Solar, wind, and hydro power are all tapped at the source. You need an efficient, expansive, and "smart" grid to allocate that power across the whole US. Not only might the supply of energy change, but demand for electricity from the grid may increase if the popularity of electric cars continues to grow, putting new stresses on the grid. Matching electric vehicles with renewable energy would obviously be a perfect pairing to reduce greenhouse emissions.
From a practical perspective, the grid is a smart investment because it solves an underlying infrastructure issue that will benefit all types of energy creation, not just those currently in vogue. The next big thing might turn out to be an alternative energy failure like these five, but an efficient, smart grid would support whatever sources end up winning out.
Do you think this is an intelligent and practical solution to a problem, and a smart use of federal funds?
Something about talking about the grid makes my head hurt. I think it's that there is even a discussion about it... why wouldn't we want better power distribution, exactly?
ReplyDeleteTo see a great example of how specific business interests throw themselves into 'public good' discussions to try to influence the discussion, click on the "improving the grid" link and pay attention to the different people and businesses being quoted. The guy selling rooftop solar arrays in New Jersey thinks the grid is better served by funding local projects like his; the giant solar array producer in the southwest thinks the grid is better if it pumps power from the SW to the east coast. Not surprising, but amusing because it's so transparent and yet these people are allowed to influence things anyway. Ugh.
An update on this subject from BW - apparently Italy is the world leader in the field. Smart meters exist in 85% of Italian homes, saving the leading electricity company an estimated $750 million a year. The company says much of the savings are passed on to customers.
ReplyDelete