This is going to be the year that you take action to reduce your energy bill.
Changes keep improving the function and ease of using on line energy audit materials. The US Department of Energy, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy site has everything you need to get started. Try their YOUR HOME site for a great beginning for 2009 that will help you see where you can cut energy bills at your house.
Be sure to click on every link on the left side to get the most useful information about saving energy at your house. The amount of free cost saving information is astounding. Even if you aren’t interested in one of the links today, click it anyway. You will be surprised at what you learn. Then you can pass the information on to someone you know that might need help.
Here is what you are looking for. Go ahead click them all.
Apartments
Appliances & Electronics
Designing & remodeling
Electricity
Energy Audits
Insulation & Air Sealing
Landscaping
Lighting & Daylighting
Space Heating & Cooling
Water Heating
Windows, Doors & Skylights
We can all be part of the solution whether you are concerned about the environment, the economy, climate change, energy independence or cutting your home expense budget, its all related and you can make a difference and see results.
© 2009 Mark R. Daily
Showing posts with label Alternative Energy Electricity Generation. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Alternative Energy Electricity Generation. Show all posts
Tuesday, January 27, 2009
Wednesday, January 21, 2009
Step One to Energy Addiction Recovery
Know the difference between “Energy Efficiency” and “Energy Conservation” and you will have taken the first step to energy addiction recovery. Plus, you may find joy and happiness.
Last year, energy efficiency guru Amory Lovins wrote this in an email to me and I assume, to many others.
“Fear of specific and avoidable dangers has evolutionary value. Nobody has ancestors who weren’t mindful of saber-toothed tigers. But pervasive dread, currently in fashion and sometimes purposely promoted, is numbing and de-motivating. When I give a talk, sometimes a questioner details the many bad things happening in the world and asks how dare I propose solutions: isn’t resistance futile? The only response I’ve found is to ask, as gently as I can, “Does feeling that way make you more effective?”To be sure, mood does matter. The last three decades of the twentieth century reportedly saw 46,000 new psychological papers on despair and grief, but only 400 on joy and happiness. If psychologists want to help people find joy and happiness, they’re looking in the wrong places. Empathy, humor, and reversing both inner and outer poverty are all vital. But the most solid foundation we know for feeling better about the future is to improve it—tangibly, durably, reproducibly, and scaleably.
This year you can feel better about the world and yourself by learning more about energy efficiency and energy conservation. When you do this the future improves.
There is a lot of hype centered on the terms “energy conservation” and “energy efficiency” and most consumers seem clueless when it comes to knowing the difference and asking the right questions at the right time.
In over twenty years of dealing with electric utility consumers I believe that only about one in nine knows what they are saying when they ask, “which one is more efficient”? They don’t really care which one is more efficient. What they really care about is which one is cheaper.
So the difficult questions become, cheaper for whom and efficient in which way?
The answer for “which one is more efficient" is easy. It’s the solution that uses less energy to produce the same amount of work. This work could be light, heat, refrigeration, air conditioning etc.
The answer for “which one is less expensive” is never easy.
Everyone knows that a cheaper purchase price is often a dead give away for a product that will actually be more expensive over the product’s life of operation. The simple life cycle comparison of a fifty cent incandescent light bulb compared to its more “efficient” product, the three dollar compact fluorescent bulb, can be replicated with even higher costs savings when comparing refrigerators, pumps, water heaters, furnaces, windows, insulation and houses just to name a few.
Each fuel and each appliance has variables that are hard to compare. Certain fuels cost more up front like solar photovoltaic energy. Certain fuels and products traditionally avoid external costs and come in looking cheaper until you factor in the costs for healthcare, environmental degradation, and tax payer subsidies, like coal and nuclear power. The challenge is to define and quantify those external costs. This is hard to do and the producers of these energy products don’t really want you to figure out or factor in, those external costs. Just like the tobacco industry doesn’t want you to factor in the costs of treating lung diseases with the cost of a pack of cigarettes.
Here are the variables that go into the answer for the question, “which one is cheaper?”
What is the cost and efficiency to get the product (useful energy) to your house?
What is the true life cycle cost including operating costs and purchase price of the appliances that use the energy?
What are the operating habits and skills of the people using the appliance?
What is the quality of the building envelope or location in which the appliance is used?
In its simplest definition, energy conservation means those actions that cause you to use less energy. This could be as simple as keeping the thermostat lower and wearing a sweater on a cold day or as silly as trying to read in the dark. Sure you are saving energy and reducing your bill, but you have to suffer to do it. Americans don’t like to suffer. Consequently, most energy conservation programs do little to actually reduce energy use.
Energy Efficiency on the other hand means getting your beer just as cold or our home just as warm with efficient systems or products that use less energy. Like the compact fluorescent light bulb that produces the same light output for less than half the energy use of an incandescent bulb, or the better insulated house that uses less energy to heat the same square footage.
I am not a big fan of Wikipedia because it’s too easy for facts and sources to be questionable. Yet, I often start there for an overview of a topic and then check facts with other websites I consider more reputable or scientific. Their energy efficiency section seems factual and actually helpful. I recommend that you visit and read it all. It will give you some ideas about the possibilities for energy efficient products that can maintain your lifestyle without suffering more than a little higher purchase price. In most cases the life cycle cost of an energy efficient product or system will be cheaper than the “cheaper” product to purchase.
By understanding your options and understanding the language used to talk about energy and energy issues, you can take a big step to your own energy independence, cut your utility bills in the process and find joy and happiness. Wow, this is going to be a great year.
Last year, energy efficiency guru Amory Lovins wrote this in an email to me and I assume, to many others.
“Fear of specific and avoidable dangers has evolutionary value. Nobody has ancestors who weren’t mindful of saber-toothed tigers. But pervasive dread, currently in fashion and sometimes purposely promoted, is numbing and de-motivating. When I give a talk, sometimes a questioner details the many bad things happening in the world and asks how dare I propose solutions: isn’t resistance futile? The only response I’ve found is to ask, as gently as I can, “Does feeling that way make you more effective?”To be sure, mood does matter. The last three decades of the twentieth century reportedly saw 46,000 new psychological papers on despair and grief, but only 400 on joy and happiness. If psychologists want to help people find joy and happiness, they’re looking in the wrong places. Empathy, humor, and reversing both inner and outer poverty are all vital. But the most solid foundation we know for feeling better about the future is to improve it—tangibly, durably, reproducibly, and scaleably.
This year you can feel better about the world and yourself by learning more about energy efficiency and energy conservation. When you do this the future improves.
There is a lot of hype centered on the terms “energy conservation” and “energy efficiency” and most consumers seem clueless when it comes to knowing the difference and asking the right questions at the right time.
In over twenty years of dealing with electric utility consumers I believe that only about one in nine knows what they are saying when they ask, “which one is more efficient”? They don’t really care which one is more efficient. What they really care about is which one is cheaper.
So the difficult questions become, cheaper for whom and efficient in which way?
The answer for “which one is more efficient" is easy. It’s the solution that uses less energy to produce the same amount of work. This work could be light, heat, refrigeration, air conditioning etc.
The answer for “which one is less expensive” is never easy.
Everyone knows that a cheaper purchase price is often a dead give away for a product that will actually be more expensive over the product’s life of operation. The simple life cycle comparison of a fifty cent incandescent light bulb compared to its more “efficient” product, the three dollar compact fluorescent bulb, can be replicated with even higher costs savings when comparing refrigerators, pumps, water heaters, furnaces, windows, insulation and houses just to name a few.
Each fuel and each appliance has variables that are hard to compare. Certain fuels cost more up front like solar photovoltaic energy. Certain fuels and products traditionally avoid external costs and come in looking cheaper until you factor in the costs for healthcare, environmental degradation, and tax payer subsidies, like coal and nuclear power. The challenge is to define and quantify those external costs. This is hard to do and the producers of these energy products don’t really want you to figure out or factor in, those external costs. Just like the tobacco industry doesn’t want you to factor in the costs of treating lung diseases with the cost of a pack of cigarettes.
Here are the variables that go into the answer for the question, “which one is cheaper?”
What is the cost and efficiency to get the product (useful energy) to your house?
What is the true life cycle cost including operating costs and purchase price of the appliances that use the energy?
What are the operating habits and skills of the people using the appliance?
What is the quality of the building envelope or location in which the appliance is used?
In its simplest definition, energy conservation means those actions that cause you to use less energy. This could be as simple as keeping the thermostat lower and wearing a sweater on a cold day or as silly as trying to read in the dark. Sure you are saving energy and reducing your bill, but you have to suffer to do it. Americans don’t like to suffer. Consequently, most energy conservation programs do little to actually reduce energy use.
Energy Efficiency on the other hand means getting your beer just as cold or our home just as warm with efficient systems or products that use less energy. Like the compact fluorescent light bulb that produces the same light output for less than half the energy use of an incandescent bulb, or the better insulated house that uses less energy to heat the same square footage.
I am not a big fan of Wikipedia because it’s too easy for facts and sources to be questionable. Yet, I often start there for an overview of a topic and then check facts with other websites I consider more reputable or scientific. Their energy efficiency section seems factual and actually helpful. I recommend that you visit and read it all. It will give you some ideas about the possibilities for energy efficient products that can maintain your lifestyle without suffering more than a little higher purchase price. In most cases the life cycle cost of an energy efficient product or system will be cheaper than the “cheaper” product to purchase.
By understanding your options and understanding the language used to talk about energy and energy issues, you can take a big step to your own energy independence, cut your utility bills in the process and find joy and happiness. Wow, this is going to be a great year.
Thursday, January 1, 2009
Slow Economic Times Mean Time to Re-Tool Alternate Energy and Energy Conservation Policies and Regulations
Falling energy demand could soften the incentive to implement energy conservation programs and initiatives across the USA. As fossil fuel prices fall, renewable energy advocates expect declining support for expensive renewable energy projects. Yet, this could be just the right time to develop the national energy policy needed to guide us when demand roars back after economic recovery.
The Energy Information Administration of the Department of Energy says, “Total electricity consumption during 2008 is projected to be flat at about 2007 levels, as slight growth in the commercial and industrial sectors is balanced by decline in the residential sector, primarily as a result of milder summer temperatures (U.S. Total Electricity Consumption). Total electricity consumption is expected to decline in 2009 due to the slow growth in new housing construction and reduced demand in the industrial sector.”
Declining prices always mean declining excitement and support for alternate energy programs. We’ve been through this before. Yet despite the slow-down in demand, prices for residential electricity do not appear to be falling. Again according to the Official Energy Statistics from the US Government, “Spot prices for power generation fuels continue to decline from their peak summer levels. Residential electricity prices are expected to rise by 6 percent this year and by 5 percent in 2009 (U.S. Residential Electricity Prices). Still these price increases pale compared to the national average of 10 percent residential rate increases between 2005 and 2006.
This lull is just the right time for policy makers, utilities and consumers to take action; adopt a national energy policy and put into place uniform local energy and distributed generation policies. If we do it now, these regulations will be in place when we all get too busy putting out our own brush fires when the economy gets back into full swing.
Cutting the Red Tape Out features ideas for better uniformity of regulations and permitting for distributed generation equipment. Now is the time to contact your federal, states and local elected representatives to tell them what you want in the way of distributed renewable energy systems. This also the time to tell them to review their regulations pertaining to building, energy efficiency, and alternate energy systems. It won’t matter how great your utility incentives are for wind and solar power if local building codes impose unreasonable and outdated requirements. Or, worse yet, if they have no regulations pertaining to wind towers , photovoltaic systems on roofs etc., advocates for these systems will end up triggering moratoriums on these “new” developments that could take years to unravel.
If you want to save the world and promote alternate energy development, you cannot wait until you’re in the building permit office filling out construction permit forms to find out what the requirements are in your area. If you do, you deserve to spend lots of time, twice as much money and three times the patience getting your project completed.
In May 2000 all of the world's science academies created the Inter-Academy Council to mobilize the best scientists and engineers worldwide to provide high quality advice to international bodies - such as the United Nations and the World Bank - as well as to other institutions. They recognize that barriers to adopting new technologies are not always financial. In their report Barriers to realizing cost-effective energy savings they describe institutional and personal barriers to adopting energy efficient systems including alternate energy systems.
Now is the time to make that call and tell your elected representatives where you stand on renewable energy. It also the time to do your home work and find out what the regulations and policies are in your area to make sure that state and local governments and local utilities are ready to do alternate energy business.
© 2009 Mark R. Daily
The Energy Information Administration of the Department of Energy says, “Total electricity consumption during 2008 is projected to be flat at about 2007 levels, as slight growth in the commercial and industrial sectors is balanced by decline in the residential sector, primarily as a result of milder summer temperatures (U.S. Total Electricity Consumption). Total electricity consumption is expected to decline in 2009 due to the slow growth in new housing construction and reduced demand in the industrial sector.”
Declining prices always mean declining excitement and support for alternate energy programs. We’ve been through this before. Yet despite the slow-down in demand, prices for residential electricity do not appear to be falling. Again according to the Official Energy Statistics from the US Government, “Spot prices for power generation fuels continue to decline from their peak summer levels. Residential electricity prices are expected to rise by 6 percent this year and by 5 percent in 2009 (U.S. Residential Electricity Prices). Still these price increases pale compared to the national average of 10 percent residential rate increases between 2005 and 2006.
This lull is just the right time for policy makers, utilities and consumers to take action; adopt a national energy policy and put into place uniform local energy and distributed generation policies. If we do it now, these regulations will be in place when we all get too busy putting out our own brush fires when the economy gets back into full swing.
Cutting the Red Tape Out features ideas for better uniformity of regulations and permitting for distributed generation equipment. Now is the time to contact your federal, states and local elected representatives to tell them what you want in the way of distributed renewable energy systems. This also the time to tell them to review their regulations pertaining to building, energy efficiency, and alternate energy systems. It won’t matter how great your utility incentives are for wind and solar power if local building codes impose unreasonable and outdated requirements. Or, worse yet, if they have no regulations pertaining to wind towers , photovoltaic systems on roofs etc., advocates for these systems will end up triggering moratoriums on these “new” developments that could take years to unravel.
If you want to save the world and promote alternate energy development, you cannot wait until you’re in the building permit office filling out construction permit forms to find out what the requirements are in your area. If you do, you deserve to spend lots of time, twice as much money and three times the patience getting your project completed.
In May 2000 all of the world's science academies created the Inter-Academy Council to mobilize the best scientists and engineers worldwide to provide high quality advice to international bodies - such as the United Nations and the World Bank - as well as to other institutions. They recognize that barriers to adopting new technologies are not always financial. In their report Barriers to realizing cost-effective energy savings they describe institutional and personal barriers to adopting energy efficient systems including alternate energy systems.
Now is the time to make that call and tell your elected representatives where you stand on renewable energy. It also the time to do your home work and find out what the regulations and policies are in your area to make sure that state and local governments and local utilities are ready to do alternate energy business.
© 2009 Mark R. Daily
Tuesday, December 23, 2008
Electric Energy Independence is already underway – One house and one business at a time.
Forget the US Government and Obama’s rhetoric. Remember, every presidential candidate has campaigned on Energy Independence for the last thirty years. Forget your local utility. They’ve been doing business the same way for over 60 years.
Several Blogs ago I predicted the demise of the electric distribution industry as we know it. In Death of the Electric Industry I predicted the end of distribution utilities. In Death of the Electric Industry Part II, I explained how I think this is going to happen.
As little bits and pieces come to me that support my prediction, I tend to get a smug little grin on my face. My predictions had to do with residential customers jumping the grid tied ship like rats on a sinking vessel. But, Solar buzz recently announced a small commercial project that leads the way in proving that even industry can make use of solar energy in a mediocre solar climate like Connecticut. Tri-Town Precision Plastics plans to go solar and expects their investment to pay for itself in six years and deliver all of their electric energy needs all year long.
