flat-rate tariff will equitably account for cost variation, as it has for decades. This is done through averaging. Simply put, a flat-rate tariff "overcharges" during parts of the day and "undercharges" at other times in order to yield a total net charge that properly accounts for the utility's varying costs. In short, existing rates and meters meet the accounting and billing demands of conventional generation operations.

There are a number of technical problems that come with wind and solar sources, but for the purpose of this article, the chief problem is that they appear and "disappear" at the call of nature, often defying all efforts to forecast their Copperfield-like magic tendencies. This causes grid system operators (sysops) no end of grief, as they must balance varying consumer demand against a supply reserve that now contains a host of variable, uncontrollable generators. This results in exceptional use of conventional generating assets and taxes grid stability.

Given the foregoing, the need for Smart Meters is clear. Simple metering and flat-rate billing can no longer equitably account for all the green cost variables being inflicted on utilities. In the final analysis, time-of-use billing tariffs are the answer. To enable these tariffs, Smart meters are required.

One set of statistics for your consideration. The Cape Wind project, America's first offshore wind farm (within view of the Kennedy compound), pre-sold 50% of its design output last month on a fifteen-year contract to National Grid. Sales price: $0.207 per kilowatt-hour, plus an annual cost increase of 3.5%. Power deliveries are scheduled to begin in 2013. At the end of the contract in 2028, the kilowatt-hour price will have escalated to $0.3237.

In other words, the subsidized wind power cost when diluted by the low cost of conventional generation is barely noticeable! Never mind that the raw cost is just shy of double the national average residential energy cost, according to statistics taken from the U.S. Energy Information Administration. This is how frogs are boiled.

Stopping the march to green serfdom will not be easy because a confluence of separate conflicts of interest are securing our fate. On one end, you have the green mafia, who are on the threshold of having their dreams fulfilled. On the other end are vendors who stand to make millions selling "greenware." Between are utilities that will finally secure the means to bear the financial pressures of environmentalism. On the periphery are engineering firms and installation contractors, many that would otherwise starve in this economy but for the Smart Grid initiative. Politicians, of course, are filthy throughout, the most effective offenders being members of state Public Utility Commissions (PUC). Having already enabled costly Renewable Portfolio Standards, no doubt they will approve costly sophisticated rates as well.

The foregoing is only the tip of the proverbial iceberg. Clearly, the Smart Grid initiative is every bit as ominous as Cap & Trade, perhaps worse, because it romps along without much notice as billions of taxpayer dollars are spent. Fighting it starts with understanding that the initiative isn't really about modernizing the grid in the way most people understand the definition of "modernizing." It's about enabling the green agenda.

Grant Ellis holds a BS in Electrical Engineering from the University of Florida and Professional Engineering licenses in Texas, Georgia, and Kansas. He is in private practice and a veteran of multiple power distribution and energy efficiency projects over a 31-year career.

You won’t be able to run AC in the heat of the day and you can do your laundry and cooking between the hours of 11:00 PM and 6:00 AM.

Progress!

My utility offers a program whereby they tell users a day in advance what the cost per KwH will be for the next 24 hours, and each person decides how they choose to use electricity at that rate. A “smart meter” tabulates usage in hourly increments, but does not communicate or control anything.

Most of us make decisions every as to whether we spend our money on something, or decide to wait. This program brings that same ability to electricity usage and there’s nothing wrong with that.

Flat rate plans have always been artificial because when you “peanut-butter” costs across a range of users, some get screwed and some get a free ride, and there is no incentive to save money.

Exactly right. For years, the public has been "protected" against the real cost of energy production and delivery. If the everyday consumer was forced to pay the real cost, they would all be bitching about how "unfair" it is.

This article is a complete scare tactic.

The bottom line with Smart Grid is consumers will ALWAYS have a choice about how they use energy but will pay the REAL price of energy. THAT will have consumers taking a real look at how they use energy and PERHAPS making some changes.

Any attempt by any utility to control load only happens when it gets signed off by the customer. Period.

Interestingly, the Maryland PUC just voted this down. It was proposed by Baltimore Gas and Electric to the Public Utilities Commission and the liberals must not have know what they were supposed to do. The Dems were griping that BG&E was just trying another way to make money.

