Slashdot Mirror


Smart Power Grid Could Wreak Havoc On Itself

MrSeb writes "Smart power grid monitoring that lets you pick the exact cheapest time to run the dishwasher or recharge your electric car may put too much power (so to speak) in the hands of the consumer, according to a new study by MIT. Researchers say that users receiving minute-by-minute pricing information might cycle off-peak power use more rapidly than utilities can spool up their power plants. In other words, it's OK if you're the only person charging your Chevy Volt at 2am in the morning, but if a whole town does it exactly the same time... there will be issues."

331 comments

  1. Smart Meters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  2. if everyone is using off peak hours by Osgeld · · Score: 5, Insightful

    they will quickly become peak hours, I have the upmost faith in our utilities to gouge us for whatever they can

    1. Re:if everyone is using off peak hours by Abstrackt · · Score: 1

      ... I have the upmost faith in our utilities to gouge us for whatever they can

      That reminds me of a joke about solar power. It will be widely available as soon as power companies figure out how to run a sunbeam through a meter.

      --
      They say a little knowledge is a dangerous thing, but it's not one half so bad as a lot of ignorance. - Terry Pratchett
    2. Re:if everyone is using off peak hours by Stellian · · Score: 2

      That sounds like a grid that is not smart enough; if everybody charges his Chevy at 2AM, then 2AM will be the new peak hour and it will cost an arm and a leg to charge at that time. If the price information is delayed versus the instantaneous power consumption, then yes, a spike should be expected when the the price drops, but this could be countered by distributing the price information with random delays and only in some areas.

    3. Re:if everyone is using off peak hours by CannonballHead · · Score: 1

      I don't think it necessarily works that way in this case. How many businesses do you know that can just stop using power during peak hours? Office building ACs, for example, during the middle of the day?

      Sure, for actual flexible usage - like people at home doing laundry - you may have a point. But I always thought that the point was to shift home usage from business hours to closer to non-business hours, and especially non-AC hours during the summer.

      Not that "our utilities" aren't trying to make money... of course they are, they are for-profit. However, it seems it may be in their interest to try to shift usage to make it more even throughout the day.

    4. Re:if everyone is using off peak hours by Osgeld · · Score: 2, Interesting

      well I can assure you most places do not shut off their AC when they leave, do you know how much time it takes to get the office back down to 60? (no seriously thats a fad here AC must be 60 so you get a chest cold when you walk in from 103 degree temps, cause little Susie secretary has not spent a day outside since school)

    5. Re:if everyone is using off peak hours by b0r1s · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You're exactly right ... the power used by businesses far exceeds the amount used by even busy households. Corporate ACs in 20 story buildings use far more electricity than people running appliances at night in their homes. Peak will remain peak, and even in the worst case, 'smart' enough grids should be able to distribute the load across the 'down' cycle, instead of everything running at 2am on the dot.

      --
      Mooniacs for iOS and Android
    6. Re:if everyone is using off peak hours by DarkOx · · Score: 2

      That really depends I would expect lots business DO have some ability to control or at least scale their usage.

      They could say cool the building down to a cooler than normal, but still liveable temperature while power is cheap so they won't need to run cooling as soon or as long during peak later for example. Say crank the place down to 67F between 7 and 8a and then let the place creep up to 74 before you start the AC again during office hours.

      If the cost per kwh is much lower at night, perhaps you do more production on your third shift and your first and second shifts are lighter, for examples.

      --
      Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
    7. Re:if everyone is using off peak hours by iluvcapra · · Score: 2

      Most uses of power during different times of day is obligatory -- you can't schedule all your air conditioning at night, and you can't schedule your lighting for the day.

      In principle, everyone can charge their Volt at 2AM as long as the power company knows ahead of time its going to happen -- the problem TFA posits is that people would be sufficently unpredictable about when they would use their power, or would allocate their power usage in a perfectly rational way in order to minimize their cost per unit, causing power consumption to become unpredictable, neither of which is likely to happen in aggregate.

      The way the power company is liable to solve this problem, which will totally work but people don't like, is they'll give you a schedule and tell you to only run your clothes washer at certain hours, or your car charger at certain hours, and the Smart Grid(tm) will give your power company the liberty to switch off your high-demand appliances at times they don't have the supply.

      That's what a Smart Grid does -- people think it will let them pay spot prices for electricity, no no no, it's about the power company collecting Google-style metrics of power consumption on an appliance-by-appliance, outlet-by-outlet basis, and then giving you 10% off your bill if you consent to having a remote power cutoff installed on your washing machine, air conditioner, and car charger.

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
    8. Re:if everyone is using off peak hours by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The smartest comment in all of slashdotington.

    9. Re:if everyone is using off peak hours by davester666 · · Score: 1

      Don't forget everybody plugging in their cars once they get to work, so they can drive to lunch, then charge again to be able to drive home.

      --
      Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
    10. Re:if everyone is using off peak hours by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      The effect of that would be the same as not having smart grids at all.

    11. Re:if everyone is using off peak hours by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Actually, just to set the record straight, the Utilities are regulated by your local Public Service Commission, so profits are limited and controlled.

    12. Re:if everyone is using off peak hours by operagost · · Score: 2

      Susie Secretary likes to set the thermostat to 60, then turn on the 1850W space heater under her desk and flip the breaker.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    13. Re:if everyone is using off peak hours by foobsr · · Score: 1

      people think it will let them pay spot prices for electricity, no no no, ...

      Hard to believe that people can be so naive if confronted with a P_O_W_E_R_ _C_O_M_P_A_N_Y.

      CC.