To plan your escape from the grid you only need two things, know-how and cash. Check out these websites to get the know-how. By acting on this information you can trim your energy appetite and get your house ready for energy independence without the expense of a solar system. Then after you’ve saved a bundle off your utility bill (said bundle being prudently stashed in a secure savings account) you are ready to use available incentives in your area to match your cash and build the system. Find my energy saving tips here.
Useful information is all about “Trust”. If you don’t trust the source of the information you are not going to follow their recommendations. Find sources of Know-How that you trust. Here are some that look pretty good to me.
The Edison Electric Institute (EEI) sponsors efficiency tips at getenergyactive.org. Organized in 1933, EEI is the association of U.S. shareholder or investor-owned electric companies. Their members serve 95 percent of the end use customers in the investor-owned part of the industry, and represent approximately 70 percent of the U.S. electric power industry. So you might be justified in being suspicious of their motives. However, all utilities, especially investor-owned utilities are falling all over themselves these days to prove to regulators that their rate increase requests are justified. One way that they do this is to show State Regulatory Commissions that they take energy conservation seriously.
The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has locked horns with utilities across the nation over air quality issues. These guys are not friends of the electric utility industry. They are supposed to be friends of the environment. ENERGY AND YOU is their site for all kinds of good information on energy conservation.
The benefits of visiting the above two sites are that they aren’t trying to sell any specific products.
Commercial sites might make you leery, but I think Real Goods has a good reputation for getting systems on the ground that work. Be sure to visit their Get Started and Economics & Financing links.
The American Solar Energy Society (ASES) is a nonprofit organization dedicated to increasing the use of solar energy, energy efficiency, and other sustainable technologies in the U.S. Sure they are selling solar equipment and trying to employ solar installation contractors, but these guys can’t last if they lie. Their Solar calculator will take your Monthly kWh and calculate the size of the system you need based on your climate.
Now you are ready to match your utility savings with incentives that can help reduce your out of pocket expenses. This data base at the Database of State Incentives for Renewables and Efficiency can help you stretch your funds to meet your energy independence goals.
Maybe I’ll be reading about your off grid solar system and smiling one of these days. Don’t get mad at your utility, leave them
© 2008 Mark R. Daily
Several Blogs ago I predicted the demise of the electric distribution industry as we know it. In Death of the Electric Industry I predicted the end of distribution utilities. In Death of the Electric Industry Part II, I explained how I think this is going to happen.
As little bits and pieces come to me that support my prediction, I tend to get a smug little grin on my face. My predictions had to do with residential customers jumping the grid tied ship like rats on a sinking vessel. But, Solar buzz recently announced a small commercial project that leads the way in proving that even industry can make use of solar energy in a mediocre solar climate like Connecticut. Tri-Town Precision Plastics plans to go solar and expects their investment to pay for itself in six years and deliver all of their electric energy needs all year long.
To plan your escape from the grid you only need two things, know-how and cash. Check out these websites to get the know-how. By acting on this information you can trim your energy appetite and get your house ready for energy independence without the expense of a solar system. Then after you’ve saved a bundle off your utility bill (said bundle being prudently stashed in a secure savings account) you are ready to use available incentives in your area to match your cash and build the system. Find my energy saving tips here.
Useful information is all about “Trust”. If you don’t trust the source of the information you are not going to follow their recommendations. Find sources of Know-How that you trust. Here are some that look pretty good to me.
The Edison Electric Institute (EEI) sponsors efficiency tips at getenergyactive.org. Organized in 1933, EEI is the association of U.S. shareholder or investor-owned electric companies. Their members serve 95 percent of the end use customers in the investor-owned part of the industry, and represent approximately 70 percent of the U.S. electric power industry. So you might be justified in being suspicious of their motives. However, all utilities, especially investor-owned utilities are falling all over themselves these days to prove to regulators that their rate increase requests are justified. One way that they do this is to show State Regulatory Commissions that they take energy conservation seriously.
The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has locked horns with utilities across the nation over air quality issues. These guys are not friends of the electric utility industry. They are supposed to be friends of the environment. ENERGY AND YOU is their site for all kinds of good information on energy conservation.
The benefits of visiting the above two sites are that they aren’t trying to sell any specific products.
Commercial sites might make you leery, but I think Real Goods has a good reputation for getting systems on the ground that work. Be sure to visit their Get Started and Economics & Financing links.
The American Solar Energy Society (ASES) is a nonprofit organization dedicated to increasing the use of solar energy, energy efficiency, and other sustainable technologies in the U.S. Sure they are selling solar equipment and trying to employ solar installation contractors, but these guys can’t last if they lie. Their Solar calculator will take your Monthly kWh and calculate the size of the system you need based on your climate.
Now you are ready to match your utility savings with incentives that can help reduce your out of pocket expenses. This data base at the Database of State Incentives for Renewables and Efficiency can help you stretch your funds to meet your energy independence goals.
Maybe I’ll be reading about your off grid solar system and smiling one of these days. Don’t get mad at your utility, leave them
© 2008 Mark R. Daily
Thursday, October 30, 2008
DO IT! (conserve energy & money) Scenerios of the Revolution (the energy revolution)
The Energy Revolution
This is a new revolution. A revolution that lets you tune in to savings and drop out of your energy dependence. No, it won't be televised. But, you will remember it. So, unlike the saying, "if you can remember the 60's, you weren't there", you, will be there to save the planet.
The challenge of energy conservation is in the minute and boring details of everyday living. As with any chronic bad habit (eg. alcoholism, drug addiction, frivolous energy waste, etc.) the first step to a cure is awareness. Nothing goes quicker to the heart of energy waste awareness than two fairly easy steps. One, keep track of the kilowatt hours you use and two, monitor your house appliances and systems to calculate your energy footprint.
Step One: Keep track of your kWh Use
There are several meaningful ways to do this. This easiest way is to set up a computer spreadsheet with columns for months and rows for years. When you get your electric bill, plug in the total kWh from your bill. In less than a year you will start to see patterns in your energy use that can help you make management decisions about energy use. After one year of record keeping you can compare with previous years. This is a great and easy way to see how your energy conservation actions translate into dollar savings, which is the real point of this effort. In three years of record keeping you’ll gain a great understanding of how your house works and document your energy conservation results.
I know a guy that made a form to keep track of his energy use every day. With morning, coffee in hand, he takes a short walk to his electric meter and records the reading. If you were ever suspicious of your electric utility (“no way did I use that much electricity last month - is this bill an estimate?”) this will help reduce those fears. It will also quickly show the impact of energy management decisions in your house. A whole host of energy wasters can be recognized quickly this way. Leaky hot water faucets, stuck thermostats, underground water pipe leaks and failing electric motors have all been some of the things caught early by doing this. So, the effort can save you future headaches by fixing these problems before they turn into bigger problems.
Step Two: Monitor your Stuff
This sounds like a lot of work but really it’s not too bad and the feeling you get from being in control of your energy consumption destiny is well worth the effort. With your Kill-a-watt meter in hand, take turns plugging in different appliances. This is a real eye opener. Plug in each appliance like refrigerators, freezers, television systems, sound systems, computer systems, humidifiers, dehumidifiers, hair dryers, electric blankets, lamps, anything with a cord that plugs into a regular wall outlet. Keep each appliance plugged in for a week. Note the kWh used at the end of the week, divide by seven and multiply by 365 and you have the cost to run that appliance for a year. If you only use that freezer or humidifier for part of the year, adjust your calculations accordingly.
Here’s how to make this easy. Get a calendar that you can write on and hang it in the kitchen. Get a Kill-o-watt Meter and leave it on your kitchen counter. Just leave it there. Then, the next time you head for the refrigerator, before you open the door, unplug the fridge and plug it back in with the Kill-o-watt meter in place. Leave it for a week. (Mark the day and time you set up the meter on your calendar.)In a week pick a new appliance to monitor. Retrieve your meter after recording the kWh used and time elapsed on the previous appliance. Keep going until you have documented energy use on each plug in appliance in your house.
The main point of doing this is to save the planet of course, but the best part of doing this is to save money. Are you freaking out about the world financial turmoil? Are you trying to find that finance vehicle that is secure, gives great returns for your dollars invested and won’t disappear with the latest dip in the DOW? Energy Conservation is it. Money invested in home improvements geared to saving energy shows returns that far exceed anything you can do on Wall Street. If you want a safe place to stick your investment funds, stick them in energy conservation.
DO IT !
What’s stopping you? I know. Just like the anxiety of picking the right stock in today’s market, you’re afraid to make the wrong energy conservation decision. You don’t want to waste money or plunk down big bucks for small savings.
BUILDITSOLAR.COM shows you where to start. While this website sounds like it’s just geared to solar energy enthusiasts, there is a wealth of information about energy conservation. Not only do they cover great ideas on energy conservation, they offer ways to help you pick projects that give the best bang for the buck.
The combination of taking control of your energy use by monitoring and taking action based on a do-able plan for energy conservation will make you feel better about the economy and the environment all at the same time.
This is a new revolution. A revolution that lets you tune in to savings and drop out of your energy dependence. No, it won't be televised. But, you will remember it. So, unlike the saying, "if you can remember the 60's, you weren't there", you, will be there to save the planet.
The challenge of energy conservation is in the minute and boring details of everyday living. As with any chronic bad habit (eg. alcoholism, drug addiction, frivolous energy waste, etc.) the first step to a cure is awareness. Nothing goes quicker to the heart of energy waste awareness than two fairly easy steps. One, keep track of the kilowatt hours you use and two, monitor your house appliances and systems to calculate your energy footprint.
Step One: Keep track of your kWh Use
There are several meaningful ways to do this. This easiest way is to set up a computer spreadsheet with columns for months and rows for years. When you get your electric bill, plug in the total kWh from your bill. In less than a year you will start to see patterns in your energy use that can help you make management decisions about energy use. After one year of record keeping you can compare with previous years. This is a great and easy way to see how your energy conservation actions translate into dollar savings, which is the real point of this effort. In three years of record keeping you’ll gain a great understanding of how your house works and document your energy conservation results.
I know a guy that made a form to keep track of his energy use every day. With morning, coffee in hand, he takes a short walk to his electric meter and records the reading. If you were ever suspicious of your electric utility (“no way did I use that much electricity last month - is this bill an estimate?”) this will help reduce those fears. It will also quickly show the impact of energy management decisions in your house. A whole host of energy wasters can be recognized quickly this way. Leaky hot water faucets, stuck thermostats, underground water pipe leaks and failing electric motors have all been some of the things caught early by doing this. So, the effort can save you future headaches by fixing these problems before they turn into bigger problems.
Step Two: Monitor your Stuff
This sounds like a lot of work but really it’s not too bad and the feeling you get from being in control of your energy consumption destiny is well worth the effort. With your Kill-a-watt meter in hand, take turns plugging in different appliances. This is a real eye opener. Plug in each appliance like refrigerators, freezers, television systems, sound systems, computer systems, humidifiers, dehumidifiers, hair dryers, electric blankets, lamps, anything with a cord that plugs into a regular wall outlet. Keep each appliance plugged in for a week. Note the kWh used at the end of the week, divide by seven and multiply by 365 and you have the cost to run that appliance for a year. If you only use that freezer or humidifier for part of the year, adjust your calculations accordingly.
Here’s how to make this easy. Get a calendar that you can write on and hang it in the kitchen. Get a Kill-o-watt Meter and leave it on your kitchen counter. Just leave it there. Then, the next time you head for the refrigerator, before you open the door, unplug the fridge and plug it back in with the Kill-o-watt meter in place. Leave it for a week. (Mark the day and time you set up the meter on your calendar.)In a week pick a new appliance to monitor. Retrieve your meter after recording the kWh used and time elapsed on the previous appliance. Keep going until you have documented energy use on each plug in appliance in your house.
The main point of doing this is to save the planet of course, but the best part of doing this is to save money. Are you freaking out about the world financial turmoil? Are you trying to find that finance vehicle that is secure, gives great returns for your dollars invested and won’t disappear with the latest dip in the DOW? Energy Conservation is it. Money invested in home improvements geared to saving energy shows returns that far exceed anything you can do on Wall Street. If you want a safe place to stick your investment funds, stick them in energy conservation.
DO IT !
What’s stopping you? I know. Just like the anxiety of picking the right stock in today’s market, you’re afraid to make the wrong energy conservation decision. You don’t want to waste money or plunk down big bucks for small savings.
BUILDITSOLAR.COM shows you where to start. While this website sounds like it’s just geared to solar energy enthusiasts, there is a wealth of information about energy conservation. Not only do they cover great ideas on energy conservation, they offer ways to help you pick projects that give the best bang for the buck.
The combination of taking control of your energy use by monitoring and taking action based on a do-able plan for energy conservation will make you feel better about the economy and the environment all at the same time.
Wednesday, October 15, 2008
Solve the Electricity Generation Crisis with Smarts
“A group won't be smart if its members imitate one another, slavishly follow fads, or wait for someone to tell them what to do. When a group is being intelligent, whether it's made up of ants or attorneys, it relies on its members to do their own part. For those of us who sometimes wonder if it's really worth recycling that extra bottle to lighten our impact on the planet, the bottom line is that our actions matter, even if we don't see how.” – Swarm Theory by Pete Miller, National Geographic.
Swam Theory may be one method to solve the growing crisis for electricity generation in the USA. The concept demonstrates two key features that could bring meaningful results to the challenge of meeting our energy needs.
First, experts and cynics a like seem to agree that our energy needs will be best met by a combination of energy conservation, renewable energy growth and cultivation of existing energy generation systems like coal and nuclear power. This means that we all have a role to play in reducing our energy demands and a role to play in encouraging energy generation diversity. In short your actions at home to conserve energy and your actions in the political arena to encourage wise decision making are very important.
Second, we all must participate in the discussion in order to make the most out of our “smart swarm” of ideas and actions.
How do you get Smart?
Can you live without electricity? Of course you could, but your life would change dramatically for the worse. You would spend more of your time doing mundane chores and less time doing things that make your life what it is today. So, if you can’t live without it, shouldn’t you know something about it? Yet, I frequently get blank stares from smart people when I ask, “how much electricity does your house or business use and what is your cost per kWh”? I use between 300 and 602 kWh per month, lowest in the summer and highest in the winter – in case you wonder if I’ve done my homework. Yes, I know. I could do better, but the national average according to U.S. Energy Information Administration is 888 kWh per month. (thanks Power - Save for setting me straight on this). Oh and I pay $0.13 per kilowatt hour. If you live in Hawaii you pay about $0.22. The nation average in June 2008 was about $0.12 per kWh and rising.
Once you know your energy appetite, find out why you eat what you eat. Everyone is reading grocery product labels these days. Consumers want to know if the product they are buying might come from a tainted batch of garlic from China or the neighborhood organic farm. They want to know if what they are buying is mostly sugar or substance. So it should be with your energy bill. Find out how much energy each appliance eats at your house. Its different for everyone so don’t use your mother-in-laws numbers, get your own. Buy a Kill-A-Watt meter or ask for one for a holiday gift. Start tracking down what you require for energy at your house. Don’t just take the utility companies month meter reading total.
Get smart. Get active. Don’t wait for someone to tell you what to do. Do your own part. It’s not that hard. No one knows your house better than you do.
© Mark Daily, 2008
Swam Theory may be one method to solve the growing crisis for electricity generation in the USA. The concept demonstrates two key features that could bring meaningful results to the challenge of meeting our energy needs.
