smart grid

The Smart Way to Provide Power

by Iain Murray on February 3, 2009 · 1 comment

in Deregulate to Stimulate, Economy, Energy, Environment, Regulation

It’s not often I disagree with Ron Bailey, but his article about the “Smart Grid” today glosses over the main reason why electric companies aren’t investing in it now.

It’s not because they’ll be selling less electricity and that means reduced profits. One of the main points about a smart grid means that you can charge more when there is a strain on the system caused by peaking and less when there isn’t. So your income stream takes on a different character. Yes, people tend to use less electricity on the whole, but this is made up for by the fact that you don’t have to generate extra electricity to supply the concentrated demand, and you are getting more revenue for electricity you generated that would otherwise be wasted. Most companies would prefer this, but there’s a lot of regulation out there, aimed at keeping prices “fair,” that prevents it. Why build a grid if regulation prevents you from utilizing its main benefit?

Moreover, there are massive regulatory barriers to construction. The presence of NEPA requirements, for example, which provide a pretext for environmental organizations to bog new infrastructure projects down in court action as well as red tape. That is one reason why three former California governors just complained about environmental regulations stymieing infrastructure projects.

There are two ways for government to incentivize investment in a smart grid. One way is to pony up taxpayer cash, to cover the costs of the regulations it has imposed. The other is to suspend or get rid of those regulations – and then they won’t have to take money out of our pockets (and our children’s pockets). Liberate is the best way to stimulate.

Alex Tabarrok has more on the reasons why grid upgrades just aren’t happening. See also here (this is not an endorsement of all those policies).

“Smart”: The new ‘green’

by Gary Howard on January 13, 2009 · 1 comment

in Economy, Energy, Environment, Global Warming

Recently in the NYTimes’ via GigaOm, David Erlich drops the knowledge on the alleged infinite job-creating possibilities of the new “smart” energy infrastructure thingy.

A new energy-efficient infrastructure could be coming to the U.S. with the new administration, and up to 280,000 new jobs could be created from the deployment of smart grid technology alone.

Wow! Who knew “creating” that many jobs could be so simple?

But nevermind my skeptical opinion of the magical job-berthing properties said to be present in our president-elect’s very core.  What concerns me firstly is the certain potential for waste, fraud and corruption, i.e. boondoggles for buddies(or just plain boon doggles).  We are talking billions added to the billions (trillion) already promised for bailouts and current boondoggles.  Where is all this cash going to come from?(YOU) Oh yes, we have a printing press!

Secondly, I am concerned with the obfuscation going on here in terms of well, terms.  ’Green’ became just way too, not sexy, or hip like it was say last year.  And besides, people are just sick of being (or being told to be) green. We are like all greened out (plus Wal Mart is doing green so, its not cool).  But when people say let’s be smart, or you get to say ‘I am smart’ or just allow yourself to be ‘smart’ then that’s all kinds of wonderful. Marketing, they pay a lot for it. Its like convincing guys that hot girls will simply appear if you drink ‘this’ beer.  Or convincing girls that ‘these’ jeans definitely make you look thin and beautiful. Definitely.  And you can never be too smart, right?