kristopher
kristopher's JournalStreet Fight
LED street lighting the newest challenge to old utility business models
Guest co-author Dan Howe is the assistant city manager for the City of Raleigh, NC, and a member of RMI’s eLab.
A lot is being said about various threats to the electric utility business model. At their root, many of those threats are really a fundamental misalignment between utilities’ revenue model and their customers’ own financial needs and service preferences. More often than not, solar PV figures centrally in these conversations. But a new and unexpected threat is emerging: street lights.
For any level of government responsible for managing roadways, street lighting is a critical service. Among other services, effective and targeted lighting on roadways can dramatically improve auto and pedestrian safety. Now emerging technologies such as energy-efficient LED lighting are creating a dramatic opportunity for consumer-side cost savings, as well as the potential for a much broader suite of municipal services via LED-integrated smart sensors, and with it the possibility for upending a staid and overlooked component of the traditional utility service offering. Clearly, these are not your grandfather’s street lights.
In some cities, the municipality owns the streetlights and pays the utility for the energy those lights use. But in most cities around the country, the local electric distribution company provides overhead street lighting as a basic service at a flat monthly rate per light, which includes the light itself, maintenance, and electricity. Therein lies the rub—regulated utilities often have little incentive to invest in more efficient streetlights, which offer a reliable, consistent, and often lucrative revenue stream that comes at a time of day (or night) when demand is low.
Despite a seeming incentive for utilities to invest in efficiency and thus increase the profit margin between the flat monthly rate they charge municipalities and the kilowatt-hours that are bundled in that rate, installing a more efficient street lighting system typically requires approval from the state PUC, including tariff updates to reflect the new costs—a process that would erode any cost savings the utility would hope to capture.
Yet efficient streetlights could save cities and towns tons of money if these municipalities were able to capture all the inherent savings in energy and maintenance promised by the new technology. In fact, street lighting often represents the highest single energy-related expense in municipalities’ annual budget, often running into the millions of tax dollars per year...
http://blog.rmi.org/blog_2013_11_26_Street_Fight
It is no more "the key" than power lines are "the key"
As I said, yes we need some storage. But that isn't "the key". Replacing carbon with clean generation is "the key" - nothing else.
What you've written is somewhat accurate, but some critical elements are inaccurate and the emphasis is inapt as it creates the impression that there is some sort of technical barrier or massive storage rollout effort that must be accomplished before we really get down to concentrating on the generating side. That simply isn't the case.
It is also a bit inappropriate because it creates the sense that the variability issue is larger, more unusual, and more difficult to deal with than is actually the case.
The needed storage is going to be rolled out as the economic niches develop. FERC just gave storage equal access to the grid by requiring that, when a need for grid services is evaluated by ISOs and utilities, the rapid response characteristics of battery storage are included. The prior rule structure favored fossil sources.
The ramp up of battery electric vehicles and Vehicle 2 Grid technology is also in progress, and in the not too distant future that will put in place a massive pool of energy storage resources that the utilities can 'rent' from the vehicle owners as needed.
You wrote, "If wind were cheaper then Utilities would be rushing to add Turbines to the grid instead of Natural gas CT units."
Would you care to share with us the amounts of new capacity added in the past two years by technology? I think you'll find the rush is on.
Establishing the cost of integration is a normal part of any project and is not significant; there are greater costs involved with ensuring emergency back-up for large scale thermal coal and (particularly) nuclear plants.
You might enjoy reading this.
Cory Budischaka, DeAnna Sewellc, Heather Thomsonc, Leon Machd, Dana E. Veronc, Willett Kempton,
Open Access Article http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378775312014759
Abstract
We model many combinations of renewable electricity sources (inland wind, offshore wind, and photovoltaics) with electrochemical storage (batteries and fuel cells), incorporated into a large grid system (72 GW). The purpose is twofold:
1) although a single renewable generator at one site produces intermittent power, we seek combinations of diverse renewables at diverse sites, with storage, that are not intermittent and satisfy need a given fraction of hours. And
2) we seek minimal cost, calculating true cost of electricity without subsidies and with inclusion of external costs.