First, experts and cynics a like seem to agree that our energy needs will be best met by a combination of energy conservation, renewable energy growth and cultivation of existing energy generation systems like coal and nuclear power. This means that we all have a role to play in reducing our energy demands and a role to play in encouraging energy generation diversity. In short your actions at home to conserve energy and your actions in the political arena to encourage wise decision making are very important.
Second, we all must participate in the discussion in order to make the most out of our “smart swarm” of ideas and actions.
How do you get Smart?
Can you live without electricity? Of course you could, but your life would change dramatically for the worse. You would spend more of your time doing mundane chores and less time doing things that make your life what it is today. So, if you can’t live without it, shouldn’t you know something about it? Yet, I frequently get blank stares from smart people when I ask, “how much electricity does your house or business use and what is your cost per kWh”? I use between 300 and 602 kWh per month, lowest in the summer and highest in the winter – in case you wonder if I’ve done my homework. Yes, I know. I could do better, but the national average according to U.S. Energy Information Administration is 888 kWh per month. (thanks Power - Save for setting me straight on this). Oh and I pay $0.13 per kilowatt hour. If you live in Hawaii you pay about $0.22. The nation average in June 2008 was about $0.12 per kWh and rising.
Once you know your energy appetite, find out why you eat what you eat. Everyone is reading grocery product labels these days. Consumers want to know if the product they are buying might come from a tainted batch of garlic from China or the neighborhood organic farm. They want to know if what they are buying is mostly sugar or substance. So it should be with your energy bill. Find out how much energy each appliance eats at your house. Its different for everyone so don’t use your mother-in-laws numbers, get your own. Buy a Kill-A-Watt meter or ask for one for a holiday gift. Start tracking down what you require for energy at your house. Don’t just take the utility companies month meter reading total.
Get smart. Get active. Don’t wait for someone to tell you what to do. Do your own part. It’s not that hard. No one knows your house better than you do.
© Mark Daily, 2008
Wednesday, October 8, 2008
I can say that word, “NUCLEAR”
"The true essence of humankind is kindness. There are other qualities which come from education or knowledge, but it is essential, if one wishes to be a genuine human being and impart satisfying meaning to one's existence, to have a good heart."- Tenzin Gyatso, the 14th Dalai Lama
In the energy debate, clever quips and well placed personal barbs seem to prevail over kindness. I think that is one reason why we haven’t gotten farther along with our energy planning in the USA.
This stumbling block to reasoned discussion is especially vitriolic in the nuclear energy debate where both sides frequently resort to a combination of name calling and bewildering statistics. Doing this makes it hard for the consumer on the street to sort out the facts. It makes most of us reluctant to even enter the debate.
Energy Central is a website that has offered news and commentary on the Electric Utility industry for many years. I believe their aim is to provide as much objective information as possible about this industry and its issues. It’s a great way to hear all sides of the debate on many different utility topics.
One regular contributor, John K. Sutherland, seems to have a pretty good handle on issues relating to Nuclear Energy production in the USA. Sadly, he seems so angry about those opposed to nuclear energy that it is hard to read much of his material. His most recent piece on nuclear energy includes this:
“Nuclear waste, despite the ignorant half-truths and inventions of those who fear it, and despite the fact that we would rather not have it, is one of the best reasons for developing nuclear power relative to any other major reliable source of energy other than hydro. When you add its minimal pollution contributions; its much better safety record than any large energy source; and its improving cost advantages at this time, there should be no contest, yet the emotionally slanted nuclear mythologies keep rearing their heads.”
In his article he includes interesting and helpful numbers that show that nuclear energy wins hands down when it comes to its safety record, waste stream volume reduction and health impacts compared to coal and natural gas. The trouble is, I am usually so pissed off by the time I get to his numbers, I don’t really care if he’s right.
In contrast Amory Lovins has long been an opponent of nuclear energy, until recently Mr. Lovins has tried to gain converts by bludgeoning them with statistics, but a recent piece of his from the Rocky Mountain Institute entitled “Forget Nuclear” does offer a summary that leaves out the laborious numbers and footnote references long enough to let the average person on the street understand a little about what he has been getting at. Yet he too cannot resist that Saturday Night Live jab like, “Jane you ignorant slut” when he concludes his summary opposition with the following comments;
“So why do otherwise well-informed people still consider nuclear power a key element of a sound climate strategy? Not because that belief can withstand analytic scrutiny. Rather, it seems, because of a superficially attractive story, an immensely powerful and effective lobby, a new generation who forgot or never knew why nuclear power failed previously (almost nothing has changed), sympathetic leaders of nearly all main governments, deeply rooted habits and rules that favor giant power plants over distributed solutions and enlarged supply over efficient use, the market winners’ absence from many official databases (which often count only big plants owned by utilities), and lazy reporting by an unduly credulous press.”
It’s really a shame we can’t be more polite to each other when it comes to talking about energy issues. Yet we persist in making sure we spend more time attacking opposing views than trying to understand them.
"Insanity is repeating the same behavior and expecting a different result," said Werner Erhart.
And, in the debate about energy planning for the USA, I think both sides are pretty much insane if they think their approach to this complicated issue is the way to develop a sound energy policy.
© Mark Daily, 2008
In the energy debate, clever quips and well placed personal barbs seem to prevail over kindness. I think that is one reason why we haven’t gotten farther along with our energy planning in the USA.
This stumbling block to reasoned discussion is especially vitriolic in the nuclear energy debate where both sides frequently resort to a combination of name calling and bewildering statistics. Doing this makes it hard for the consumer on the street to sort out the facts. It makes most of us reluctant to even enter the debate.
Energy Central is a website that has offered news and commentary on the Electric Utility industry for many years. I believe their aim is to provide as much objective information as possible about this industry and its issues. It’s a great way to hear all sides of the debate on many different utility topics.
One regular contributor, John K. Sutherland, seems to have a pretty good handle on issues relating to Nuclear Energy production in the USA. Sadly, he seems so angry about those opposed to nuclear energy that it is hard to read much of his material. His most recent piece on nuclear energy includes this:
“Nuclear waste, despite the ignorant half-truths and inventions of those who fear it, and despite the fact that we would rather not have it, is one of the best reasons for developing nuclear power relative to any other major reliable source of energy other than hydro. When you add its minimal pollution contributions; its much better safety record than any large energy source; and its improving cost advantages at this time, there should be no contest, yet the emotionally slanted nuclear mythologies keep rearing their heads.”
In his article he includes interesting and helpful numbers that show that nuclear energy wins hands down when it comes to its safety record, waste stream volume reduction and health impacts compared to coal and natural gas. The trouble is, I am usually so pissed off by the time I get to his numbers, I don’t really care if he’s right.
In contrast Amory Lovins has long been an opponent of nuclear energy, until recently Mr. Lovins has tried to gain converts by bludgeoning them with statistics, but a recent piece of his from the Rocky Mountain Institute entitled “Forget Nuclear” does offer a summary that leaves out the laborious numbers and footnote references long enough to let the average person on the street understand a little about what he has been getting at. Yet he too cannot resist that Saturday Night Live jab like, “Jane you ignorant slut” when he concludes his summary opposition with the following comments;
“So why do otherwise well-informed people still consider nuclear power a key element of a sound climate strategy? Not because that belief can withstand analytic scrutiny. Rather, it seems, because of a superficially attractive story, an immensely powerful and effective lobby, a new generation who forgot or never knew why nuclear power failed previously (almost nothing has changed), sympathetic leaders of nearly all main governments, deeply rooted habits and rules that favor giant power plants over distributed solutions and enlarged supply over efficient use, the market winners’ absence from many official databases (which often count only big plants owned by utilities), and lazy reporting by an unduly credulous press.”
It’s really a shame we can’t be more polite to each other when it comes to talking about energy issues. Yet we persist in making sure we spend more time attacking opposing views than trying to understand them.
"Insanity is repeating the same behavior and expecting a different result," said Werner Erhart.
And, in the debate about energy planning for the USA, I think both sides are pretty much insane if they think their approach to this complicated issue is the way to develop a sound energy policy.
© Mark Daily, 2008
Wednesday, September 17, 2008
Take Action to Support Distributed Renewable Energy Generation
So, you want to install a solar photovoltaic system on your roof and join those taking action to reverse climate change. You want to be part of the solution to the growing gap between energy demand and new power plant construction by installing distributed alternate energy generation. You’ve consulted your Special 30th Anniversary Edition of the Real Goods Solar Living Source Book, trimmed your home’s energy demand as much as you can without freezing in the dark and you are ready to order your equipment.
Wait! Have you contacted your local utility?
Almost every utility in the nation has some type of policy or regulation that could impact your ability to generate your own power from your own alternate energy system. Utility policies are a function of State regulations and individual utility company choices. Before you dump that list of PV parts into your checkout basket, contact your utility to make sure you can do what you want to do without being surprised by extra fees, technical restrictions or a hostile utility engineer that doesn’t get what you are trying to do.
The Network for New Energy Choices grades States on net-metering and interconnection laws and gives them an “A” through “F” score on how well they assist consumers with installing alternate energy distributed generation systems. The grades are based on a comparison with recommended regulations featured in the model regulations from the Interstate Renewable Energy Council.
Here are the results from the Network for New Energy Choices report.
Net Metering Grades
A IREC Model , New Jersey, Colorado, Pennsylvania, Maryland, California.
B Oregon, Delaware, Iowa, Nevada, Connecticut, Ohio, New Mexico.
C Arkansas, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Hawaii, Maine, Louisiana, Virginia, North Dakota, Minnesota, Massachusetts, Montana, Vermont, Missouri.
D Washington, New York, Texas, Kentucky, Michigan, Wyoming, Oklahoma, Indiana, West Virginia.
F Utah, D.C., Georgia, North Carolina, Wisconsin.
Interconnection Grades
A IREC Model.
B New Jersey, Arizona.
C California, Ohio, Texas, New York, Colorado, Oregon* , Massachusetts, Georgia, New Mexico* , Vermont, Minnesota.
D Rhode Island, Wisconsin, West Virginia, Arkansas, New Hampshire, Virginia, Iowa, Maryland*, Montana, Michigan, Indiana, Pennsylvania, Connecticut.
F North Carolina, D.C., Wyoming, Louisiana, Delaware, Hawaii, Utah, Washington, Missouri.
The Network for New Energy Choices offers these definitions to explain the difference between interconnection and net-metering and their report offers more details showing what makes a good regulation.
Interconnection – the technical rules for customers to “plug in” to the grid.
Net Metering – the billing arrangement by which customers realize savings from their systems, here 1-kWh generated by the customer has the exact same value as 1-kWh consumed by the customer.
States scoring an A or B are obviously trying to allow distributed alternate energy generators to start-up in their states. States scoring a C are pretending that they care about distributed alternate energy generators. And, States scoring a D or F obviously aren’t interested in having distributed alternative energy play any roll in meeting their electricity demands. The interesting thing is that states scoring A’s are finding spin-off results that improve their economies, reduce costs for customers, and reap financial benefits for their utilities. States scoring D’s and F’s are telling manufacturing industries, businesses and citizens to forget about making any money in the new economy where green businesses are growing new jobs and creating new business opportunities.
The killer in all of this is that a comparison of the top ten states by non-farm employees working in the manufacturing industry are in many cases, the same states that score the lowest on net-metering and interconnection support.
Rank. State – Net-metering Grade/ Interconnection Grade
1. Indiana - D/D
2. Wisconsin - F/D
3. Arkansas - C/D
4. Iowa - B/D
5. Mississippi- no grade/no grade
6. Alabama – no grade/no grade
7. Michigan - D/D
8. Ohio - B/C
9. Tennesse- no grade/no grade
10.Kentucky- D/no grade
So, the states potentially best equipped to make and supply distributed generation equipment and reap the corresponding economic benefits are shooting themselves in the foot when it comes to alternate energy development.
If you live in a State scoring anything less than a B, it’s time to take action. In less time than it took to read this, you can email your state representatives. Tell them you support distributed alternate energy and you think it’s time that they woke up and supported it too. Tell them you’re tired of being a C student- or worse, and you want to get A’s the next time the Network for New Energy Choices scores your State.
To find more details about your utility or your State and how they treat distributed alternate energy generation, visit the Database of State Incentives for Renewables & efficiency (DSIRE) web site and see how they stack up.
Wait! Have you contacted your local utility?
Almost every utility in the nation has some type of policy or regulation that could impact your ability to generate your own power from your own alternate energy system. Utility policies are a function of State regulations and individual utility company choices. Before you dump that list of PV parts into your checkout basket, contact your utility to make sure you can do what you want to do without being surprised by extra fees, technical restrictions or a hostile utility engineer that doesn’t get what you are trying to do.
The Network for New Energy Choices grades States on net-metering and interconnection laws and gives them an “A” through “F” score on how well they assist consumers with installing alternate energy distributed generation systems. The grades are based on a comparison with recommended regulations featured in the model regulations from the Interstate Renewable Energy Council.
Here are the results from the Network for New Energy Choices report.
Net Metering Grades
A IREC Model , New Jersey, Colorado, Pennsylvania, Maryland, California.
B Oregon, Delaware, Iowa, Nevada, Connecticut, Ohio, New Mexico.
C Arkansas, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Hawaii, Maine, Louisiana, Virginia, North Dakota, Minnesota, Massachusetts, Montana, Vermont, Missouri.
D Washington, New York, Texas, Kentucky, Michigan, Wyoming, Oklahoma, Indiana, West Virginia.
F Utah, D.C., Georgia, North Carolina, Wisconsin.
Interconnection Grades
A IREC Model.
B New Jersey, Arizona.
C California, Ohio, Texas, New York, Colorado, Oregon* , Massachusetts, Georgia, New Mexico* , Vermont, Minnesota.
D Rhode Island, Wisconsin, West Virginia, Arkansas, New Hampshire, Virginia, Iowa, Maryland*, Montana, Michigan, Indiana, Pennsylvania, Connecticut.
F North Carolina, D.C., Wyoming, Louisiana, Delaware, Hawaii, Utah, Washington, Missouri.
The Network for New Energy Choices offers these definitions to explain the difference between interconnection and net-metering and their report offers more details showing what makes a good regulation.
Interconnection – the technical rules for customers to “plug in” to the grid.
Net Metering – the billing arrangement by which customers realize savings from their systems, here 1-kWh generated by the customer has the exact same value as 1-kWh consumed by the customer.
States scoring an A or B are obviously trying to allow distributed alternate energy generators to start-up in their states. States scoring a C are pretending that they care about distributed alternate energy generators. And, States scoring a D or F obviously aren’t interested in having distributed alternative energy play any roll in meeting their electricity demands. The interesting thing is that states scoring A’s are finding spin-off results that improve their economies, reduce costs for customers, and reap financial benefits for their utilities. States scoring D’s and F’s are telling manufacturing industries, businesses and citizens to forget about making any money in the new economy where green businesses are growing new jobs and creating new business opportunities.
The killer in all of this is that a comparison of the top ten states by non-farm employees working in the manufacturing industry are in many cases, the same states that score the lowest on net-metering and interconnection support.
Rank. State – Net-metering Grade/ Interconnection Grade
1. Indiana - D/D
2. Wisconsin - F/D
3. Arkansas - C/D
4. Iowa - B/D
5. Mississippi- no grade/no grade
6. Alabama – no grade/no grade
7. Michigan - D/D
8. Ohio - B/C
9. Tennesse- no grade/no grade
10.Kentucky- D/no grade
So, the states potentially best equipped to make and supply distributed generation equipment and reap the corresponding economic benefits are shooting themselves in the foot when it comes to alternate energy development.