First off new limits are presented to the people as a good thing ... IE giving us choice and control of our amount of usage ... but then it turns out they can control, shut down individual usage from their company control centers. Same idea is coming soon with the implanted identity chip, IE it will keep your child from being lost, it will have a person's health information in case of accident, emergency, ... etc,

Do not take the mark of the beast! " ...without which one can not buy or sell"!!! do not fall for these entrapment's ... so called good for the user ideas.

If a person gives controls to others, do not be surprised when they use them for other results than the consumer expected.

1984 to the MAX is NOW! WATCH AND SEE!!!

God help us in our day, in Jesus name, amen.

More Larger and More efficient Nuclear power stations and distributed “Beta Decay Batteries” to help blanace the load.

Then start a program for Orbital Solar constructed using lunar mined and processed components.

It is the only way to do this. Setting up pinwheels and solar cells that only work 10 hours a day if lucky is just plain foolish.

>”You won’t be able to run AC in the heat of the day and you can do your laundry and cooking between the hours of 11:00 PM and 6:00 AM.”

Thats EXACTLY it. Minnesota Power called me about, oh, 4 or 5 years ago and wanted to put one of those new meters on my house AND a new thermostat inside. When I asked what it was and why they wanted to do it, they stated it was so they could limit power consumption when they needed to.

I told them as long as I pay for the power I use, I’ll use as much as I want, and to stay the hell away from my house.

People, do NOT get this. Do NOT keep relinquishing control of your life to these LIBERALS!

By God, if I want to have 25 electric heaters going, my AC on, and my furnace pumping out CO2 like Al Gore’s butt pumps out methane, then I’ll damned well do it, and NO LIBERAL is gonna tell me otherwise!

The authors of â€œSmart Gridâ€sound like the same bunch that promote â€œsmart growth.â€Those are the socialists that reduce highway lanes for bike lanes, make straight roads crooked with crosswalk bump-outs, make intersections hard to drive through with roundabouts, add axle breaking road-bumps all in the name of improving safety but really meant to encourage commuters to use public transportation.

More Larger and More efficient Nuclear power stations and distributed “Beta Decay Batteries” to help blanace the load.

As it happened, we had a speaker at the Engineers Club this week who talked on electricity generation and distribution. The main theme of his talk was that electricity demand is already pushing maximum capacity. As to why the utilities don't build more power plants, he said one factor is a shortage of welders. We don't even have enough welders to build significantly more coal plants, let alone enough nuclear certified welders to build nuclear plants.

Instead of pushing more and more people to go to college, working our way down the Bell Curve, we'd do a lot better to encourage people to go into the skilled trades, including welding.

I already have a devise required by my electric company that shuts off the compressor on my central air conditioner during certain peak usage times. The electric company determines when these shut offs occur. I was getting a small rebate on my bill when the devise kicked in, but no longer.

When the government assumes control I could see my central air being turned off at the whim of bureaucrats or to wait for the wind to be just right to move the windmills. I expect that my natural gas line will in the near future have a similar "feature" that cuts off my supply based on carbon output. Welcome to Obama world where we all will swelter or freeze in our own homes.

"Simple: to better and more subtly mine your wallet for the funds needed to uphold renewable energy sources and other costly Green initiatives. Of course, that's not the official reason."

The article is total nonsense. Strawberries are more expensive in the beginning of a season than in its height. A worker's pay is greater during overtime. Hotel rooms are more expensive during tourist season and conventions.

The author assumes that energy should be different without explaining --- or even attempting to explain --- why; this stupid assumption is supposed to be self-evident.

And on top of that he uses the tactic of a scoundrel, simply trying to anger the reader.

"Simple: to better and more subtly mine your wallet for the funds needed to uphold renewable energy sources and other costly Green initiatives. Of course, that's not the official reason."

The author assumes that energy should be different without explaining --- or even attempting to explain --- why; this stupid assumption is supposed to be self-evident.

And on top of that he uses the tactic of a scoundrel, simply trying to anger the reader.

"Not on MY house!"

How will you avoid it?? The "electric company" owns the meter on your house now. Your only recourse is to go completely "off-the-grid", which also fits the "green agenda".

"It is the only way to do this. Setting up pinwheels and solar cells that only work 10 hours a day if lucky is just plain foolish."

Not at all. Solar thermal with heat storage can be "stand-alone". It actually "mirrors" the demand cycle better than other choices. Cheaper...maybe not. Can also be retrofitted onto existing fossil (or nuclear) plants that use steam generators.

My personal preference is to "go nuclear" all the way, including re-processing and breeder reactors. But solar energy alone CAN run a high-tech civilization.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.