      --
      TaijiQuan (Huang, 5 loosenings)
    14. Re:if everyone is using off peak hours by jank1887 · · Score: 1

      True, but the systems themselves will (should) run less at night. As the outdoor temperature drops, so does the rate at which the building warms up. Plus you won't have the personnel thermal load, the lighting thermal load, maybe computer equipment thermal load if IT lets them shut down at night, etc.

    15. Re:if everyone is using off peak hours by Osgeld · · Score: 1

      while wearing a sweater (a light sweater but none the less) in fucking August

    16. Re:if everyone is using off peak hours by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's sort of what we do, except we have to pre-cool and run the AC during the morning/afternoon to prevent the office from going above 80.

    17. Re:if everyone is using off peak hours by h4rr4r · · Score: 1

      No it would not be. The time an appliance started using power would just be staggered. Which is the ideal.

    18. Re:if everyone is using off peak hours by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If Susie the "sexytary" wears a light sweater to make up for the heat loss due to her miniskirt, I wouldn't complain ;).

    19. Re:if everyone is using off peak hours by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Me thinks you don't understand what peak hours means in terms of energy usage...

    20. Re:if everyone is using off peak hours by GooberToo · · Score: 2

      Not at all. The effect is distributing the load throughout the period which is traditionally considered off-peak.

    21. Re:if everyone is using off peak hours by MightyMartian · · Score: 2

      Sadly this is all made up for by the heat generated by friction from the four 10 minute before-lunch private conferences with your department manager

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    22. Re:if everyone is using off peak hours by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      Exxactly. I call this the Three Stooges effect (after their gag where they all rush to go through a door at the same time and get stuck). I'm sure you have the same issue with torrents at night in college dorms.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    23. Re:if everyone is using off peak hours by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      True. You'd have power use being very consistent throughout the day, eliminating the existence of peak and off-peak hours, and the potential savings of using off-peak hours. But it would save the power company some money and let law enforcement see exactly what you're running in your house (on the upside, at least they won't raid you for farming Bitcoins or whatever...but can you disguise grow op lights as a server? Hmm...).

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    24. Re:if everyone is using off peak hours by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      The solution is not to delay it - that leads to feedback cycles, which are even worse. It's to restrict who gets the lower price. When demand drops, you offer the low price to 100 homes. Then, if the demand stays low, you broadcast it to another 100, and so on. Alternatively, you offer it to everyone but make it only valid for the first 100 metres that request it. The utility says something like 'We have 100kW going cheap, for one hour, who wants it'. A metre then replies 'I can use 1kW for 30 minutes'. It then pays for this, whether it uses it or not, and the utility supplies it at that price, irrespective of the change in demand.

      This is not even a new problem. There were papers published in the '80s and earlier in the operating systems community for using the same techniques for provisioning on mainframes.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    25. Re:if everyone is using off peak hours by jbengt · · Score: 1

      How many businesses do you know that can just stop using power during peak hours? Office building ACs, for example, during the middle of the day?

      No business I know completely stops using power, but dozens I have dealt with, for example, shuts down equipment, including A/C, during the middle of the day, A few have even considered using emergency generators in order to take advantage of an electric company's offer of cheaper rates if they are allowed to disconnect the business from the grid whenever the electric company has too much demand.
      As early as the '80s (my knowledge only goes back that far) we were specifying cost saving control strategies including time shifting - such as making ice at night to use for cooling in the day; duty cycling.- turning off fans, A/C units, and other equipment for several minutes an hour in a rotating cycle; daylighting - turning off lights near windows whenever sunlight is sensed; and load shedding - selectively turning off the least immediately important systems, including A/C systems. This is a direct result of the energy companies' rate structures that included higher rates per kWh during the typical business hours and demand charges for the peak usage in a month that cost 10's of $'s for each kW.

    26. Re:if everyone is using off peak hours by mcrbids · · Score: 2

      That's what a Smart Grid does -- people think it will let them pay spot prices for electricity, no no no, it's about the power company collecting Google-style metrics of power consumption on an appliance-by-appliance, outlet-by-outlet basis, and then giving you 10% off your bill if you consent to having a remote power cutoff installed on your washing machine, air conditioner, and car charger.

      I'm not aware of there being a definition for what is a "smart grid". It's still evolving, and many people have different ideas about what "smart" grid should be.

      All TFA says is that it's easily possible to build a dynamic system that's unstable. Duh. In aviation, the attribute that you are looking for is called "positive dynamic stability" - which simply means that when things get interrupted or jarred, that the system actively works to mitigate the change and stabilize over time.

      This is also something I achieve with a self-healing load-balanced computing cluster. Things happen, loads spike, etc. The system should gradually self-stabilize.

      This is a problem as old as the presence dynamic systems.

      --
      I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.
    27. Re:if everyone is using off peak hours by blair1q · · Score: 1

      That is a bingo.

      Electric vehicles are shifting energy cost from the gas pump to the electrical grid, and prices will move right along with them.

      People still persist in believing that the price we pay for fuel is based on the cost of delivering it. That's never been true. There's a glut of the stuff, and prices are high enough to instigate even more glut-producing supply-chain growth. But prices don't crash. Because Adam Smith was one wrong mofo.

      The suppliers know that all they have to do is keep banking the excess profits and never war on price, because such a thing means nothing in a world where once the price war is over the customers will resume ignoring the branding and going to whichever supplier is closest.

      So the price we pay is not in any way based on supply. It's based only on demand, and demand is based entirely on aggregate utility.

      And once electricity becomes the thing we need to get us to and from our source of income, electricity's price will climb until it costs us as much to do that on electricity as it does on gasoline.

      Right now the average EV can do a 40-mile day for under a dollar, while the average ICE uses about $6 worth of go-juice. And what's ironic, there? In about half the country, the electric energy is generated from burning oil for energy. You think burning oil for electricity is 6X as efficient as burning it in your car? Nertz.