If you live in a State scoring anything less than a B, it’s time to take action. In less time than it took to read this, you can email your state representatives. Tell them you support distributed alternate energy and you think it’s time that they woke up and supported it too. Tell them you’re tired of being a C student- or worse, and you want to get A’s the next time the Network for New Energy Choices scores your State.
To find more details about your utility or your State and how they treat distributed alternate energy generation, visit the Database of State Incentives for Renewables & efficiency (DSIRE) web site and see how they stack up.
Monday, September 8, 2008
Getting to the Dream- Reliable Distributed Renewable Energy Generation
In order to move the idea of small scale renewable energy forward for the every-day home owner in a way that makes a resource contribution to utilities, three things need to happen.
First there needs to be willing homeowners wanting to install distributed generation equipment like wind, solar or biomass generation on their homes. As part of this concept they also need to be interconnected to the grid to make the output of their generators or excess kWh, available to the grid.
Next there needs to be effective, clear and fair state regulations that define net-metering and interconnection requirements. These regulations must not penalize homeowners who want to be distributed system generators or place unfair burdens on compliance.
And finally there have to be utilities willing to adopt and implement programs for those customers or willing homeowners.
To make small scale renewable energy more than just a pipe dream, communities, utilities, state regulators and the nation need to move forward equally on all three fronts.
Willing Homeowners
So far, few homeowners have elected to install renewable energy equipment on their own. Most residential installations nationwide have taken advantage of state or local utility incentives that help homeowners cover some of the estimated $15,000 -25,000 installation and interconnections expenses.
States leading the way in this area like New Jersey and Colorado are struggling with ways to provide incentives without raising rates for all electric rate payers. In addition to the issue of incentives and rebates, the issue of homeowner education is a big issue. Too many homeowners have unrealistic expectations about the amount of money to be made selling excess power back to utilities even in areas with strong utility support for these systems.
These homeowners not only need to be willing to install the equipment on their homes but they need to be willing to monitor their systems and reassure their local utility that they won’t become a danger to themselves, their neighbors or the electric grid itself. A great source of practical self education information is available at Real Goods . They sell a book called the Solar Living Source Book that really is as they claim “the bible on renewable energy”. You can’t be serious about alternative energy and green power if you don’t have one on your book shelf. I have several versions and each new addition has great tips on getting the rubber to meet the road – so to speak.
Supportive State Regulations
In many states with willing and well educated homeowners you may face a list of regulatory hurdles that are more designed to protect myopic utilities, coal producers and the status quo then they are likely to support the installation of interconnected distributed generation. The two key areas of regulatory support are in net-metering regulations and interconnection requirements.
Onerous insurance or safety disconnect requirements can unnecessarily stifle willing homeowners before they even begin buying equipment. Some states however, like New Jersey, Colorado and Pennsylvania are working out these details in a way that protects public safety, assures utilities of safe interconnection and maintenance practices and supports small scale renewable distributed generation. The Network for New Energy Choices provides up to date analysis and reporting on statewide net-metering and interconnection rules. See their report Freeing the Grid: 2007 Edition.
“As of September 2007, thirty-nine states had adopted statewide programs that established rules for compensating consumers who own grid-tied renewable-energy systems. These programs award owners of small, grid-tied renewables the same savings as one would expect from conserving energy on-site.” – Freeing the Grid; Report No. 02-07 November 2007
Progressive Uilities
Utilities have a long history of making excuses for not supporting net-metering or distributed generation connections to the grid, yet for those utilities that have seen the light, customers are helping to meet the growing need for electricity in a way that actually saves utilities money in reduced infrastructure, improved reliability and deferred generation and transmission improvements . One of the leaders in small system residential solar development is the Sacramento Municipal Utility District (SMUD). “SMUD offers an incentive of $2.50 per watt, based on system performance (orientation, array, tilt and shade). The incentive will be paid to the approved PV contractor and should be reflected in the contractor's bid to the customer.”
What is the incentive for utilities to support distributed renewable energy generation? In the long run it will be survival, but in the short run its just money and reliability. In my last post I referred to the North American Reliability Corporation’s Long Term Reliability Assessment conclusions. They discuss electric power shortages in as little as two years. No matter which source you consult, everyone agrees that even with major conservation efforts, there will be a shortage of power. By promoting distributed generation, utilities add resources without the expense of generation and transmission.
Without the three pronged dedication of homeowners willing to dig into their own pockets, State regulator’s supporting reasonable enabling legislation and local utility support and cooperation, the green power revolution will choke on unfulfilled expectations. There are positive signs that all three key actors have learned from past mistake and are working toward a more supportive and measured approach to small scale distributed generation.
The recent Coop America Utility Solar Assessment (USA) Study summary says, “For the first time in history, a confluence of forces is coming together — solar technology developments, conventional energy price increases, aging transmission and distribution infrastructure, climate concerns, security issues, and others — that bring the dramatic worldwide growth of solar increasingly to center stage. In this rapidly changing energy landscape, the 10 percent goal is truly within reach.”
Next week I’ll go into more detail about utility company attitudes towards interconnection requirements and net-metering.
Hey. My hit counter says someone is reading this. What do you think ? Post a comment. If you have a question about energy conservation or renewable energy ask me, I'll try to find objective answers.
© Mark Daily, 2008
First there needs to be willing homeowners wanting to install distributed generation equipment like wind, solar or biomass generation on their homes. As part of this concept they also need to be interconnected to the grid to make the output of their generators or excess kWh, available to the grid.
Next there needs to be effective, clear and fair state regulations that define net-metering and interconnection requirements. These regulations must not penalize homeowners who want to be distributed system generators or place unfair burdens on compliance.
And finally there have to be utilities willing to adopt and implement programs for those customers or willing homeowners.
To make small scale renewable energy more than just a pipe dream, communities, utilities, state regulators and the nation need to move forward equally on all three fronts.
Willing Homeowners
So far, few homeowners have elected to install renewable energy equipment on their own. Most residential installations nationwide have taken advantage of state or local utility incentives that help homeowners cover some of the estimated $15,000 -25,000 installation and interconnections expenses.
States leading the way in this area like New Jersey and Colorado are struggling with ways to provide incentives without raising rates for all electric rate payers. In addition to the issue of incentives and rebates, the issue of homeowner education is a big issue. Too many homeowners have unrealistic expectations about the amount of money to be made selling excess power back to utilities even in areas with strong utility support for these systems.
These homeowners not only need to be willing to install the equipment on their homes but they need to be willing to monitor their systems and reassure their local utility that they won’t become a danger to themselves, their neighbors or the electric grid itself. A great source of practical self education information is available at Real Goods . They sell a book called the Solar Living Source Book that really is as they claim “the bible on renewable energy”. You can’t be serious about alternative energy and green power if you don’t have one on your book shelf. I have several versions and each new addition has great tips on getting the rubber to meet the road – so to speak.
Supportive State Regulations
In many states with willing and well educated homeowners you may face a list of regulatory hurdles that are more designed to protect myopic utilities, coal producers and the status quo then they are likely to support the installation of interconnected distributed generation. The two key areas of regulatory support are in net-metering regulations and interconnection requirements.
Onerous insurance or safety disconnect requirements can unnecessarily stifle willing homeowners before they even begin buying equipment. Some states however, like New Jersey, Colorado and Pennsylvania are working out these details in a way that protects public safety, assures utilities of safe interconnection and maintenance practices and supports small scale renewable distributed generation. The Network for New Energy Choices provides up to date analysis and reporting on statewide net-metering and interconnection rules. See their report Freeing the Grid: 2007 Edition.
“As of September 2007, thirty-nine states had adopted statewide programs that established rules for compensating consumers who own grid-tied renewable-energy systems. These programs award owners of small, grid-tied renewables the same savings as one would expect from conserving energy on-site.” – Freeing the Grid; Report No. 02-07 November 2007
Progressive Uilities
Utilities have a long history of making excuses for not supporting net-metering or distributed generation connections to the grid, yet for those utilities that have seen the light, customers are helping to meet the growing need for electricity in a way that actually saves utilities money in reduced infrastructure, improved reliability and deferred generation and transmission improvements . One of the leaders in small system residential solar development is the Sacramento Municipal Utility District (SMUD). “SMUD offers an incentive of $2.50 per watt, based on system performance (orientation, array, tilt and shade). The incentive will be paid to the approved PV contractor and should be reflected in the contractor's bid to the customer.”
What is the incentive for utilities to support distributed renewable energy generation? In the long run it will be survival, but in the short run its just money and reliability. In my last post I referred to the North American Reliability Corporation’s Long Term Reliability Assessment conclusions. They discuss electric power shortages in as little as two years. No matter which source you consult, everyone agrees that even with major conservation efforts, there will be a shortage of power. By promoting distributed generation, utilities add resources without the expense of generation and transmission.
Without the three pronged dedication of homeowners willing to dig into their own pockets, State regulator’s supporting reasonable enabling legislation and local utility support and cooperation, the green power revolution will choke on unfulfilled expectations. There are positive signs that all three key actors have learned from past mistake and are working toward a more supportive and measured approach to small scale distributed generation.
The recent Coop America Utility Solar Assessment (USA) Study summary says, “For the first time in history, a confluence of forces is coming together — solar technology developments, conventional energy price increases, aging transmission and distribution infrastructure, climate concerns, security issues, and others — that bring the dramatic worldwide growth of solar increasingly to center stage. In this rapidly changing energy landscape, the 10 percent goal is truly within reach.”
Next week I’ll go into more detail about utility company attitudes towards interconnection requirements and net-metering.
Hey. My hit counter says someone is reading this. What do you think ? Post a comment. If you have a question about energy conservation or renewable energy ask me, I'll try to find objective answers.
© Mark Daily, 2008
Wednesday, September 3, 2008
What will you do when your area runs out of electricity? - Preparing for Future Electricity Demands
Ignoring the title question is like an ostrich hiding its head in the sand when attacked by wild dogs. Guess which part of the anatomy gets bitten first? So it could be with us, if we all ignore the facts when it comes to getting electricity to our homes and businesses.
Electricity users throughout the United States and Canada are being ostriches unless they actively ask their elected Representatives to deal with the question, “how can we power the future without destroying the planet or making electricity a luxury few can afford”.
“Summer peak demand in the U.S. is forecast to increase over 135,000 MW or 17.7 percent in the next ten years with committed resources projected to increase 77,000 MW or 8.4 percent
(including uncommitted resources, 123,000 MW or 12.7 percent).” Source: NERC 2007 Long-Term Reliability Assessment
No matter which study or forecast you review, the answer comes out the same. We will not have enough electric power to meet our needs in as little as two years, if our current (pun intended) behavior doesn’t change. It the NERC assessment is correct we will have 5 percent less electricity than we need when 2018 arrives in less than ten years.
Don’t be an ostrich, take action. If you are a member of a rural electric cooperative your supplier belongs to the National Rural Electric Cooperative Association. They created a website that makes it easy for anyone to contact their elected representatives. I did it in about five minutes and you can do it too.
Go to https://www.ourenergy.coop and after reading that page, scroll down to the line that says "Contact your electric officials and begin the dialogue now". When you click the arrow at the end of this line, you will be asked to fill out your name and address to email your US Senators and US House of Representatives with the following message:
Our country faces a crisis as electricity use increases faster than available supply. I believe that by unleashing American ingenuity we can solve this problem. What are you doing to speed the development of new technology which will allow me to have the electric power I need while meeting our national climate policy goals? I look forward to your answer and will share it with my friends and neighbors. Thank you.
Then click “Send Message”, that’s it. You don’t even have to know who your representatives are. By filling in your name and address your message will automatically be sent to the correct representatives and you will get a brief confirming message listing which representatives were emailed on your behalf. It’s easy.
Let me know who it went and what you think about it.
© Mark Daily, 2008
Electricity users throughout the United States and Canada are being ostriches unless they actively ask their elected Representatives to deal with the question, “how can we power the future without destroying the planet or making electricity a luxury few can afford”.
“Summer peak demand in the U.S. is forecast to increase over 135,000 MW or 17.7 percent in the next ten years with committed resources projected to increase 77,000 MW or 8.4 percent
(including uncommitted resources, 123,000 MW or 12.7 percent).” Source: NERC 2007 Long-Term Reliability Assessment
No matter which study or forecast you review, the answer comes out the same. We will not have enough electric power to meet our needs in as little as two years, if our current (pun intended) behavior doesn’t change. It the NERC assessment is correct we will have 5 percent less electricity than we need when 2018 arrives in less than ten years.
Don’t be an ostrich, take action. If you are a member of a rural electric cooperative your supplier belongs to the National Rural Electric Cooperative Association. They created a website that makes it easy for anyone to contact their elected representatives. I did it in about five minutes and you can do it too.
Go to https://www.ourenergy.coop and after reading that page, scroll down to the line that says "Contact your electric officials and begin the dialogue now". When you click the arrow at the end of this line, you will be asked to fill out your name and address to email your US Senators and US House of Representatives with the following message:
Our country faces a crisis as electricity use increases faster than available supply. I believe that by unleashing American ingenuity we can solve this problem. What are you doing to speed the development of new technology which will allow me to have the electric power I need while meeting our national climate policy goals? I look forward to your answer and will share it with my friends and neighbors. Thank you.
Then click “Send Message”, that’s it. You don’t even have to know who your representatives are. By filling in your name and address your message will automatically be sent to the correct representatives and you will get a brief confirming message listing which representatives were emailed on your behalf. It’s easy.
Let me know who it went and what you think about it.
© Mark Daily, 2008
Monday, August 25, 2008
Save the Planet Save Your money- This book helps you do both
Looking for a great tax free investment? Wishing for an operating manual for your house? Longing to know how to evaluate your energy using appliances and home heating systems? Puzzled why your electric bill was so high? Frustrated trying to learn what to do about it? Now there are solutions to your problems with a new book by Godo Stoyke.
Energy efficiency guru Amory Lovins has said it for decades. When it comes to electricity generation, saving energy equals constructing energy supply. Now we have a tool to help us reduce the need for more power plants and save cash at home, all at the same time. And, the best part is that if you pick the right energy conservation efforts, you’ll have a better return on investment then anything you can do in the stock market even when the stock market was doing well.
The Carbon Buster’s Home Energy Handbook by Godo Stoyke (New Society Publishers) is the next best thing to an owner’s manual for your home. Chapter by chapter, step by step, this easy to read book lays out choices that you can make in your home to live better, reduce your impact on the globe and keep more money in your pocket and out of the utility company’s cash register.
The best part about saving energy with this book is that it’s short. In only 131 pages, LEED accredited graduate of the University of Alberta Master of Science program, lays out a clear picture of concrete steps you can take to identify your home’s energy appetite, search for unwanted energy hogs and quickly learn what can and can’t save you money.
“The purpose of this book is to show you the most effective and most cost effective ways to reduce your carbon emissions and the best ways to reduce your family’s energy bills.” Stoyke goes on to describe products and technologies that do just that. He explains the way of the Carbon Miser, whose only mission is to get the best return on investment (ROI) versus the Carbon Buster whose emphasis is reducing negative environmental consequences.
In nicely designed appendices Stoyke provides tables that list Efficiency measures with their corresponding carbon reductions, cost savings and payback years. He even lists energy conservation steps according to best return on investment.
This should be one book that everyone has in the house.
© Mark Daily, 2008
Energy efficiency guru Amory Lovins has said it for decades. When it comes to electricity generation, saving energy equals constructing energy supply. Now we have a tool to help us reduce the need for more power plants and save cash at home, all at the same time. And, the best part is that if you pick the right energy conservation efforts, you’ll have a better return on investment then anything you can do in the stock market even when the stock market was doing well.
