There has been a lot of buzz this week about smart meters -- electrical meters that allow each of us to parse our use in minute-by-minute increments. There was a particularly intelligent discussion about smart meters and broad band at Unfair Park, the Observer's blog.
Most of the publicity has focused on our pals at Oncor giving us the opportunity to find out just how much difference it makes to run the air conditioning at 76 degrees instead of 78 degrees (or 80 degrees, if you're cheap and from the Midwest). What a lot of the stories have overlooked is that we're not the only piece of the smart meter puzzle.
Much of the enthusiasm about smart meters comes from utilities who want to know exactly when we use electricity. That way, they will be able to do two things: First, charge us a premium when we use it during peak periods, and second, map where they need to send electricity more efficiently. And it's the second thing that is key (though they certainly won't mind the ability to do the first), since it can save them millions and millions of dollars.
Currently, Texas doesn't have enough transmission capacity -- the lines to take electricity from the power source to our homes -- to meet anticipated demand. (There isn't enough generating capacity, either, but that's a post for another day). The state's CREZ plan will increase transmission capacity over the next decade or so, mostly to being wind power from West Texas to Dallas and Houston (which is why I know about this -- I cover this stuff for a trade magazine).
So think of a smart meter as the ultimate traffic cop. If the utilities know exactly when and how much power we use, they can route enough to where it needs to go, despite limited capacity and the vagaries of the system. For example, wind blows more at night than during the day, so that's when you want to take a natural gas plant off line to do maintenance. If you know, minute by minute, how much electricity you need, you can figure out the best time to shut the natural gas plant and use night-time wind power to make up the difference. A smart meter should provide better data than is currently available to do that.
It's an omniscient being moving cars along the freeway system during rush hour to avoid traffic jams, so that everyone gets where they need to go with a minimum of delay.
Too bad we can't get broadband, though.
Some interesting stuff regarding electricity generation:
- Generating facilities, such as Nuclear, Coal and Natural Gas plants take quite a while (i.e. 24+ hours) to "turn on" from an idled state.
- Generating capacity has to be built out to handle "peak demand", which is in the Noon-6pm time frame somewhere.
- Since generating capacity can't simply be turned on and off when needed, we have to have "peak demand" capacity running 24x7. This means that if we only use 50% of the electricity generated at midnight, the same amount of fuel (coal or natural gas) is still used - so the cost of generating is the same, but they can only sell half of the electricity.
Due to our high peak demand in summer (due to HVAC usage), we have a lot of plants that are idled in the winter and a lot of waste during the summer at night. This drives up the per KwH price because all that infrastructure is sitting idle for many months of the year and we waste a lot of fuel during the rest of the year.
Many states different peak and off-peak consumer rates (i.e. instead of paying 12 cents per KwH 24x7, with a smart meter, you can be charged 8 cents per KwH in off-peak times and maybe 16 cents during peak hours). The concept is that this will encourage the consumers to modify their behavior to help smooth the peak/non-peak demand levels, thereby wasting less fuel and decreasing the need for more "peak" plants. People would learn to run their dishwashers and washer/dryers in the evening (or use the "delay" option so they run in the middle of the night), encourage people to use set-backs on their AC when they are at work, or simply to upgrade to a more efficient AC system if yours is older and/or you work from the home (i.e. either professionals, or a stay at home parent).
One other interesting concept is that, while I believe that with today's electrical rates, solar panels simply aren't economically feasible, with a peak/off peak type setup, since solar panels generate nearly 100% of their capacity during the grid's peak-load hours - if we could offset 16-20 cent per KwH rates - the math may change enough to make a compelling financial case for installing a small (20-25% of your overall usage) solar array to essentially "avoid" the cost of the most expensive KwH's. This becomes even more compelling as there are many technologies in the solar pipeline that promise to lower the cost of solar panels. When the financials work, I can certainly see myself installing one.
Brian
Posted by: Brian | May 29, 2008 at 09:02 AM