      Expect your electric bill go up 500% in the next few years. The only question is how the gasoline cartels and electricity utility monopolies will spin the PR on it.

    28. Re:if everyone is using off peak hours by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      You just need to randomize the start of off-peak hours for each person, breaking up the surge.

    29. Re:if everyone is using off peak hours by Derek+Pomery · · Score: 1

      Ah. Yeah. I signed up for that with our power company.
      When I was sold on it, I was told that the AC would be cut only for an hour or two at a time, even at the maximum "cycling" level.

      What actually happened to 100,000+ people who signed up for it was during the hottest day of the year they completely disabled the AC for 9 or 10 hours.
      They said after that was accidental, they'd only intended 6 hours but there'd been switching issues.
      Then there was another report that they'd done a 6 hour emergency shutoff and then immediately shifted into another one. Of course the lines were completely jammed.
      Upshot, house in 90s and humid. Also, was even worse since I wasn't home and the people who were weren't aware that they had decided to completely cut off AC.
      And since it wasn't synched w/ cooling system, the upstairs intakes were sucking hot air through the house.
      Normally I block the upstairs vents and close the doors so minimal hot air is pulled in through that intake, I also increase the temperature on the inside thermostat into the mid 80s, so it kicks in pretty rarely, maybe once or twice during the day and still keeps humidity level moderate.

      So the "smart" system ended up being less efficient and a whole lot more harmful. We cancelled our participation after. If the power bill depended on usage at certain times of day, I could decide for myself how much I was willing to pay. I already keep AC usage to a minimum anyway.

      --
      -- perl -e'print pack"H*","6e656d6f406d38792e6f7267"' /. ate my old sig. Bastards.
    30. Re:if everyone is using off peak hours by wagnerrp · · Score: 1

      Why would a smart grid let you see what you're running in your house? The most they should have access to are two plots, power and power factor versus time. Anything else is information that neither the utility nor the law needs to know about. There is no need to know what is running inside a home or business, or even have any control over anything running inside it. All the control you need is real time pricing pushed out to the power meter, and from there to connected smart appliances.

      Each appliance operates independently, unaware of anything else in the area. Each appliance gets a probability curve where at a certain cost, it may have different behavior. Your car is charging in the garage, and electricity cost is going up. You and your neighbor both have the same charging station running off the same probability algorithm to fit the curve based off daily average power costs. At the current price, your charger has a 50% chance of shutting off and does so. Your neighbor's has a 50% chance, and continues running. Power costs continue to rise, and the chance increases to 60%, at which point his turns off. You're going to be out of town for a week, and simply want your car to be charged when you come back. You tell the unit as such, it automatically adjusts some scaling factors, and now while your neighbor's car is 60% likely to be charging, yours is only 20%. You other neighbor tells his unit damn the cost, never turn off. His unit stays powered up, he pays the incurred cost, and other people's units power down due to increasing price to compensate. Power consuming devices are all turning off in an orderly staggered fashion, with no upstream control.

    31. Re:if everyone is using off peak hours by wagnerrp · · Score: 1

      When I first read that, I thought you said 'tight sweater', and were subtly approving the behavior.

    32. Re:if everyone is using off peak hours by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      2AM will never become peak hours. Everyone charging electric vehicles at the same time will be nowhere near the amount used at typical work spaces will air conditioning running on high and computers all on.

    33. Re:if everyone is using off peak hours by mikael · · Score: 1

      There are some businesses who gets discounts on their electricity contracts if they are able to shut or slow down during times of excessive demand. These were mainly aluminum smelter plants and construction materials manufacturers (clay bricks).

      --
      Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
    34. Re:if everyone is using off peak hours by mcgrew · · Score: 2

      Why would a smart grid let you see what you're running in your house? The most they should have access to are two plots, power and power factor versus time. Anything else is information that neither the utility nor the law needs to know about. There is no need to know what is running inside a home or business, or even have any control over anything running inside it. All the control you need is real time pricing pushed out to the power meter, and from there to connected smart appliances.


      In many US locales, if you suddenly use a lot more power they inform the cops, who then bring dope sniffing dogs to see if you're growing pot. They assume that a big jump in power consumption means high pressure sodium lamps.

    35. Re:if everyone is using off peak hours by mikael · · Score: 1

      Never mind torrents - my last university was proud that they had a 1 Gigabit link shared between 40,000 PC's and servers across several campus sites, which ended up giving everyone effectively 25K/second. Doing a remote login to my home PC and downloading the same file from the same server at the same time gave a download speed of 500K/second.

      --
      Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
    36. Re:if everyone is using off peak hours by Monchanger · · Score: 1

      Pricing is dependent on usage and sure, in the short term, the cheap way to make a "smart" grid is to share information about expected load/price so consumers can try to time their appliance to plug into the grid at the optimal time, which then, in theory, could leads exactly to the problem you stated of everyone pluging in at the same time. But that would soon be evident, and people would understand that it's a gamble determining when you should plug in (since few people are actually watching real-time information, and at best are using the previous night or some kind of historical average). Lottery players might choose to chase the 2am "jackpot", but the rest of us would know that an hour earlier or later yields better odds.

      But plugging in at 2am isn't feasible anyway, not in aggregate across the entire population - few people will set their alarm to 2am every night to save a nickel. The long-term answer to is to simply plug in your Chevy when you get home and let the grid itself determine the scheduling of appliances so that the load is evenly distributed proactively, efficiency is optimal and cost drops as low as possible throughout the night so it no longer makes a difference when your car gets charged (as long as it happens before you have to leave for work). That would actually be "smart". Unfortunately, it also requires that devices (or at least "smart" outlets) can communicate their needs (Wattage and no-later-than) and their designated timeslot with the grid and turn on&off appropriately, so that'll take some time and have to pass a cost/benefit test first.