The Carbon Buster’s Home Energy Handbook by Godo Stoyke (New Society Publishers) is the next best thing to an owner’s manual for your home. Chapter by chapter, step by step, this easy to read book lays out choices that you can make in your home to live better, reduce your impact on the globe and keep more money in your pocket and out of the utility company’s cash register.
The best part about saving energy with this book is that it’s short. In only 131 pages, LEED accredited graduate of the University of Alberta Master of Science program, lays out a clear picture of concrete steps you can take to identify your home’s energy appetite, search for unwanted energy hogs and quickly learn what can and can’t save you money.
“The purpose of this book is to show you the most effective and most cost effective ways to reduce your carbon emissions and the best ways to reduce your family’s energy bills.” Stoyke goes on to describe products and technologies that do just that. He explains the way of the Carbon Miser, whose only mission is to get the best return on investment (ROI) versus the Carbon Buster whose emphasis is reducing negative environmental consequences.
In nicely designed appendices Stoyke provides tables that list Efficiency measures with their corresponding carbon reductions, cost savings and payback years. He even lists energy conservation steps according to best return on investment.
This should be one book that everyone has in the house.
© Mark Daily, 2008
Monday, August 18, 2008
SHOP FOR ENERGY EFFICIENT APPLIANCES
Shopping for appliances isn’t fun. I usually don’t shop for an appliance until the one I have breaks down. Then, it’s a mad dash to the store to find a quick replacement. When a season’s worth of frozen vegetables is melting in your busted freezer, energy conservation is the last thing on your mind.
Unfortunately a hasty decision in the appliance selection process can cost you extra cash over the next fifteen years, the average life of most home appliances. “When you buy an appliance, you commit to paying both the first cost and the operating cost for as long as you own it. And over the life of an appliance, the energy cost to run it can be many times greater than the first cost. So it pays to buy an energy-efficient appliance,” says the introduction to the American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy’s Consumer Guide.
A refrigerator or freezer that costs an extra $200 but saves you $100 per year in energy bills, will not be $200 more expensive than the cheaper model. Actually in fifteen years it will have been $1,300 less expensive due to the higher operating costs of the cheaper model. So, if you really want to save money on appliances don’t compare price, compare efficiency ratings instead.
When shopping for appliances there are two stickers that help you compare. One is the Yellow Energy Guide. The other is the Energy Star Label.
The Yellow Energy Guide label shows a comparison of the highest and lowest energy consumption or efficiency estimates of similar appliance models, based on test procedures established by the US Department of Energy. This information lets you compare the features, size and energy usage of different models. From “uses least energy” to “uses most energy,” a scale shows how a model stacks up against the competition. Since 1980, the Federal Trade Commission has required the Energy Guide labels on refrigerators, freezers, dishwashers, clothes washers, room air conditioners, water heaters, furnaces, boilers, central air conditioners, heat pumps and pool heaters. Labels are not yet required on clothes dryers, portable space heaters, kitchen ranges, microwave ovens, lights or on-demand tank-less water heaters.
Energy Star labels are not on all appliances, but you should always look for this sticker to get the most efficient appliance possible. To earn the ENERGY STAR, these appliances must meet strict energy efficiency criteria set by the US Environmental Protection Agency or the US Department of Energy. They use less energy and reduce your contribution to green house gas emissions from power plants.
More than 70% of American households recognize the Energy Star label. DOE estimates that $16 billion dollars was saved by consumers on 2007 utility bills.
According to the DOE Energy Star website here is what you can expect in savings by purchasing the following Energy Star appliances.
-Qualified refrigerators are at least 15% more efficient than the minimum federal efficiency standard.
-Qualified TVs consume 3 watts or less when switched off, compared to a standard TV, which consumes almost 6 watts on average.
-Office equipment that qualifies automatically enters a low-power "sleep" mode after a period of inactivity.
-Qualified light bulbs (compact florescent or CFL) use two-thirds less energy than a standard incandescent bulb and must meet additional operating and reliability guidelines.
-Qualified furnaces offer a rating of 90% AFUE (Annual Fuel Utilization Efficiency) or greater, which is about 15% more efficient than the minimum federal efficiency standard.
So buying Energy Star appliances ensures that you are buying the most efficient models possible. You also save money by getting appliances with the “least energy used” per model category. Shop now, but don’t buy until you really need a new appliance. After all, these standards may change again and manufacturers are always coming up with more energy efficient models. That shouldn’t keep you being prepared by shopping ahead of time.
© Mark Daily, 2008
Unfortunately a hasty decision in the appliance selection process can cost you extra cash over the next fifteen years, the average life of most home appliances. “When you buy an appliance, you commit to paying both the first cost and the operating cost for as long as you own it. And over the life of an appliance, the energy cost to run it can be many times greater than the first cost. So it pays to buy an energy-efficient appliance,” says the introduction to the American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy’s Consumer Guide.
A refrigerator or freezer that costs an extra $200 but saves you $100 per year in energy bills, will not be $200 more expensive than the cheaper model. Actually in fifteen years it will have been $1,300 less expensive due to the higher operating costs of the cheaper model. So, if you really want to save money on appliances don’t compare price, compare efficiency ratings instead.
When shopping for appliances there are two stickers that help you compare. One is the Yellow Energy Guide. The other is the Energy Star Label.
The Yellow Energy Guide label shows a comparison of the highest and lowest energy consumption or efficiency estimates of similar appliance models, based on test procedures established by the US Department of Energy. This information lets you compare the features, size and energy usage of different models. From “uses least energy” to “uses most energy,” a scale shows how a model stacks up against the competition. Since 1980, the Federal Trade Commission has required the Energy Guide labels on refrigerators, freezers, dishwashers, clothes washers, room air conditioners, water heaters, furnaces, boilers, central air conditioners, heat pumps and pool heaters. Labels are not yet required on clothes dryers, portable space heaters, kitchen ranges, microwave ovens, lights or on-demand tank-less water heaters.
Energy Star labels are not on all appliances, but you should always look for this sticker to get the most efficient appliance possible. To earn the ENERGY STAR, these appliances must meet strict energy efficiency criteria set by the US Environmental Protection Agency or the US Department of Energy. They use less energy and reduce your contribution to green house gas emissions from power plants.
More than 70% of American households recognize the Energy Star label. DOE estimates that $16 billion dollars was saved by consumers on 2007 utility bills.
According to the DOE Energy Star website here is what you can expect in savings by purchasing the following Energy Star appliances.
-Qualified refrigerators are at least 15% more efficient than the minimum federal efficiency standard.
-Qualified TVs consume 3 watts or less when switched off, compared to a standard TV, which consumes almost 6 watts on average.
-Office equipment that qualifies automatically enters a low-power "sleep" mode after a period of inactivity.
-Qualified light bulbs (compact florescent or CFL) use two-thirds less energy than a standard incandescent bulb and must meet additional operating and reliability guidelines.
-Qualified furnaces offer a rating of 90% AFUE (Annual Fuel Utilization Efficiency) or greater, which is about 15% more efficient than the minimum federal efficiency standard.
So buying Energy Star appliances ensures that you are buying the most efficient models possible. You also save money by getting appliances with the “least energy used” per model category. Shop now, but don’t buy until you really need a new appliance. After all, these standards may change again and manufacturers are always coming up with more energy efficient models. That shouldn’t keep you being prepared by shopping ahead of time.
© Mark Daily, 2008
Monday, August 11, 2008
Clear Skies is a Lie
I can’t figure out why the public isn’t outraged over the obvious disregard for human health that comes with provisions of President Bushes’ Clear Skies Act. This is just one in a long list of legislation proposed by the Bush administration that does the exact opposite of its title. The Clear Skies Act makes our skies less clear by so many measurable standards that the title could only have been selected by a room full of comedians. Clear Skies? I don’t think so.
According the National Resource Defense Counsel, “The Clear Skies legislation sets new targets for emissions of sulfur dioxide, mercury, and nitrogen oxides from U.S. power plants. But these targets are weaker than those that would be put in place if the Bush administration simply implemented and enforced the existing law! Compared to current law, the Clear Skies plan would allow three times more toxic mercury emissions, 50 percent more sulfur emissions, and hundreds of thousands more tons of smog-forming nitrogen oxides. It would also delay cleaning up this pollution by up to a decade compared to current law and force residents of heavily-polluted areas to wait years longer for clean air compared to the existing Clean Air Act.”
Zachary Roth writing for the Columbia Journalism Review put it this way, “It’s not just that the Clear Skies reduction targets are “little different” from what would be achieved by simply enforcing the Clean Air Act. It’s that Clear Skies, despite its name, would actually lead to more pollution than the existing Clean Air Act, because current law calls for further reductions over time.
In other words, either Clear Skies or strict enforcement of the Clean Air Act would make the air cleaner than it is today. But enforcing current law will achieve greater reductions than would Clear Skies”.
According to Energy Central Ken Silverstien “In February, a federal appeals court in Washington, D.C. ruled that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency had violated the Clean Air Act by refusing to make mercury reductions mandatory. Instead, the Bush administration had proposed a voluntary cap-and-trade system that it says would have reduced mercury emissions by 70 percent by 2018.”
Yet cap and trade means that those that can trade, create hot zones of mercury pollution that may exceed responsible mercury pollution standards.
The NRDC says that “Mercury can cause serious neurological and developmental damage, including birth defects, subtle losses of sensory or cognitive ability, and delays in developmental milestones such as walking and talking. Power plants are responsible for 34 percent of all mercury emissions, which settle into our waters, where they accumulate in fish. In 41 states, officials warn against eating fish from mercury-contaminated lakes and rivers.”
Are people really so busy that they can’t rally enough vocal opposition to this blatant attempt to court irresponsible industries? Are we so strapped financially that we can’t keep our air clean enough to avoid health problems?
If this is all about money why aren’t the taxpayers outraged at the expense of treating air pollution related illnesses and diseases. It has to be less expensive to prevent the pollution than it is to treat all of the health problems associated with dirty air. Yet, people remain focused on complaints about the high cost of electricity without realizing that they are going to have to pay more money for health problems than they would for prevention programs.
I just don’t get it. Can someone out there explain it to me?
According the National Resource Defense Counsel, “The Clear Skies legislation sets new targets for emissions of sulfur dioxide, mercury, and nitrogen oxides from U.S. power plants. But these targets are weaker than those that would be put in place if the Bush administration simply implemented and enforced the existing law! Compared to current law, the Clear Skies plan would allow three times more toxic mercury emissions, 50 percent more sulfur emissions, and hundreds of thousands more tons of smog-forming nitrogen oxides. It would also delay cleaning up this pollution by up to a decade compared to current law and force residents of heavily-polluted areas to wait years longer for clean air compared to the existing Clean Air Act.”
Zachary Roth writing for the Columbia Journalism Review put it this way, “It’s not just that the Clear Skies reduction targets are “little different” from what would be achieved by simply enforcing the Clean Air Act. It’s that Clear Skies, despite its name, would actually lead to more pollution than the existing Clean Air Act, because current law calls for further reductions over time.
In other words, either Clear Skies or strict enforcement of the Clean Air Act would make the air cleaner than it is today. But enforcing current law will achieve greater reductions than would Clear Skies”.
According to Energy Central Ken Silverstien “In February, a federal appeals court in Washington, D.C. ruled that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency had violated the Clean Air Act by refusing to make mercury reductions mandatory. Instead, the Bush administration had proposed a voluntary cap-and-trade system that it says would have reduced mercury emissions by 70 percent by 2018.”
Yet cap and trade means that those that can trade, create hot zones of mercury pollution that may exceed responsible mercury pollution standards.
The NRDC says that “Mercury can cause serious neurological and developmental damage, including birth defects, subtle losses of sensory or cognitive ability, and delays in developmental milestones such as walking and talking. Power plants are responsible for 34 percent of all mercury emissions, which settle into our waters, where they accumulate in fish. In 41 states, officials warn against eating fish from mercury-contaminated lakes and rivers.”
Are people really so busy that they can’t rally enough vocal opposition to this blatant attempt to court irresponsible industries? Are we so strapped financially that we can’t keep our air clean enough to avoid health problems?
If this is all about money why aren’t the taxpayers outraged at the expense of treating air pollution related illnesses and diseases. It has to be less expensive to prevent the pollution than it is to treat all of the health problems associated with dirty air. Yet, people remain focused on complaints about the high cost of electricity without realizing that they are going to have to pay more money for health problems than they would for prevention programs.
I just don’t get it. Can someone out there explain it to me?
Wednesday, August 6, 2008
Electric Rates- Consumers Must Wade Through the Hype and Speak Up
Writing about energy issues isn’t easy. There are a host of dueling experts that love to aggressively champion their ideas. Some even have secret motives tied to parts of the energy industry. Are these objective writers? It’s hard to say frankly. I once had a person reading my material wonder aloud “which side are you on”? That really is the whole point of my writing. I don’t want to be on a “side” unless it is the side of getting the most accurate and honest information out to the most number of people.
As general consumers I believe we still have a rather naive view of electric energy and electric energy issues. Many people still hold the idea that there are these robber baron capitalists that are cranking out copious amount of “dirty” electricity trying to make the most money for the least investment possible. Of course, this is the American way some would argue.”What’s wrong with that? ”, some might say; Nothing, actually. That may well be the goal of most utility companies and their investors. Yet each state has its own utility commission that reviews utility rate increases and keeps a lid on potential abuses from the private sector. Municipal Utilities have tax payers that theoretically are keeping an eye on things and can vote the scoundrels out if rates climb beyond reasonable expense recovery and, member owned public power districts and member owned rural electric cooperatives also have the “membership vote” regulation in play.
So, if these regulating functions are doing their jobs no one should be paying more than absolutely necessary for electricity and no utility company should be getting windfall profits from the sale of electricity. And, I think that this has largely been the case with the California mess and Enron being the main exceptions to the rule. Fingers pointing in so many directions on those debacles that everyone got a little of the blame there.
In fact with those exceptions, regulators have been doing their jobs so well that in many states prices per kilowatt hour had actually gone down in the 90’s as a result of deals made between regulators and utilities over electric utility de-regulation. Unfortunately increasing fuel costs for all utilities have cancelled out the anticipated price reductions and left many companies in the red begging for rate increases in recent years. Our memories are short when it comes to electricity prices, so the feelings consumers have today are strictly based on recent and nation-wide rate increases and any residual positive perception from the rate decreases of the 90’s has long evaporated in the angry and heated response over the most recent bill.
So, what’s a consumer to do? The main thing a consumer can do is get familiar with their electric bill. How much are you paying per kilowatt hour? What is your monthly kWh use? How much does your monthly use fluctuate with the seasons? What appliances do you have that contribute the most to your electric bill? These questions all go to the heart of the concept – “if it’s not being measured, it’s not being managed”, and if you aren’t trying to manage your electric bill, then you deserve whatever bill you get. And, whatever bill you get is your fault, not your utility’s.
The next best thing you can do is let your elected representative know that you are tired of them spending so much time worrying about what’s going on in public bathrooms and private bedrooms and get back to the job we elected them to do, which is to research, propose and adopt legislation that encourages us all to take a long range view of energy issues.
As general consumers I believe we still have a rather naive view of electric energy and electric energy issues. Many people still hold the idea that there are these robber baron capitalists that are cranking out copious amount of “dirty” electricity trying to make the most money for the least investment possible. Of course, this is the American way some would argue.”What’s wrong with that? ”, some might say; Nothing, actually. That may well be the goal of most utility companies and their investors. Yet each state has its own utility commission that reviews utility rate increases and keeps a lid on potential abuses from the private sector. Municipal Utilities have tax payers that theoretically are keeping an eye on things and can vote the scoundrels out if rates climb beyond reasonable expense recovery and, member owned public power districts and member owned rural electric cooperatives also have the “membership vote” regulation in play.