Our model evaluated over 28 billion combinations of renewables and storage, each tested over 35,040 h (four years) of load and weather data. We find that the least cost solutions yield seemingly-excessive generation capacity — at times, almost three times the electricity needed to meet electrical load. This is because diverse renewable generation and the excess capacity together meet electric load with less storage, lowering total system cost.
At 2030 technology costs and with excess electricity displacing natural gas, we find that the electric system can be powered 90%–99.9% of hours entirely on renewable electricity, at costs comparable to today's—but only if we optimize the mix of generation and storage technologies.
Open Access Article http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378775312014759
UniStar scraps plans for Nine Mile Point 3 nuclear power plant
December 6, 2013
By Dorothy Davis
Content Director
UniStar Nuclear Energy has completely withdrawn its application for a third nuclear power reactor at the Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station, reports The Associated Press.
Nine Mile Point is a two-unit nuclear power station located in Scriba, New York on the shore of Lake Ontario. The license application for a third reactor at the site was submitted by UniStar to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in 2008. However, UniStar then submitted a request the NRC to put the application on hold just over a year later.
According to the AP, UniStar has now opted to completely halt the application process for Nine Mile Point 3 because the project was not selected for federal loan guarantees....
http://www.pennenergy.com/articles/pennenergy/2013/12/unistar-scraps-plans-for-third-nuclear-reactor-at-nine-mile-point.html
Ray of hope: "Emperor’s apparent liberal leanings jar with Japan’s right wing"
BY PHILIP BRASOR
DEC 7, 2013
In the media debate about the state secrets bill, much has been said about the public’s right to know. Participants in a democratic society must be informed to make decisions in their interest, and critics of the bill, which ostensibly protects matters of national security, believe it will be used to keep people in the dark about anything the government doesn’t want revealed or discussed openly.
But even before there is a law limiting the dispersal of official information, Japanese citizens operate with a built-in filter that controls what an individual believes he or she has a right to say. According to documentary filmmaker Tatsuya Mori, this self-censorship function is a holdover from the prewar regime’s effort to monitor the hearts and minds of the populace, and its main tool in that effort was emperor worship.
In an interview published in the Asahi Shimbun on Nov. 27, Mori talks about the recent controversy surrounding rookie lawmaker Taro Yamamoto, who handed Emperor Akihito a letter during the annual autumn garden party at the Imperial Palace. The actor-turned-politician wanted to draw the Emperor’s attention to the plight of those affected by the crippled Fukushima nuclear power plant, but by personally giving him a note without obtaining prior permission he was violating protocol. The reaction was swift and hard, and came from across the entire political spectrum.
Yamamoto was admonished by the Diet. Mori thinks his action revealed a “lack of common sense,” but he did not break any laws, regardless of what the ruling Liberal Democratic Party implied. Mori asked a group of university students for their opinion of the incident and everyone said Yamamoto had been “rude,” even “blasphemous.” One student seemed deeply offended by the fact that Yamamoto used “only one hand” to present the letter.
What struck Mori ...
http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2013/12/07/national/emperors-apparent-liberal-leanings-jar-with-japans-right-wing/
Czech Project Shows Why Nuclear Power Is Fading Away
A recent report and statement from CEZ-AS, the country’s largest utility, once again highlight why the economics of nuclear don’t work. In short, CEZ has been pushing to add two new nuclear reactors to the Temerlin plant that would come online around 2025.
The utility has made the usual argument—that nuclear will create employment, help the country gain energy independence and even let the Czechs export power to neighboring European countries—but it has also said it can’t build the plan without government guarantees on the price of power.
We won’t build without state guarantees,” Pavel Cyrani, chief of strategy at CEZ told Bloomberg in an interview. “It’s simply impossible.”