    37. Re:if everyone is using off peak hours by mcgrew · · Score: 2

      but can you disguise grow op lights as a server?

      Some friends of mine solved that problem over ten years ago. A bank of CFLs will put off as much light as a high pressure sodium lamp at 1/5 the wattage, and without having to use the extra electricity to cool the grow room. The weed grew just as fast and was just as tasty and potent as the HPS lamps produced.

    38. Re:if everyone is using off peak hours by Monchanger · · Score: 1

      That's a little dire, don't you think? Commutes are too long and/or electric cars are useless if they require a charge to get back home, let alone to go to lunch.

      Oh, and where do you work? I'm sure a bunch of folks would love to know about this amazing employer of yours who provides charging stations for every commuter. :)

    39. Re:if everyone is using off peak hours by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      Most EV chargers, and smart battery chargers in general, do not just flip on the switch to full and then switch off when done. Instead they ramp up the currently slowly and ramp down with trickle charge near the end. Of course the 3 stooges problem will occur with electric water heaters too. But in some places _today_ there is already off peak usage pricing with smart grid technology and water heaters put on separate switchable circuits.

    40. Re:if everyone is using off peak hours by hawguy · · Score: 2

      Susie Secretary likes to set the thermostat to 60, then turn on the 1850W space heater under her desk and flip the breaker.

      In my office, Susie Secretary can't control the thermostat (only Facilities can), and since there's limited cooling zones, they have a hard time making everyone comfortable. When Joe Boss with the corner office starts getting afternoon sun through the windows, Susie Secretary outside of his office suffers because the air handlers are sending so much cooling to that zone that it's 67 degrees in her office and 73 degrees in his.

      Sure, it's possible to fix it with a system redesign and maybe some more walls to zone out the cooling better, but when finance looks at $80K to redesign the cooling system for the entire office and compares with telling Susie to wear a sweater in August, guess who wins?

    41. Re:if everyone is using off peak hours by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have a general question: Do electric companies really charge consumers different rates based on time of day?

      My bill just has the difference between last monthes reading and this monthes reading. They then multiple that by the rate to get a price. Its demonstrated as such on the bill, they're instructions for figuring out what you owe lay it out as such, the notices of the state approving raises in rates list it as such, and finally you can dispute it by saying what your outside meter actually reads (they only come out to read it every three monthes now; even when they do the electric company said if you dispute it and its within a certain gap they will just assume your right figuring eventually they'll read it again and get their money).

    42. Re:if everyone is using off peak hours by pixelpusher220 · · Score: 1

      But plugging in at 2am isn't feasible anyway, not in aggregate across the entire population - few people will set their alarm to 2am every night to save a nickel.

      They won't but the 'smart meter' will know that's when it's cheap and start charging then. Hence, everybody 'turning on' at 2am. Of course this assumes that you can charge your car enough from 2am to morning, which isn't likely for most anyway.

      --
      People in cars cause accidents....accidents in cars cause people :-D
    43. Re:if everyone is using off peak hours by CohibaVancouver · · Score: 1

      few people will set their alarm to 2am every night to save a nickel

      Sure, but that won't be required. Most electric cars like the Leaf have an option whereby you set when the charging starts - So you don't have to set your alarm. You just plug it in when you get home and the car just automatically turns on its charging circuit at 2am.

    44. Re:if everyone is using off peak hours by Vegemeister · · Score: 1

      Your friends might want to consider using standard tubular fluorescents instead. Two-tube hanging fixtures are sold at Wal-mart as 'shop lights' for less than twenty dollars. They tend to be more efficient than CFLs. Also, the bulbs are available in a variety of spectra.

    45. Re:if everyone is using off peak hours by Vegemeister · · Score: 1

      Joe Boss should put some aluminum foil on his windows. That's what I do.

    46. Re:if everyone is using off peak hours by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 0

      It's to restrict who gets the lower price. When demand drops, you offer the low price to 100 homes. Then, if the demand stays low, you broadcast it to another 100, and so on.

      So, how long do you think it'll be before, say, the local politicians are the first 100 people to get the low price?

      Or the local rich guys?

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
    47. Re:if everyone is using off peak hours by wagnerrp · · Score: 1

      That still doesn't explain why with a smart grid, anyone should have any idea of what I am running behind my meter. If I have a trickle charger that draws a modest amount of power 24 hours a day, charging a battery to allow for rapid dumps to my electric car, that would appear to have the same power consumption profile as a grow lamp. That doesn't mean i should tell police ahead of time that is what I'm doing, or have them search my premises to prove my claim. It's none of their business, and I have my right to privacy.

      Marijuana growers could burst charge a battery system, and use that to run their grow lamps throughout the day, which would have the same profile as someone charging an electric car straight off the grid. Police are simply going to have to find other evidence to get a warrant.

    48. Re:if everyone is using off peak hours by networkBoy · · Score: 1

      My employer does.
      We have:
      -one converted VW rabbit
      -one Tesla
      -one sparrow
      -one electric bike/moped frankin-thingy (not sure if it's even street legal)
      This out of a population of ~6000 employees. I inquired about what if more people start ddriving electrics, the answer from facilities was we'll add capacity.
      The current charging pedestals are the old GM EV1/EV2 units with 110/20, 110/30, 208/30 taps bolted to the sides.
      the 208/30's were added for the Tesla about 2 months ago by his request.
      -nB

      --
      whois gawk date unzip strip find touch finger mount join nice man top fsck grep eject more yes exit umount sleep dump
    49. Re:if everyone is using off peak hours by ProfessionalCookie · · Score: 1
      Pretty sure that'd be a dumb meter.