So, if these regulating functions are doing their jobs no one should be paying more than absolutely necessary for electricity and no utility company should be getting windfall profits from the sale of electricity. And, I think that this has largely been the case with the California mess and Enron being the main exceptions to the rule. Fingers pointing in so many directions on those debacles that everyone got a little of the blame there.
In fact with those exceptions, regulators have been doing their jobs so well that in many states prices per kilowatt hour had actually gone down in the 90’s as a result of deals made between regulators and utilities over electric utility de-regulation. Unfortunately increasing fuel costs for all utilities have cancelled out the anticipated price reductions and left many companies in the red begging for rate increases in recent years. Our memories are short when it comes to electricity prices, so the feelings consumers have today are strictly based on recent and nation-wide rate increases and any residual positive perception from the rate decreases of the 90’s has long evaporated in the angry and heated response over the most recent bill.
So, what’s a consumer to do? The main thing a consumer can do is get familiar with their electric bill. How much are you paying per kilowatt hour? What is your monthly kWh use? How much does your monthly use fluctuate with the seasons? What appliances do you have that contribute the most to your electric bill? These questions all go to the heart of the concept – “if it’s not being measured, it’s not being managed”, and if you aren’t trying to manage your electric bill, then you deserve whatever bill you get. And, whatever bill you get is your fault, not your utility’s.
The next best thing you can do is let your elected representative know that you are tired of them spending so much time worrying about what’s going on in public bathrooms and private bedrooms and get back to the job we elected them to do, which is to research, propose and adopt legislation that encourages us all to take a long range view of energy issues.
Wednesday, July 30, 2008
Alternate Energy Advocates need to Get Real
Electricity is today, by almost any standard, a requirement for modern life.
A nation-wide system of unrelated companies makes electricity, a product that cannot be seen, stored or stockpiled and gets it delivered to every corner of the nation through a series of wires connected by thousands of different companies, 24 hours a day for 365 days a year.
This product reaches the customer at the exact moment that the customer wants it- even when the customer doesn’t know they want it. If too much electricity is delivered, things start melting. If too little electricity is delivered, things start melting. This is not like gas for your car. There is no gauge showing a low tank so you can head to the filling station. This is a product that most homeowners only think about when it isn’t there or when the price goes up.
The back bone of the electric power generation system consists of thousands of power plants spread across the country. Most are located strategically near urban load centers or sources of fuel. Usually, sources of fuel, like coal or wind or hydro power, are nowhere near urban load centers.
Base-load fossil fuel is stockpiled allowing power plants to schedule power production to meet anticipated loads. When power plant schedulers get it right, nobody notices. When they get it wrong, rolling brown-outs or black-outs inspire months of government investigation and reams of customer hate mail focused on those utilities that left them in the dark or melted their ice cream. Wholesale power suppliers pay various contract penalties for being short on generation delivery if they under produce or waste electricity and ratepayer’s money if they produce more than is needed.
Because of the ability to schedule these base-load fossil fuel systems, they are called “dispatch-able”. Schedulers dispatch power at varying levels targeted every thirty minutes to meet your electricity demands. They do it based on formulas that consider historic loads, predicted weather conditions and anticipated load growth. Wind and solar energy are not “dispatch-able”.
Based load power plants have an excellent track record of meeting the nation’s needs. As a whole, they achieve an astounding 80% production output that combines with back-up power generation and regional inter-connections to provide electricity at your house almost 100 percent of the time.
Renewable power production facilities have a track record of 25% output. As renewables become more plentiful and spread over wider geographic areas, this “production” factor will improve. Increased reliability through diversity has long been a goal of renewable energy advocates. The Rocky Mountain Institute is one group supporting this concept. Their recent research in the July 2008 issue of their Solution Journal describes how that might come about.
Utilities, have historically appeared to drag their feet about including wind and solar power into their generation portfolio. This is not because they dislike clean power, but because they feel like a 25 % production track record does not meet the needs of their customers. From their perspective, every kilowatt of wind or solar power generation must be backed up with equal base load generation to cover the 75% of the time renewable resources fail to deliver power. In a business dedicated to reliable power at the least cost, the expense of supporting renewable energy means building redundant base-load coverage.
Until customers get “real” about alternate energy expectations there will always be conflict between customer expectations and utility’s ability to deliver.
A nation-wide system of unrelated companies makes electricity, a product that cannot be seen, stored or stockpiled and gets it delivered to every corner of the nation through a series of wires connected by thousands of different companies, 24 hours a day for 365 days a year.
This product reaches the customer at the exact moment that the customer wants it- even when the customer doesn’t know they want it. If too much electricity is delivered, things start melting. If too little electricity is delivered, things start melting. This is not like gas for your car. There is no gauge showing a low tank so you can head to the filling station. This is a product that most homeowners only think about when it isn’t there or when the price goes up.
The back bone of the electric power generation system consists of thousands of power plants spread across the country. Most are located strategically near urban load centers or sources of fuel. Usually, sources of fuel, like coal or wind or hydro power, are nowhere near urban load centers.
Base-load fossil fuel is stockpiled allowing power plants to schedule power production to meet anticipated loads. When power plant schedulers get it right, nobody notices. When they get it wrong, rolling brown-outs or black-outs inspire months of government investigation and reams of customer hate mail focused on those utilities that left them in the dark or melted their ice cream. Wholesale power suppliers pay various contract penalties for being short on generation delivery if they under produce or waste electricity and ratepayer’s money if they produce more than is needed.
Because of the ability to schedule these base-load fossil fuel systems, they are called “dispatch-able”. Schedulers dispatch power at varying levels targeted every thirty minutes to meet your electricity demands. They do it based on formulas that consider historic loads, predicted weather conditions and anticipated load growth. Wind and solar energy are not “dispatch-able”.
Based load power plants have an excellent track record of meeting the nation’s needs. As a whole, they achieve an astounding 80% production output that combines with back-up power generation and regional inter-connections to provide electricity at your house almost 100 percent of the time.
Renewable power production facilities have a track record of 25% output. As renewables become more plentiful and spread over wider geographic areas, this “production” factor will improve. Increased reliability through diversity has long been a goal of renewable energy advocates. The Rocky Mountain Institute is one group supporting this concept. Their recent research in the July 2008 issue of their Solution Journal describes how that might come about.
Utilities, have historically appeared to drag their feet about including wind and solar power into their generation portfolio. This is not because they dislike clean power, but because they feel like a 25 % production track record does not meet the needs of their customers. From their perspective, every kilowatt of wind or solar power generation must be backed up with equal base load generation to cover the 75% of the time renewable resources fail to deliver power. In a business dedicated to reliable power at the least cost, the expense of supporting renewable energy means building redundant base-load coverage.
Until customers get “real” about alternate energy expectations there will always be conflict between customer expectations and utility’s ability to deliver.
Wednesday, February 20, 2008
Why Utility Executives Think Environmentalists are a Pain in the Ass
Utility Executives think environmentalists are a pain in the ass for many reasons, but the main reason is because the language that environmentalists use to talk about utilities and utility executives hurts their feelings. Oh you won’t get them to admit it. Utility executives often have engineering or accounting backgrounds and these professions are not exactly known for their warm and fuzzy emotional types. But, still, environmentalists create immediate walls of distrust and antagonism just by choosing annoying words to frame their points of view.
Think of your own profession or job. Would you like it if people referred to what you were doing with words like “toxic”, “destruction”, “degradation”, “waste”, “monopoly”, “cancer” or my favorite derogatory word “spew”. What have you been spewing today? Did you spew your product on anyone?
How about degradation? Have you degraded anything today?
While most businesses secretly wish they were monopolies, no one likes to be accused of being one. It just isn’t the American way.
So, imagine recent headlines referring to the electric utility industry. Oh, I know, I am going to exaggerate a little for effect, but still you can imagine a headline like this in your local newspaper.
“Electric Monopoly Spews Toxic Destruction Degrading Air quality linked to Cancer”.
It’s like the old conundrum “when did you stop beating your wife”? Environmentalists lead with a verbal left hook. And, it seems like the only reason they would do that is to get headlines or make someone angry. If you had a neighbor with a barking dog or a messy yard, you wouldn’t storm over there demanding and accusing, unless you just like fist fighting. You’d get to know them first and find out if there were extenuating reasons for their behavior. Chances are there is more to the story. You know that. And the Electric Utility industry is in the same spot, there is more to the story. In fact, all of us that love our computers, televisions, cold beer, toast, light after dark, and inexpensive consumer goods, are all – the rest of the story.
Today we are stuck in what peace activist Adam Kahane calls “debating”. We have each side shouting their view of the facts hoping to drown out the other’s argument. One side says, “We can power the economy with a combination of wind, solar and conservation”. The other side shouts back, “No we cannot, the load growth is too large, we must use fossil fuels and expand nuclear power”.
What can we do about all of this? We can and must do two things. Stop wasting electricity and stop wasting words about solving environmental problems. I did not say stop using electricity (we can’t). Nor did I say stop having conversations about environmental problems. I said stop wasting energy and stop wasting words.
Study the work of Adam Kahane and learn how to talk to each other about difficult issues. If Adam can do it with people that have been killing each other for decades, we can do it with the inflammatory dialogue of the environment and electricity generation debate. The so called choice between the economy and the environment is a false choice. The environment is the economy (and I am tempted to violate my own beliefs and add “stupid”, but I won’t).
We must develop a generative dialogue to realize that we all agree that the earth is our only home. We must make collective decisions about how and what we spew. We should decide together when, where and why we degrade. We must face and answer the question about what we do about waste. In the long run we must reduce even the distant potential to harm our health and the health of our children through toxins, climate change and reduced air quality. Our very lives depend on it. It will not serve the future well to stay in divisive arguments. We must come together and agree on mutually understood facts. We must take decisive steps to make this world the kind of earth on which we can all live healthy and productive lives for all eternity. We cannot keep borrowing the future from our children and hope new technology bails us out. We cannot keep ignoring the elephant in the living room without catastrophic impacts to our homes. We cannot keep calling each other names and expect to ever have the kind of world that we know in our hearts is possible.
Please, let’s all do something today to take action on those two things that we can do. Stop wasting energy and stop wasting words. We could call it Vision Power Generation. Make it all count.
Next time in the interests of fair play, I‘ll explain why environmentalists think Utility Executives are a pain in the ass.
©Mark Richard Daily, 2008
Think of your own profession or job. Would you like it if people referred to what you were doing with words like “toxic”, “destruction”, “degradation”, “waste”, “monopoly”, “cancer” or my favorite derogatory word “spew”. What have you been spewing today? Did you spew your product on anyone?
How about degradation? Have you degraded anything today?
While most businesses secretly wish they were monopolies, no one likes to be accused of being one. It just isn’t the American way.
So, imagine recent headlines referring to the electric utility industry. Oh, I know, I am going to exaggerate a little for effect, but still you can imagine a headline like this in your local newspaper.
“Electric Monopoly Spews Toxic Destruction Degrading Air quality linked to Cancer”.
It’s like the old conundrum “when did you stop beating your wife”? Environmentalists lead with a verbal left hook. And, it seems like the only reason they would do that is to get headlines or make someone angry. If you had a neighbor with a barking dog or a messy yard, you wouldn’t storm over there demanding and accusing, unless you just like fist fighting. You’d get to know them first and find out if there were extenuating reasons for their behavior. Chances are there is more to the story. You know that. And the Electric Utility industry is in the same spot, there is more to the story. In fact, all of us that love our computers, televisions, cold beer, toast, light after dark, and inexpensive consumer goods, are all – the rest of the story.
Today we are stuck in what peace activist Adam Kahane calls “debating”. We have each side shouting their view of the facts hoping to drown out the other’s argument. One side says, “We can power the economy with a combination of wind, solar and conservation”. The other side shouts back, “No we cannot, the load growth is too large, we must use fossil fuels and expand nuclear power”.
What can we do about all of this? We can and must do two things. Stop wasting electricity and stop wasting words about solving environmental problems. I did not say stop using electricity (we can’t). Nor did I say stop having conversations about environmental problems. I said stop wasting energy and stop wasting words.
Study the work of Adam Kahane and learn how to talk to each other about difficult issues. If Adam can do it with people that have been killing each other for decades, we can do it with the inflammatory dialogue of the environment and electricity generation debate. The so called choice between the economy and the environment is a false choice. The environment is the economy (and I am tempted to violate my own beliefs and add “stupid”, but I won’t).
We must develop a generative dialogue to realize that we all agree that the earth is our only home. We must make collective decisions about how and what we spew. We should decide together when, where and why we degrade. We must face and answer the question about what we do about waste. In the long run we must reduce even the distant potential to harm our health and the health of our children through toxins, climate change and reduced air quality. Our very lives depend on it. It will not serve the future well to stay in divisive arguments. We must come together and agree on mutually understood facts. We must take decisive steps to make this world the kind of earth on which we can all live healthy and productive lives for all eternity. We cannot keep borrowing the future from our children and hope new technology bails us out. We cannot keep ignoring the elephant in the living room without catastrophic impacts to our homes. We cannot keep calling each other names and expect to ever have the kind of world that we know in our hearts is possible.
Please, let’s all do something today to take action on those two things that we can do. Stop wasting energy and stop wasting words. We could call it Vision Power Generation. Make it all count.
Next time in the interests of fair play, I‘ll explain why environmentalists think Utility Executives are a pain in the ass.
©Mark Richard Daily, 2008
Tuesday, February 12, 2008
Why Utility Executives Hate Renewable Energy Portfolio Standards
Did you ever wonder why Renewable Energy provides less than ten percent of this nation’s electric energy? What the heck is an RPS and why should you take action to support them? And, finally if RPS’s are such a good idea, why do many utility executives hate them?
Defining Renewable Portfolio Standards
Renewable Portfolio Standards are not exactly on everyone’s mind these days. A Google search of RPS is just as likely to turn up sites about Rock – Paper – Scissors. Some insist that RPS is a game, but for states moving ahead with renewable energy industries, Renewable Portfolio Standards, sometimes called Renewable Electricity Standards, can be just the extra push that renewables need to become a big player in the electric energy generation game.
“A renewable portfolio standard is a state policy that requires electricity providers to obtain a minimum percentage of their power from renewable energy resources by a certain date. Currently there are 24 states plus the District of Columbia that have RPS policies in place. Together these states account for more than half of the electricity sales in the United States.
Four other states, Illinois, Missouri, Virginia, and Vermont, have nonbinding goals for adoption of renewable energy instead of an RPS.
Three states, Missouri, Virginia, and Vermont, have set voluntary goals for adopting renewable energy instead of portfolio standards with binding targets.”
Source: Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, U.S. Department of Energy
Today renewable energy makes up less than 10% of the generation mix anywhere in the nation. And, 8% of that is from conventional large hydroelectric dam facilities. Wind generation even with its recent strong growth amounts to less than 1% of the generation mix and solar comes in at 0.04% of the generation resource in 2005.
Non-renewable resources mostly fossil fuel related, still account for 89.9% of the electricity generated in the USA.
Utility Executives Hate Renewable Portfolio Standards
So, why do some utility executives appose Renewable Portfolio Standards? It’s simple. No one likes it when someone else tells them what to do, especially when that someone else is outside the industry and expertise of that industry. Utility executives feel that the public is ill-informed about the true costs of electric energy generation. Utility executives with electrical engineering background especially feel that the public has arrived at their “pro-renewable” stance based on incomplete or faulty information. “If you knew what I know….,” you can hear them saying.