How high would those guarantees have to be? A pair of studies from Candole Partners predicts that the price would have to be 115 Euros a megawatt hour, or $157 per megawatt hour, in 2013 dollars for the full lifetime operation of the Temerlin reactors for it to break even.
It’s high. Spot prices in the country are now around 40 Euros, or $55, per megawatt hour. Peak prices in New England grazed $230 per megawatt hour during a hot afternoon this past July, but generally the forward process are comfortably below $100. As I write, the wholesale price ticker at PJM pegs U.S. power at $62 per megawatt hour...
http://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelkanellos/2013/12/06/czech-project-shows-why-nuclear-power-is-fading-away/
Very good information further down in the article.
Part of the problem is material like the first post linked below
This discussion might be very informative.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/112758758
Some people do what that post shows for the reasons discussed, but the nuclear industry has a concerted PR campaign that does it to create a sense of desperation they hope will overcome the public's lack of acceptance of the technology. Adding to that is the fact that the entrenched energy infrastructure controls agencies like the Energy Information Agency and the International Energy Agency. And it is these agencies that the academic community has traditionally depended on for the most accurate forecast of energy needs and the performance of the options to satisfy those needs.
The problem is, for more than 20 years they've been sandbagging the competition. I began studying the transition away from carbon in grad school 11 years ago, and I noticed that the EIA was consistently forecasting a 2% annual growth in wind when for the previous 5 years the industry had been showing an actual average growth of about 50% per year. They are better now because there has been a huge amount of criticism, but they are still extremely conservative.
The problem was so bad that the UN sponsored a new energy agency that specializes in renewable sources - the International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA) ( https://www.irena.org/? ).
Their 2013 assessment included a look at the performance of prior forecasts. They found what experts in the field already knew - the models from the established energy community were producing conservative forecasts that were grossly inaccurate, while the modeling from groups like Greenpeace have been predicting actual performance pretty accurately.
You can download the report with this link, and the information I'm talking about is on page 15
http://www.unep.org/pdf/GSR2013.pdf
So, lthough it may not seem like it, we are making very good progress with renewable technologies. This stage is largely building a manufacturing base large enough to bring renewable energy costs down to where they are competitive with fossil fuels. We are there with several important technologies in a number of markets; onshore wind is one of the least expensive types of new generation, and solar PV is competitive in a rapidly expanding range of markets. With that reduction in price comes a corresponding growth in demand which drives growth in manufacturing which results in lowered costs that sets off another cycle of growth in demand - rinse and repeat.
Energy efficiency and renewables resources are more than adequate. And as you can see from the cost-deployment charts we are at a major turning point in what will be selected going forward.
Finally, regarding energy efficiency - it is far more important a topic than is generally appreciated. Here is the status of world final energy consumption by source.
Most discussions you've seen about how much energy we need look at "primary" energy consumption The numbers on the left of the chart below). This is the concept behind calls for energy efficiency (another set of technologies that are anathema to the coal and nuclear industry because it slashes their profits).
Understanding the energy wasted from thermal sources is very significant to appreciating what energy source is doing what.
Primary energy measures the total amount of energy that is embodied in a raw fuel source - no matter whether it is powering our lives (ie electricity or or propulsion for autos) or whether it is waste heat being transferred to our waterways from nuclear plants or heat that's causing NO2 emissions off the hot engine block of an internal combustion.
An alternative (and most say better) way of looking at the production and use of energy is to measure what is needed and consumed by the actual work being accomplished. For example, an average internal combustion engine (ICE) powered car ejects 85% of the energy content of the gasoline it consumes as heat and only uses 15% for motive power. When we look for alternatives to gasoline do we think biofuels, and duplicate the efficiencies of the gasoline powered ICE or do we focus on batteries and electric motors that have far better efficiencies - typically using 90% of the input energy for locomotion?