      We solved problems like this ages ago, just negotiate allocations before automatically flipping the switch. The grid should know what each meter's plan is or at least it should only inform meters of available cheap energy as it is available and then just don't broadcast to more meters.

      It's not like the grid will say "HEY CHEAP POWER!!!!1111" to every automated system all at once.

    50. Re:if everyone is using off peak hours by pixelpusher220 · · Score: 1

      Pretty sure that'd be a dumb meter.

      In an article about 'smart meters' you're 'pretty sure' it would be a dumb meter?

      just wow.

      --
      People in cars cause accidents....accidents in cars cause people :-D
    51. Re:if everyone is using off peak hours by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Which model of Susie Secretary did you get? All of ours insist on temperatures in the 80s before they stop complaining about the cold, running space heaters, and wearing sweaters.

    52. Re:if everyone is using off peak hours by Lehk228 · · Score: 1

      it will be a release feature

      --
      Snowden and Manning are heroes.
    53. Re:if everyone is using off peak hours by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      I'd imagine that the metres would measure the highest and lowest price, and the average that they're offered, and some people would be interested in correlating this. From the utility's perspective, it's best to offer the low price to people who are most likely to use it but least likely to use electricity at a higher price, so they'd probably not want to offer the low price to the rich at all - they're more likely to just run things when they want to. Politicians? Maybe. If a politician sees a constantly low electricity bill then he's less likely to vote or regulation, but there aren't enough politicians (yet) for this to distort the market unduly.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    54. Re:if everyone is using off peak hours by wagnerrp · · Score: 1

      I think you underestimate just how much oil we use daily. Even if you account for the inefficiencies of internal combustion engines, switching all road vehicles over to electric powered off the grid would nearly double our average power consumption.

    55. Re:if everyone is using off peak hours by wagnerrp · · Score: 1

      And that's the problem... why not make the smart grid simply one with real time pricing? Push the pricing data out of the individual power meters accurate to a minute, let the meters forward that onto the devices that care to know. Have each appliance determine how important it is that it receive that power now, and shut off accordingly. Not going to use your car tomorrow, set it for low priority and it's off if the cost of power comes within 20% of average. Need your car in a few hours, set it in high priority and it won't shut off until power goes 40% above average. Standard deviations might be a better scaling value than percent difference. Add in some fuzzing factor so you don't have a whole block of devices changing state at the same time.

      With enough electric cars and other devices operating at night time, power consumption becomes nearly constant. Peaking plants are exchanged for cheaper baseline plants. The real time pricing evolves into less of a means of getting cheap electricity, and more a way for the power company to provide a feedback mechanism to control power consumption. The power company doesn't need any excessively complex system to control individual appliances in each consumer's home, it just needs a feedback system to allow those appliances to regulate themselves.

      With the appliances still under customer control, and a bit of randomness thrown into the system, each individual customer's draw will be unpredictable. Combined with a thousand of their closest neighbors tied into the same power plant, the system can be modeled statistically, and a simple tuned PIV loop will alter the price as needed to keep consumption in check.

    56. Re:if everyone is using off peak hours by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So, how long do you think it'll be before, say, the local politicians are the first 100 people to get the low price? Or the local rich guys?

      Already? Last time my area had rolling blackouts, only some neighborhoods were affected, because others had "major employers". So, it was okay to let my pipes freeze as long as big business was happy.

    57. Re:if everyone is using off peak hours by wagnerrp · · Score: 1

      Residential customers are not. Industrial customers are. The combustion testing lab where I work has a blowdown wind tunnel. During periods of testing, one of the grad students gets to stay late at night to run the compressor and fill the storage tanks back up at off-peak hours.

    58. Re:if everyone is using off peak hours by mattack2 · · Score: 1

      They don't shut off AC *at all*? At least our main campus has AC buttons to hit on the weekends.

    59. Re:if everyone is using off peak hours by Eivind · · Score: 1

      It depends on the price-differential. If power is sufficiently much cheaper at night, and power-consumption is sufficiently high, it'd be profitable to, for example, run a heat-pump to freeze water in the basement at night, and use the ice for cooling intake-air during the day.

      As an added bonus, the outside-air is typically colder at night, so you get higher efficiency. (physics say that you spend more energy dumping heat to a warmer environment)

    60. Re:if everyone is using off peak hours by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      PG&E thinks a smart grid is being able to turn off your A/C, and having sensors on the lines to tell you how hot they are. Right now they don't know jack about shit in terms of what the condition of the distribution network is, so even if they could control loads, they wouldn't know what to do with them.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    61. Re:if everyone is using off peak hours by ResidentSourcerer · · Score: 1

      The article posits a system where the system tells you RIGHT NOW what the price is. So 200,000 sensors close relays and charge Chevy Volts when the price hits 5.035 c/kwh, that being the lowest announced price. This causes the the system to be unstable.

      A better way to do it is that you have to program in your price schedule ahead of time. So you do something like this:

      10 p.m. - 6 a.m. 5.035 c/kwh Turn on Chevy Outlet
      12 p.m. - 6 a.m. 5.555 c/kwh Turn on Chevy Outlet
      2 a.m. - 6 a.m 6.211 c/kwh Turn on Chevy Outlet
      4 a.m. - 6 a.m. 8 c/kwh Turn on Chevy Outlet.

      This on the basis that you needed a minimum 2 hour charge to get to an from work.

      In actual fact as electric cars join the smart grid, I would expect the difference in prices to vanish or become microscopic

      ***

      A second way to fix the problem: High demand smart outlets would ramp up slowly. Or there is a 2 minute random delay on their start up.