Frankly, I think that these executives are right. You don’t have to review too many of my previous blogs to find examples of misguided renewable cheerleaders getting carried away with a few acts or ignoring the facts all together. One mission of this blog is to correct that lack of information. The Union of Concerned Scientists must feel the same way because their FAQ does a pretty nice job of answering those happy hour questions about renewable energy.
Despite gains made in renewable energy production and in spite of the fact that the “fuel” for wind and solar energy is free, the fact still remains that all renewable energy resources cost more to get into the grid than non-renewable energy.
The Bottom Line for Renewable Energy
So, here is the real reason utility executives hate RPS. It raises rates and these guys have never ever gotten one phone call from any of their consumers yelling at them for having rates that were too low. Oh no my friends. I know from personal experience being the main person fielding angry customer complaints that I never, ever in fifteen years of dealing with angry customers – had a customer angry with me because rates were too low; quite the opposite in fact. And, since utility executives are trying to deliver electricity at the best rates possible, no one wants to be forced into RPS regulations mandating higher rates. Or, worse yet mandating rate freezes while requiring RPS targets, similar to what the retail deregulation experience did in many states.
A recent study by American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy of the financial impacts of RPS adoption shows that over all energy costs would go down but the cost savings do not happen right away and this study shows that electricity rates by themselves go up as a result of RPS implementation.
Renewable Energy Management
Renewable Energy tends to be a small scale disbursed generation resource. This requires more coordination for dispatching electricity to the load or demand centers that need the juice. Having a host of renewable energy resource generators to coordinate instead of one huge coal fired power plant gives utility executives nightmares. While there can be positive aspects to a more widely distributed generation resource, there is also the real possibility that making the system more complicated will lead to more system failures, brown-outs and black outs from mistakes made in the dispatch process.
What Can You Do to help Push Renewable Energy Electricity Generation and RPS forward?
So, how do we get around this opposition and get state legislators to adopt renewable portfolio standards?
There are three things that you must do to save the world.
First, know what you are talking about. Get the facts. Find out what alternate energy can really do. Parroting phrases like, “the State of Nevada has enough solar energy to power the entire US economy” is counter-productive. This may be a true statement, but unless you support extensive transmission line construction, no one cares what happens in Nevada.
Second, become a vocal, but polite voice advocating renewable energy development through the adoption of Renewable Energy or Renewable Electricity Portfolio Standards. Write to state and national elected officials and your utility executives and tell them that you support higher rates as long as those increases go toward the addition of renewable energy resources in their generation portfolios.
Finally the absolute most important thing that you can do to help renewable energy become a bigger percentage of the electricity generation mix is stop using electricity stupidly. This is more than just turning the lights off. Residential lighting in the US accounts for only about five percent of the entire electric energy demand. So even if you use headlamps all the time you haven’t done much to reduce energy use. Energy conservation means doing the same work smarter, by buying the most energy efficient appliances; hunting down and eliminating phantom electric loads in your house; making sure your home has the best insulation levels and high quality windows possible. Utility executives are not generating electricity because it’s a lot of fun. They are generating electricity because you are asking for it. Read some previous postings to find out more about energy conservation.
My next Blog will explain why utility executives think environmentalists are a pain in the ass.
©Mark Richard Daily
Defining Renewable Portfolio Standards
Renewable Portfolio Standards are not exactly on everyone’s mind these days. A Google search of RPS is just as likely to turn up sites about Rock – Paper – Scissors. Some insist that RPS is a game, but for states moving ahead with renewable energy industries, Renewable Portfolio Standards, sometimes called Renewable Electricity Standards, can be just the extra push that renewables need to become a big player in the electric energy generation game.
“A renewable portfolio standard is a state policy that requires electricity providers to obtain a minimum percentage of their power from renewable energy resources by a certain date. Currently there are 24 states plus the District of Columbia that have RPS policies in place. Together these states account for more than half of the electricity sales in the United States.
Four other states, Illinois, Missouri, Virginia, and Vermont, have nonbinding goals for adoption of renewable energy instead of an RPS.
Three states, Missouri, Virginia, and Vermont, have set voluntary goals for adopting renewable energy instead of portfolio standards with binding targets.”
Source: Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, U.S. Department of Energy
Today renewable energy makes up less than 10% of the generation mix anywhere in the nation. And, 8% of that is from conventional large hydroelectric dam facilities. Wind generation even with its recent strong growth amounts to less than 1% of the generation mix and solar comes in at 0.04% of the generation resource in 2005.
Non-renewable resources mostly fossil fuel related, still account for 89.9% of the electricity generated in the USA.
Utility Executives Hate Renewable Portfolio Standards
So, why do some utility executives appose Renewable Portfolio Standards? It’s simple. No one likes it when someone else tells them what to do, especially when that someone else is outside the industry and expertise of that industry. Utility executives feel that the public is ill-informed about the true costs of electric energy generation. Utility executives with electrical engineering background especially feel that the public has arrived at their “pro-renewable” stance based on incomplete or faulty information. “If you knew what I know….,” you can hear them saying.
Frankly, I think that these executives are right. You don’t have to review too many of my previous blogs to find examples of misguided renewable cheerleaders getting carried away with a few acts or ignoring the facts all together. One mission of this blog is to correct that lack of information. The Union of Concerned Scientists must feel the same way because their FAQ does a pretty nice job of answering those happy hour questions about renewable energy.
Despite gains made in renewable energy production and in spite of the fact that the “fuel” for wind and solar energy is free, the fact still remains that all renewable energy resources cost more to get into the grid than non-renewable energy.
The Bottom Line for Renewable Energy
So, here is the real reason utility executives hate RPS. It raises rates and these guys have never ever gotten one phone call from any of their consumers yelling at them for having rates that were too low. Oh no my friends. I know from personal experience being the main person fielding angry customer complaints that I never, ever in fifteen years of dealing with angry customers – had a customer angry with me because rates were too low; quite the opposite in fact. And, since utility executives are trying to deliver electricity at the best rates possible, no one wants to be forced into RPS regulations mandating higher rates. Or, worse yet mandating rate freezes while requiring RPS targets, similar to what the retail deregulation experience did in many states.
A recent study by American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy of the financial impacts of RPS adoption shows that over all energy costs would go down but the cost savings do not happen right away and this study shows that electricity rates by themselves go up as a result of RPS implementation.
Renewable Energy Management
Renewable Energy tends to be a small scale disbursed generation resource. This requires more coordination for dispatching electricity to the load or demand centers that need the juice. Having a host of renewable energy resource generators to coordinate instead of one huge coal fired power plant gives utility executives nightmares. While there can be positive aspects to a more widely distributed generation resource, there is also the real possibility that making the system more complicated will lead to more system failures, brown-outs and black outs from mistakes made in the dispatch process.
What Can You Do to help Push Renewable Energy Electricity Generation and RPS forward?
So, how do we get around this opposition and get state legislators to adopt renewable portfolio standards?
There are three things that you must do to save the world.
First, know what you are talking about. Get the facts. Find out what alternate energy can really do. Parroting phrases like, “the State of Nevada has enough solar energy to power the entire US economy” is counter-productive. This may be a true statement, but unless you support extensive transmission line construction, no one cares what happens in Nevada.
Second, become a vocal, but polite voice advocating renewable energy development through the adoption of Renewable Energy or Renewable Electricity Portfolio Standards. Write to state and national elected officials and your utility executives and tell them that you support higher rates as long as those increases go toward the addition of renewable energy resources in their generation portfolios.
Finally the absolute most important thing that you can do to help renewable energy become a bigger percentage of the electricity generation mix is stop using electricity stupidly. This is more than just turning the lights off. Residential lighting in the US accounts for only about five percent of the entire electric energy demand. So even if you use headlamps all the time you haven’t done much to reduce energy use. Energy conservation means doing the same work smarter, by buying the most energy efficient appliances; hunting down and eliminating phantom electric loads in your house; making sure your home has the best insulation levels and high quality windows possible. Utility executives are not generating electricity because it’s a lot of fun. They are generating electricity because you are asking for it. Read some previous postings to find out more about energy conservation.
My next Blog will explain why utility executives think environmentalists are a pain in the ass.
©Mark Richard Daily
Thursday, January 31, 2008
Why Electric Utility Executives Hate Net-Metering
Net- Metering is a specific utility term used to describe the way utilities may allow small home generators to feed electricity back onto their electric distribution wire grids.
The DSIRE database, (Data base of State Incentives for Renewable & Efficiency) lists each state’s renewable programs. They define net- metering like this:
“Net Metering Rules For those consumers who have their own electricity generating units, net metering allows for the flow of electricity both to and from the customer through a single, bi-directional meter. With net metering, during times when the customer's generation exceeds his or her use, electricity from the customer to the utility offsets electricity consumed at another time. In effect, the customer is using the excess generation to offset electricity that would have been purchased at the retail rate. Under most state rules, residential, commercial, and industrial customers are eligible for net metering, but some states restrict eligibility to particular customer classes.”
This is a widely accepted definition but gets confused by some utility programs that don’t really offer net-metering. Instead they offer wholesale or avoided cost metering. This often requires two meters installed at the customer’s expense. One meter records the kWh flowing into their house from the utility grid and the other meter records the flow of electricity from the home’s power generation sources like a PV array or small wind turbine. The market drives the cost of electricity just like it does other commodities and the price we all pay on our electric bill reflects market value as well as actual costs for delivery. In the case of small alternate energy generators, utilities typically pay a wholesale rate for any energy that they buy directly.
One myth that is often used to oppose net-metering is the myth that meters go forward more accurately than they go backwards. Eletromechanical meters have no physical reason to run any differently more or less accurately no matter which way the current is going. Yet, this is the reason that many utilities require two meters. Two meters doubles your minimum monthly service charge and throws an un-necessary obstacle into the net-metering road.
Utilities that offer true net-metering, allow one meter that goes both directions. With this arrangement, consumer’s gain by having any energy that they generate going back to cancel the incoming kWh hours.
Once the meter hits zero on the register the price changes. Now you are making a net contribution to the grid instead of just canceling out your utility company generated power. So, the price you make on each kWh goes down to the wholesale rate which is typically 40 to 60 percent less than the retail rate. So, if you are going to run payback numbers for your project, you need to find out the average retail rate per kWh when you calculate the financial benefits of installing your own net-metering equipment.
Safety has always been very important to electric utilities and rightfully so. You can’t make any mistakes handling 14,000 volts of electricity without serious – usually fatal consequences. So, may utilities require a long list of lock out safety requirements and a hefty insurance liability policy from homeowners interested in installing net metering equipment.
Some utilities require a physical lock out device accessible to utility personnel; all day every day so that they can isolate your system from the grid while they are working on distribution circuits effected by your system.
I heard a good talk several years ago by a knowledgeable engineer about the potential danger from net-metering facilities. He seemed to think that the likely hood of a 12 or 24 volt 1.5 to 3.0KW net-metering system back feeding enough voltage to injury a line worker was a remote possibility and said it really was not scientifically supportable. Yet many utilities still persist in adding this substantial obstacle to net- metering installations from home owners.
Today, there are several alternate energy system inverters that take care of most of the legitimate interconnection and safety issues raised by utility regulations.
The main problem with net metering relates to the way you get billed for electricity. In most locations there are two parts to your bill. One part is a kWh charge that is supposed to cover all of the costs of getting each kWh to your house from the generation facility. The other part of your bill has a fixed minimum monthly charge or availability of service fee that is supposed to cover those expenses that a distribution utility incurs whether you use any electricity or not. If you leave town and throw your main breaker to the off position, you will not use any kWh. But, your meter is still sitting there ready for action and the wires coming to your house are still in the air or under the ground waiting for something to do and the utility company still needs to send a meter reader or use software to read your meter remotely just in case you use some juice that month. These fixed costs, like property taxes, accounting expenses and administrative expenses continue whether you use electricity or not. Also these expenses are often so high that utilities bundle a portion of the fixed expense into your kWh charge. So, if you are a net-metering customer whose meter hits zero or generates a lot of your own power that displaces the utility grid power , you are cutting into their revenue, without making a meaningful contribution to cutting the costs for buying power during the night and on cloudy days.
What may change utility attitudes toward net-metering is the growing need for additional generation resources and the clamor over fossil fuel generation. Utility executives maybe looking for net-metering resources to fill in peak daytime loads when the sun is shining, thus taking some of the pressure off financing new fossil fuel resources.
Do you have a question about how your electricity gets to your house? Ask me. I'll try to find out? GOt any other questions about electric energy generation? Ask me. I'll get some answers.
The DSIRE database, (Data base of State Incentives for Renewable & Efficiency) lists each state’s renewable programs. They define net- metering like this:
“Net Metering Rules For those consumers who have their own electricity generating units, net metering allows for the flow of electricity both to and from the customer through a single, bi-directional meter. With net metering, during times when the customer's generation exceeds his or her use, electricity from the customer to the utility offsets electricity consumed at another time. In effect, the customer is using the excess generation to offset electricity that would have been purchased at the retail rate. Under most state rules, residential, commercial, and industrial customers are eligible for net metering, but some states restrict eligibility to particular customer classes.”
This is a widely accepted definition but gets confused by some utility programs that don’t really offer net-metering. Instead they offer wholesale or avoided cost metering. This often requires two meters installed at the customer’s expense. One meter records the kWh flowing into their house from the utility grid and the other meter records the flow of electricity from the home’s power generation sources like a PV array or small wind turbine. The market drives the cost of electricity just like it does other commodities and the price we all pay on our electric bill reflects market value as well as actual costs for delivery. In the case of small alternate energy generators, utilities typically pay a wholesale rate for any energy that they buy directly.
One myth that is often used to oppose net-metering is the myth that meters go forward more accurately than they go backwards. Eletromechanical meters have no physical reason to run any differently more or less accurately no matter which way the current is going. Yet, this is the reason that many utilities require two meters. Two meters doubles your minimum monthly service charge and throws an un-necessary obstacle into the net-metering road.
Utilities that offer true net-metering, allow one meter that goes both directions. With this arrangement, consumer’s gain by having any energy that they generate going back to cancel the incoming kWh hours.
Once the meter hits zero on the register the price changes. Now you are making a net contribution to the grid instead of just canceling out your utility company generated power. So, the price you make on each kWh goes down to the wholesale rate which is typically 40 to 60 percent less than the retail rate. So, if you are going to run payback numbers for your project, you need to find out the average retail rate per kWh when you calculate the financial benefits of installing your own net-metering equipment.
Safety has always been very important to electric utilities and rightfully so. You can’t make any mistakes handling 14,000 volts of electricity without serious – usually fatal consequences. So, may utilities require a long list of lock out safety requirements and a hefty insurance liability policy from homeowners interested in installing net metering equipment.
Some utilities require a physical lock out device accessible to utility personnel; all day every day so that they can isolate your system from the grid while they are working on distribution circuits effected by your system.
I heard a good talk several years ago by a knowledgeable engineer about the potential danger from net-metering facilities. He seemed to think that the likely hood of a 12 or 24 volt 1.5 to 3.0KW net-metering system back feeding enough voltage to injury a line worker was a remote possibility and said it really was not scientifically supportable. Yet many utilities still persist in adding this substantial obstacle to net- metering installations from home owners.
Today, there are several alternate energy system inverters that take care of most of the legitimate interconnection and safety issues raised by utility regulations.