Writ large, what does that mean? Take a look at this flow chart and note that the "rejected energy" comprised 58.1 quads of the total 95.1 quads of primary energy used in the US last year. How much was actually used to do the work of the nation? Only 37 quads.
If we look more closely at the various sectors we can see where the major opportunities for energy efficiency improvements are to be found.
Also, energy is closely related to water use.
See http://www.nawindpower.com/e107_plugins/content/content.php?content.11788#utm_medium=email&utm_source=LNH+07-19-2013&utm_campaign=NAW+News+Headlines
Hope that helps.
US marijuana growers consume 1% of nation's electricity
BY NICOLE FLATOW ON DECEMBER 6, 2013 AT 1:21 PM
U.S. marijuana growers have increasingly brought their farms indoors, in large part to remain hidden from law enforcement. But the industry comes at a significant carbon cost. A 2011 study by researchers at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory found that the marijuana industry is responsible for 1 percent of U.S. electricity use, primarily because of resources associated with indoor cultivation and storage. In California, indoor cultivation accounts for 3 percent of the state’s energy use.
That finding was before two states legalized recreational marijuana, in addition to several more medical marijuana states. Now, Colorado growers with utility bills of $20,000 to $100,000 per month are warning that indoor growth may not be sustainable.
“Energy consumption in this business is pretty astronomical,” marijuana business owner John Kocer told CBS Denver. “As this industry expands at its current pace I do believe that we will be a tax on the energy grid: something has to change.”
Indoor marijuana cultivation requires indoor grow lights, in addition to temperature control and ventillation. Overall...
http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2013/12/06/3031951/marijuana-prohibition-growing-carbon-cost/
People power: Rooftop solar PV reaches 3GW in Australia
By Giles Parkinson on 4 December 2013
Australia has passed through another significant solar milestone, reaching 3GW of solar PV this month, as Queensland nudged the 1GW mark and states such as South Australia reached household penetration rates of 25 per cent.
“Solar power is reshaping Australia’s electricity market,” says Warwick Johnston, the head of solar research group SunWiz, who compiled the data. “This is a milestone as note-worthy as the one millionth solar power system that was installed in April.”
The growth in solar PV in Australia is quite remarkable, given that Australia’s capacity was barely more than 180MW in 2009. Much of this growth came as a result of generous feed in tariffs, but the growth continues as a new generation of households look to solar to hedge against the rising cost of grid-based electricity, to make a statement about green energy, or to do both.
Australia is almost unique in the world in having its solar installations almost exclusively in rooftop solar PV. That, according to Johnston, now totals 3GW on its own, mostly residential but also on a growing number of commercial rooftops, such as wineries.
Australia has only one solar PV array above 1.2MW...
http://reneweconomy.com.au/2013/people-power-rooftop-solar-pv-reaches-3gw-in-australia-99543
Radiation 36,000 times permissible level found in water at Fukushima plant
Source: Mainichi Shimbun Japan
FUKUSHIMA -- The operator of the disaster-hit Fukushima No. 1 Nuclear Power Plant said on Dec. 2 that it has detected radioactive materials that topped 36,000 times the permissible level in underground water extracted in the area.
According to plant operator Tokyo Electric Power Co. (TEPCO), strontium-90 and other radioactive substances that emit beta rays were detected at a level of 1.1 million becquerels per liter in underground water pumped up from an observatory well on Nov. 28. The well is located at a sea bank east of the No. 2 reactor, about 40 meters from the ocean.
The amount of detected radioactive materials hit the highest level since Nov. 25, which marked 910,000 becquerels per liter of underground water. The national allowable emission level for strontium-90, a typical radioactive isotope that emits beta rays, is less than 30 becquerels per liter of water.
TEPCO said radioactive levels in seawater within the harbor around the plant do not show any major change.
It has ...
Read more: http://mainichi.jp/english/english/newsselect/news/20131203p2a00m0na011000c.html
Profile Information
Member since: Fri Dec 19, 2003, 02:20 AMNumber of posts: 29,798