      ***

      Obligate power:

      Good engineering can get around some of these. Example: Refrigerator: The box gets the freezer down to -40 when power is cheap, and uses that as a could source, to keep the refrigerator cool. The refrigerator part itself is brought down to just above freezing when power is cheap, and allowed to go up to 37 F when power is expensive.

      Air conditioners instead of cooling air, chill water which is used later. (It takes about 300 gallons of water to store a day's worth of coolth. With well insulated tanks, the air conditioner could also be your hot water heater. This can be made really efficient if you have a variable volume of hot water so that the AC can work most of the time with ground temp water.

      --
      Third Career: Tree Farmer Second Career: Computer Geek First Career: Teacher, Outdoor Instructor, Photographer.
    62. Re:if everyone is using off peak hours by black+soap · · Score: 1

      And then there would be a meter-race to get your device turned on when the rate drops, before someone else fires up the competing device and drives up the demand. Rapid swings in announced price and demand, caused mostly by automated algorithms all trying to manipulate the price, would follow. In the end, middle-man traders would get all the profits, drive up the price to the actual consumers, and cause such intermittent stop-and-start current flow that the electrical generation and distribution hardware would suffer. Just like the stock market.

    63. Re:if everyone is using off peak hours by black+soap · · Score: 1

      I don't have to check my watch to tell you that time already happened.

    64. Re:if everyone is using off peak hours by colinnwn · · Score: 1

      Most uses of power during different times of day is obligatory -- you can't schedule all your air conditioning at night, and you can't schedule your lighting for the day.

      This isn't a given. There are devices on the market that allow your A/C to run overnight and freeze an insulated container of ice, and then use that ice to cool the house during the day. Nissan and other companies are working on allowing electric cars plugged in for charging to pass power back to the grid. So theoretically on a smart grid, your Nissan Leaf could charge overnight at the house, you could drive to work and plug it in, during the morning it would continue to trickle charge before the afternoon power spike, then when power is in demand it could be programmed to pass power back to the grid that is credited to your kid's usage of XBox when he got home from school, and leave you just enough power to get home from work.

    65. Re:if everyone is using off peak hours by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      well, until we all have electric cars that is...then cars will be the dominant consumer of electricity.

    66. Re:if everyone is using off peak hours by RoFLKOPTr · · Score: 1

      Well for one you're acting like you think the meters are able to sense exactly what kind of appliances you're running which is ridiculous. All they can do is presume that you're running an illegal grow operation due to a sudden spike in power use as you turn on huge lights and fans. And that's not enough for a warrant. The utility will tell the police that it's possible you're running a grow operation because a constant draw of that much power (most of it being inductive due to big dirty lamp ballasts, which imparts interference and frequency fluctuations upon the grid) is detrimental to the rest of the neighborhood. The police would then have to perform some actual investigation before they'd be able to get a search warrant.

    67. Re:if everyone is using off peak hours by RoFLKOPTr · · Score: 1

      In my office, Susie Secretary can't control the thermostat (only Facilities can), and since there's limited cooling zones, they have a hard time making everyone comfortable. When Joe Boss with the corner office starts getting afternoon sun through the windows, Susie Secretary outside of his office suffers because the air handlers are sending so much cooling to that zone that it's 67 degrees in her office and 73 degrees in his.

      Sure, it's possible to fix it with a system redesign and maybe some more walls to zone out the cooling better, but when finance looks at $80K to redesign the cooling system for the entire office and compares with telling Susie to wear a sweater in August, guess who wins?

      Newer automated HVAC systems have variable air valves to each outlet (or at least to each room). Every room has a thermostat with a slider that simply says "COLDER ------------ WARMER" and allows for adjusting the temperature a couple degrees in each direction from the Facilities-set center point. You can also usually control everything over the internet these days too to make sure your workspace is the perfect temperature before you get to work... unless of course we're talking about the room I've had class in for the past 2 weeks. When class first started, the air handler supplying our quarter of the building was broken so the heat wave sweeping through the Sacramento valley made the room about 80 degrees. They managed to get the thing fixed after a couple days but our VAV was stuck open... so the room became about 60 degrees.

    68. Re:if everyone is using off peak hours by badkarmadayaccount · · Score: 1

      Sigh. Anybody heard of LEDs?

      --
      I know tobacco is bad for you, so I smoke weed with crack.
    69. Re:if everyone is using off peak hours by badkarmadayaccount · · Score: 1

      Or, you could just put flywheels at the substation to balance on the grid level, and make things a lot simpler.

      --
      I know tobacco is bad for you, so I smoke weed with crack.
    70. Re:if everyone is using off peak hours by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      Someone ought to try them to see if the light spectrum is good for growing, even if they are srill a little pricey.

    71. Re:if everyone is using off peak hours by badkarmadayaccount · · Score: 1

      Bluelight forums claim to have tried them with success.

      --
      I know tobacco is bad for you, so I smoke weed with crack.
  3. How were electric cars EVER supposed to work? by elrous0 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The big question that seemed/seems lost in all this "The electric car is gonna save the world!" hype is how an energy grid that can barely handle our energy needs AS IT IS is supposed to function when a significant portion of the population replaces their evil petroleum cars with electricity-draining electrics. When I've asked that question in the past to my usual suspect lineup of hippie friends (who also think that organic food and wind turbines are going to save us all too), the only answer I ever got was a vague "Well, most of that'll be happening at night, when the power demand is down anyway." But we're talking HUGE power usage spikes with those cars. Think of how much our system is already taxed when HVAC units have to cool a 10-degree-higher heat wave. Now imagine half the population plugging cars into the gird every night that draw WAY more power than any consumer HVAC unit.