The main problem with net metering relates to the way you get billed for electricity. In most locations there are two parts to your bill. One part is a kWh charge that is supposed to cover all of the costs of getting each kWh to your house from the generation facility. The other part of your bill has a fixed minimum monthly charge or availability of service fee that is supposed to cover those expenses that a distribution utility incurs whether you use any electricity or not. If you leave town and throw your main breaker to the off position, you will not use any kWh. But, your meter is still sitting there ready for action and the wires coming to your house are still in the air or under the ground waiting for something to do and the utility company still needs to send a meter reader or use software to read your meter remotely just in case you use some juice that month. These fixed costs, like property taxes, accounting expenses and administrative expenses continue whether you use electricity or not. Also these expenses are often so high that utilities bundle a portion of the fixed expense into your kWh charge. So, if you are a net-metering customer whose meter hits zero or generates a lot of your own power that displaces the utility grid power , you are cutting into their revenue, without making a meaningful contribution to cutting the costs for buying power during the night and on cloudy days.
What may change utility attitudes toward net-metering is the growing need for additional generation resources and the clamor over fossil fuel generation. Utility executives maybe looking for net-metering resources to fill in peak daytime loads when the sun is shining, thus taking some of the pressure off financing new fossil fuel resources.
Do you have a question about how your electricity gets to your house? Ask me. I'll try to find out? GOt any other questions about electric energy generation? Ask me. I'll get some answers.
Wednesday, January 23, 2008
Alternate Electric Generation Systems need Facts
It happened again Saturday. I was in a room of about thirty people eager to hear about the Sierra Club’s Cool Cities program. These thirty people appeared to be well educated. We were all certainly well feed because the meeting was at an Irish Pub. I thought about speaking up. Maybe it was the pint of Guinness. Maybe it was the weekend. At any rate, I bit my tongue and sat on my hands to avoid climbing on my soap box and alienating the few remaining friends I have.
Well meaning speakers got on the subject of net metering, wind power and hydro-electric energy generation. They were making the kind of statements that make uneducated crowds cheer and utility executives barf.
Here are some of the comments. “We have wind resources that should be used to replace dirty coal fired power plants”. “Solar energy systems are available that can be built into your house and power your home without the need for dirty coal fired power plants”.
Man, if it were only that simple.
Yes, there are wind resources throughout the United States that could be developed to provide power into the grid. Yes, there are integrated solar photo-voltaic systems that can be built into your house to provide clean energy. Yes, there are low head and small hydro-electric opportunities across the USA that contribute power to the nationwide electric grid. These things exist today and people are actually doing them, but there is more to the story. I believe that blindly repeating these cheer leader statements creates a climate of distrust between utilities and consumers that destroys the working relationships needed to really solve our electric energy problems.
The future of all of these technologies is exiting and optimistic. Yet, there are some very valid reasons that utilities might balk at massive expenditures to bring these technologies into the system today.
Wind Power- Wind power has seen exponential growth in construction and development, but it is still a small portion of the generating resource that keeps all of our lights on. In many areas the wind blows hard enough to get your attention but not hard enough to make a financially viable resource. The obvious limitation is that we expect electricity all the time, but the wind doesn’t blow all the time even in the Dakotas. Yes, some day there may be enough wind generation equipment well connected and spread out over a big enough area that system managers can “schedule” reliable power to load centers (like your neighborhood). Today however, utilities know that you will not wait to have electricity until the wind is blowing. This means that while wind can make a growing contribution to the grid, utilities feel that they must have base load reliable power generation that they can schedule to meet your power needs. So now, they are building and paying for wind facilities and coal fired facilities at the same time. This is part of the reason that generation utilities grimace in a crowd that’s screaming for more wind power. The other limitation to wind power is that people don’t usually like to live in a good wind resource area. While Chicago may be an exception, wind resources aren’t located near major population centers. So now we are talking major transmission facility construction and the people that are usually pro- wind, seem to be Not in My Back Yard (NIMBYS) when it comes to building transmission systems. Studying your wind resource for a full 12 months is the only way to find out what the wind power potential is for your site. You can get a rough idea about wind resources national wide from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL).
Solar Power-New developments in thin film construction for solar panels promise to make collectors that will turn 50 percent of the light that hits them into power instead of the 10 to 25 percent efficiency of panels in service today. Today you can buy solar roofing materials that do double duty. These new products have been commercially available for years and protect your roof like shingles while making electricity at the same time. Thousands of homes across the nation are using solar panels called photo-voltaic systems to power their homes. So why not just go solar now? -Two reasons. First they aren’t going to power my home unless I make major (read expensive) changes to my home’s building envelope (walls, attic insulation, windows) and appliances (refrigerator, well pump, stock tank heater, etc). Second, no one wants to be in the dark when the sun goes down, so making central station solar generation, puts us in the dark just when we get home and want the power. The exception to that is business and air conditioning loads. Here again we run into a “disconnect” between wishful thinking and reality. A simple Photo voltaic system with controls and equipment will set you back $10,000 to $20,000 for a modest system capable of generating 1.5 KW (kilo-Watts) and every five to seven years you get to replace batteries at about $4- 5 K a wack. When I go through my house and add up the load demands my appliances and equipment require, I’m in trouble and I’ll bet your home and business is in the same situation. It takes a very large and very expensive system to supply the 500 kWh per month average energy demand of homes in the USA. If you are serious about going solar you have to get a copy of the Real Goods Source book. It’s a product catalogue and a how to manual rolled into one book.
Hydroelectric power- Big dams have gotten a lot of bad press lately. Never mind that customers in big dam areas have some of the lowest power bills in the nation. Big dams create a host of other environmental problems that have their own opponents. Small hydro facilities in the 500 KW range are springing up nation-wide MARK FIND OUT FACTS. These facilities have real potential to contribute to the electric grid in regions that have the resource. So why aren’t utilities knocking down the doors to license and build these facilities? Well, there are two reasons, licensing and building. Each permit to build generation equipment requires a long drawn out battle because of all of the conflicting issues. Why go through multiple battles 500 to 1000 KW at a time when you can fight one 100 or 500 Megawatt battle and build the facility closer to the load demanding the power?
Even the smallest hydroelectric system can use more water and more water fall than you think. If you think you have a small hydroelectric resource you must do the research and study of your water resource to find out the potential to make electricity. The Real goods catalogue can help, but other hydroelectric education resources are available.
So, there you have it. I know it’s confusing. I know that in one sentence I sound like a democrat and the next sounds more republican. I had one women read my stuff and get real confused about which side I was on, and that is the problem today. It seems we have to pick sides and one side is for dirty coal and the other side is for clean renewable energy. The truth is both sides want electricity 24 hours a day 7 days a week. Utilities are mandated by law to do two things. First they have to supply the amount of power you want when you want it. Second, they have to do it at the least possible expense. If that wasn’t hard enough, they have to get permits and design approval ten years before you want the power. No wonder some of those executives are cranky.
My next blog will explain why most utility executives hate net-metering.
Well meaning speakers got on the subject of net metering, wind power and hydro-electric energy generation. They were making the kind of statements that make uneducated crowds cheer and utility executives barf.
Here are some of the comments. “We have wind resources that should be used to replace dirty coal fired power plants”. “Solar energy systems are available that can be built into your house and power your home without the need for dirty coal fired power plants”.
Man, if it were only that simple.
Yes, there are wind resources throughout the United States that could be developed to provide power into the grid. Yes, there are integrated solar photo-voltaic systems that can be built into your house to provide clean energy. Yes, there are low head and small hydro-electric opportunities across the USA that contribute power to the nationwide electric grid. These things exist today and people are actually doing them, but there is more to the story. I believe that blindly repeating these cheer leader statements creates a climate of distrust between utilities and consumers that destroys the working relationships needed to really solve our electric energy problems.
The future of all of these technologies is exiting and optimistic. Yet, there are some very valid reasons that utilities might balk at massive expenditures to bring these technologies into the system today.
Wind Power- Wind power has seen exponential growth in construction and development, but it is still a small portion of the generating resource that keeps all of our lights on. In many areas the wind blows hard enough to get your attention but not hard enough to make a financially viable resource. The obvious limitation is that we expect electricity all the time, but the wind doesn’t blow all the time even in the Dakotas. Yes, some day there may be enough wind generation equipment well connected and spread out over a big enough area that system managers can “schedule” reliable power to load centers (like your neighborhood). Today however, utilities know that you will not wait to have electricity until the wind is blowing. This means that while wind can make a growing contribution to the grid, utilities feel that they must have base load reliable power generation that they can schedule to meet your power needs. So now, they are building and paying for wind facilities and coal fired facilities at the same time. This is part of the reason that generation utilities grimace in a crowd that’s screaming for more wind power. The other limitation to wind power is that people don’t usually like to live in a good wind resource area. While Chicago may be an exception, wind resources aren’t located near major population centers. So now we are talking major transmission facility construction and the people that are usually pro- wind, seem to be Not in My Back Yard (NIMBYS) when it comes to building transmission systems. Studying your wind resource for a full 12 months is the only way to find out what the wind power potential is for your site. You can get a rough idea about wind resources national wide from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL).
Solar Power-New developments in thin film construction for solar panels promise to make collectors that will turn 50 percent of the light that hits them into power instead of the 10 to 25 percent efficiency of panels in service today. Today you can buy solar roofing materials that do double duty. These new products have been commercially available for years and protect your roof like shingles while making electricity at the same time. Thousands of homes across the nation are using solar panels called photo-voltaic systems to power their homes. So why not just go solar now? -Two reasons. First they aren’t going to power my home unless I make major (read expensive) changes to my home’s building envelope (walls, attic insulation, windows) and appliances (refrigerator, well pump, stock tank heater, etc). Second, no one wants to be in the dark when the sun goes down, so making central station solar generation, puts us in the dark just when we get home and want the power. The exception to that is business and air conditioning loads. Here again we run into a “disconnect” between wishful thinking and reality. A simple Photo voltaic system with controls and equipment will set you back $10,000 to $20,000 for a modest system capable of generating 1.5 KW (kilo-Watts) and every five to seven years you get to replace batteries at about $4- 5 K a wack. When I go through my house and add up the load demands my appliances and equipment require, I’m in trouble and I’ll bet your home and business is in the same situation. It takes a very large and very expensive system to supply the 500 kWh per month average energy demand of homes in the USA. If you are serious about going solar you have to get a copy of the Real Goods Source book. It’s a product catalogue and a how to manual rolled into one book.
Hydroelectric power- Big dams have gotten a lot of bad press lately. Never mind that customers in big dam areas have some of the lowest power bills in the nation. Big dams create a host of other environmental problems that have their own opponents. Small hydro facilities in the 500 KW range are springing up nation-wide MARK FIND OUT FACTS. These facilities have real potential to contribute to the electric grid in regions that have the resource. So why aren’t utilities knocking down the doors to license and build these facilities? Well, there are two reasons, licensing and building. Each permit to build generation equipment requires a long drawn out battle because of all of the conflicting issues. Why go through multiple battles 500 to 1000 KW at a time when you can fight one 100 or 500 Megawatt battle and build the facility closer to the load demanding the power?
Even the smallest hydroelectric system can use more water and more water fall than you think. If you think you have a small hydroelectric resource you must do the research and study of your water resource to find out the potential to make electricity. The Real goods catalogue can help, but other hydroelectric education resources are available.
So, there you have it. I know it’s confusing. I know that in one sentence I sound like a democrat and the next sounds more republican. I had one women read my stuff and get real confused about which side I was on, and that is the problem today. It seems we have to pick sides and one side is for dirty coal and the other side is for clean renewable energy. The truth is both sides want electricity 24 hours a day 7 days a week. Utilities are mandated by law to do two things. First they have to supply the amount of power you want when you want it. Second, they have to do it at the least possible expense. If that wasn’t hard enough, they have to get permits and design approval ten years before you want the power. No wonder some of those executives are cranky.
My next blog will explain why most utility executives hate net-metering.
Tuesday, January 15, 2008
The Death of the Electric Utility Industry- Part Two
So, here is the scenario for the demise of central station electricity power grids. Many of the key elements are already visible. First you have climbing electric rates. Today, no one is predicting a decrease in electric rates. In fact no one is predicting stabilization of electric rates in the near future.
Next as central station power production rates climb, costs for alternative power systems keep going down. Innovations in wind turbine design, solar photo-voltaic output and other alternate electricity systems continue to drive down the costs of delivering power to your house from these choices. And, the majority of these systems are designed to work right at your house. No more buried cable or over head power lines for residential development. Bye Bye wires companies. No more distribution meters on homes for local distribution companies, adios distribution companies.
Of course this isn’t going to happen tomorrow, but the trends are there. Today the driving expense for wholesale power costs are power plants and transmission grids. These two features of the electric utility industry are also the most damaging to the environment. Witness the reduction in the number of proposed coal fired power plants as investors and consumer re-evaluate their roles in a climate change environment. Take away the residential load and what happens? Poof, now all that’s left is business and industrial loads.
Here too the trend is moving to disbursed generation facilities. Part of this movement is to improve reliability and part is a direct response to increasing rates and the lack of control that businesses feel over electric utility rate increases. The Y2K scare drove many industries to set up back up power systems that were under their control, just in case. So, many facilities have already done some of the planning to be grid free.
What can you do about all of this. Get informed. Find out how solar and wind might work at your house. Use existing tools to calculate what it would take for you to get off the grid. Even if you choose not to make the plunge, like me, you will at least understand your energy appetite and be able to have some control over your own climate change emissions. Here are some sites to get you started with your quest.
For innovations in wind energy see- http://www.getsmartenergy.com/
For help sizing your photovoltaic system see- http://www.realgoodssolar.com/
For help reducing your home energy use see- http://www.epa.gov/cleanenergy/energy-and-you/reduce.html
I like electric utilities, really I do. I’m not ready to do this stuff by myself. I want a team of lineman ready to help get the lights back on after a storm. I want an office of skilled engineers designing a safe and reliable system to keep my home running. What I don’t want is an industry wide arrogance about individual energy choices that assumes central station power generation is the only economical way to go. That may be true today, but tomorrow will be here sooner than many utility executives can imagine.
Next as central station power production rates climb, costs for alternative power systems keep going down. Innovations in wind turbine design, solar photo-voltaic output and other alternate electricity systems continue to drive down the costs of delivering power to your house from these choices. And, the majority of these systems are designed to work right at your house. No more buried cable or over head power lines for residential development. Bye Bye wires companies. No more distribution meters on homes for local distribution companies, adios distribution companies.
Of course this isn’t going to happen tomorrow, but the trends are there. Today the driving expense for wholesale power costs are power plants and transmission grids. These two features of the electric utility industry are also the most damaging to the environment. Witness the reduction in the number of proposed coal fired power plants as investors and consumer re-evaluate their roles in a climate change environment. Take away the residential load and what happens? Poof, now all that’s left is business and industrial loads.
Here too the trend is moving to disbursed generation facilities. Part of this movement is to improve reliability and part is a direct response to increasing rates and the lack of control that businesses feel over electric utility rate increases. The Y2K scare drove many industries to set up back up power systems that were under their control, just in case. So, many facilities have already done some of the planning to be grid free.
What can you do about all of this. Get informed. Find out how solar and wind might work at your house. Use existing tools to calculate what it would take for you to get off the grid. Even if you choose not to make the plunge, like me, you will at least understand your energy appetite and be able to have some control over your own climate change emissions. Here are some sites to get you started with your quest.
For innovations in wind energy see- http://www.getsmartenergy.com/
For help sizing your photovoltaic system see- http://www.realgoodssolar.com/
For help reducing your home energy use see- http://www.epa.gov/cleanenergy/energy-and-you/reduce.html
I like electric utilities, really I do. I’m not ready to do this stuff by myself. I want a team of lineman ready to help get the lights back on after a storm. I want an office of skilled engineers designing a safe and reliable system to keep my home running. What I don’t want is an industry wide arrogance about individual energy choices that assumes central station power generation is the only economical way to go. That may be true today, but tomorrow will be here sooner than many utility executives can imagine.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