    --
    SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    1. Re:How were electric cars EVER supposed to work? by rubycodez · · Score: 2

      oh, we'll have to beef up generation and the grid all right, but that still can be more efficient and cleaner than millions of little fossil fuel burners and the distribution system to feed them

    2. Re:How were electric cars EVER supposed to work? by WrongSizeGlass · · Score: 2

      The big question that seemed/seems lost in all this "The electric car is gonna save the world!" hype is how an energy grid that can barely handle our energy needs AS IT IS is supposed to function when a significant portion of the population replaces their evil petroleum cars with electricity-draining electrics.

      There's plenty of off-peak capacity. The problem arrises when everyone who drove their electric cars to work needs to charge them before they can make the drive home.

    3. Re:How were electric cars EVER supposed to work? by Osgeld · · Score: 0

      yea I will hold my breath for that to happen, in the meantime who is going to beefing up this enormous nationwide grid? thats right a team of workers pouring out of a 2 ton quad cab V8 Chevy

    4. Re:How were electric cars EVER supposed to work? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cars will be using hydrogen, not these "im electric, charge me for 12 or 14hours to drive little over 100km and have my very expensive battery in need to be replaced every 3 years or so for more than the car is worth 2nd hand.

    5. Re:How were electric cars EVER supposed to work? by orgelspieler · · Score: 4, Informative

      yea I will hold my breath for that to happen, in the meantime who is going to beefing up this enormous nationwide grid? thats right a team of workers pouring out of a 2 ton quad cab V8 Chevy

      Them's fightin' words, son. Any self-respecting lineman drives a Ford. And we sure as shit don't carpool.

    6. Re:How were electric cars EVER supposed to work? by ciderbrew · · Score: 1

      Easy. You have to build more NUCLEAR POWER stations to power all those green cars.

    7. Re:How were electric cars EVER supposed to work? by geekoid · · Score: 2

      Yes, the hippie friend is a great source~

      Here is what we will do:
      we will build more power plants.

      Wow, that was hard, wasn't it?

      preferably 4th gen nuclear power plants, and industrial solar power.

      Full charge most packs at 6.6Kw would take 4 hours, or so.

      That's a full charge, something that wouldn't happen most nights on a modern electric car.

      So NO it won't be "WAY more power" then home HVAC units. Less, in most cases. That said, HVAC is a poor comparison because it encompasses so many different technology, and such a wide range of energy usage.

      the average American household uses 24Kwh per day.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    8. Re:How were electric cars EVER supposed to work? by rubycodez · · Score: 1

      not a worry, the consumption of utility company vehicles is negligible, and we're talking about installing things that will have decades of lifespan. Heck, an economic stimulus package of this type would actually make sense and be profitable, instead of propping up losing business models and rewarding failure.

    9. Re:How were electric cars EVER supposed to work? by Skapare · · Score: 1

      Now imagine half the population plugging cars into the gird every night that draw WAY more power than any consumer HVAC unit.

      Huh? My A/C system uses a 40 amp 240 volt dedicated circuit. They are showing these cars as having a 15 amp 120 volt plug. How much do these cars really need during recharge?

      --
      now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
    10. Re:How were electric cars EVER supposed to work? by Ephemeriis · · Score: 1

      We've got infrastructure issues. That's nothing new. We need to upgrade/replace huge chunks of our nation's infrastructure. But that isn't really the fault of electric cars.

      Electric cars are supposed to be an improvement over regular gasoline cars largely by centralizing the power generation. So you can (hopefully) get better efficiencies and less pollution and all that.

      Obviously that electricity needs to be distributed out to wherever the cars are charging. And right now, if everybody suddenly switched to electric cars, we'd be screwed. But that's secondary to how electric cars are supposed to save the world.

      --
      "Work is the curse of the drinking classes." -Oscar Wilde
    11. Re:How were electric cars EVER supposed to work? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Get off your high-horse you miserable old fart. The world cannot afford to replace their vehicles with new models, let alone with the massively inflated plug-ins. Drop the mass of the vehicles over time, smaller motors needed, smaller power sources required. Now factor in the perpetually "10 years time" fuel-cell cars running on hydrogen actually hitting the market, and we'll have a mixed bag of powered vehicles.

      HVACs are used less at night. Hmm, can't think why. Maybe the sun being on the other side of the planet? You think everyone with an AC unit is going to have an plug-in car? Bwahahaha.

    12. Re:How were electric cars EVER supposed to work? by jank1887 · · Score: 1

      chevy volt: 10-ish hours on a 120V line, 4-ish hours on a 240V line. (temperature dependent) that's 35miles (56km) of electric only driving. the gasoline 'assist' drive is there if you run the battery down. Battery is covered on the 8yr/100000mi warranty, with no more than 10-30% degradation by the end of that time.

      hydrogen: takes that same amount of energy the volt pulled out of the wall, but first uses it to somehow produce hydrogen from another source, then puts it in the vehicle, attempting to do the same net work. it's already at a disadvantage unless the hydrogen-to-work path is significantly more efficient than the electricity-work path.

    13. Re:How were electric cars EVER supposed to work? by geekoid · · Score: 1

      If by 'everyone' you mean people who live more then 50 miles away.
      Companies could have covered parking and use solar to help offesst the peak. Assuming slow charge, you would need about 15 Sqr Meters of panel per car being charge to completely offset it. I am assuming 200watts per sqr meter. And yes, I do realize it won't apply to night shifts.

      That assume they would completely charge the battery, from 0 charge to full. They wouldn't do that. It would be reasonable to assume they would plan on 1/4 charge on average. So 4sqr meters per care.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    14. Re:How were electric cars EVER supposed to work? by jank1887 · · Score: 1

      that's a good point. Chevy volt is rated at ~35miles electric. that would get me to work, but not back home again. so I'd need to recharge or plan on using the gas assist engine on the way home. recharge is 10hours at 120V or 4 hours at 240V if temperatures are moderate. (forget winters). If I _needed_ a full charge at work, I'd have to do it at 240V, which is at ~twice average power. Maybe I could handle getting only a partial fillup during the day to spread it out with a 110 line, but still, I'd need to recharge, putting that load on the system at the same time as the office's AC is running at full load.

    15. Re:How were electric cars EVER supposed to work? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Somehow the answer will involve dozens of impossible materials and fantasy technologies proposed by the Space Nutters. Space elevators and space-based solar power will save the world!

    16. Re:How were electric cars EVER supposed to work? by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      I haven't seen any "The electric car is gonna save the world!" hype from any greens. Only time you hear that is from trolls constructing straw men.

      As to "hugh power spikes" - An typical overnight charge of an electric car would be done at 1.5kw*. A kettle is typically 3kw*. So making a cup of your favourite hot beverage is more of a spike than charging an electric car overnight.

      On a fast charge from a beefier outlet, it might be 6kw*. 2 kettles worth.

      (*This may vary from country to country given different power standards. But basically the "HUGE power spike" claim will look just as silly when compared to an everyday kettle in any country.)

    17. Re:How were electric cars EVER supposed to work? by AJWM · · Score: 1

      A couple of blocks from where I work, there's a parking lot roofed over (carport-style) with solar panels. (Part of a government demo project, the power is fed to the grid.) I could easily see these becoming charging stations as e-cars become more prevalent. Has the nice side effect of keeping the cars shaded and cool, so less need for car A/C in summer, at least for short commutes.

      (Guesstimating the numbers -- 2m by 6m of panel per vehicle, panel efficiency <10%, so maybe 1.5 kW per vehicle? 12 kWh for a workday charge?)

      --
      -- Alastair
    18. Re:How were electric cars EVER supposed to work? by Yaur · · Score: 1

      Instead of millions of little ones we are just going to have thousands of big ones. Its a step towards a solution but not a solution in and of its self.

    19. Re:How were electric cars EVER supposed to work? by Bob+the+Super+Hamste · · Score: 1

      How many people have a commute longer than 20 miles (Chevy volt) or 50 miles (Nissan Leaf) one way so charging at work is . If you are like me neither one would be a good option all the time (the Leaf would work most of the time) but I doubt many people consistently drive more than 100 miles a day.

      --
      Time to offend someone
    20. Re:How were electric cars EVER supposed to work? by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      Yes, nuclear. Plus of course more wind and tidal generation. All 3 of which are green sources.

    21. Re:How were electric cars EVER supposed to work? by Registered+Coward+v2 · · Score: 1

      The big question that seemed/seems lost in all this "The electric car is gonna save the world!" hype is how an energy grid that can barely handle our energy needs AS IT IS is supposed to function when a significant portion of the population replaces their evil petroleum cars with electricity-draining electrics. When I've asked that question in the past to my usual suspect lineup of hippie friends (who also think that organic food and wind turbines are going to save us all too), the only answer I ever got was a vague "Well, most of that'll be happening at night, when the power demand is down anyway." But we're talking HUGE power usage spikes with those cars. Think of how much our system is already taxed when HVAC units have to cool a 10-degree-higher heat wave. Now imagine half the population plugging cars into the gird every night that draw WAY more power than any consumer HVAC unit.

      The issue is not capacity but peaking - as you say "spikes." Adding a huge load, beyond spinning reserves, taxes the system since you cannot handle the load so you have to load shed. So who do you shed? It's not like daytime where big industrial users can be dropped quickly (and are often paid for the ability to do this); it's a bunch of home users who more than likely are the culprit. Plus, it's only temporary since you probably have the capacity just not "right now!"- if you have a nuke with available capacity you can ramp it out real fast - or a gas turbine (but that's expensive peaking power) - if you have to do a cold start you'll never get there.

      The problem is not so much a grid problem - the same issue occurs if a plant trips off line as well - but, as TFA points out, the way smart meters will be used to buy power. Rather than do an all at once buy - equipment should be allowed to lock in a price and the grid tell it when to start drawing power - and bring stuff online at a ramp rate that is below the grid's rate. The same thing should be done for dropping off - if everyone drops off at once it causes problems as well - which could happen if the price all of a sudden jumped due to demand and the running of a peaker.

      It's not that a smart grid is too smart - it's not quite smart enough, yet.

      --
      I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
    22. Re:How were electric cars EVER supposed to work? by Fned · · Score: 2

      " Think of how much our system is already taxed when HVAC units have to cool a 10-degree-higher heat wave."

      If there was ever an obvious case for solar, this is it.

      Why new AC is allowed to be installed without at least some kind of photovoltaic offset continues to be a mystery...

    23. Re:How were electric cars EVER supposed to work? by Registered+Coward+v2 · · Score: 0

      yea I will hold my breath for that to happen, in the meantime who is going to beefing up this enormous nationwide grid? thats right a team of workers pouring out of a 2 ton quad cab V8 Chevy

      Them's fightin' words, son. Any self-respecting lineman drives a Ford. And we sure as shit don't carpool.

      Ha. What's yellow and sleeps 4? An utility bucket truck.

      --
      I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
    24. Re:How were electric cars EVER supposed to work? by h4rr4r · · Score: 0

      Or you could not live so far away?
      If this is your one way commute, so 70 miles total, you are spending over an hour a day in your car without pay. Why in the hell would you waste your life like that?

    25. Re:How were electric cars EVER supposed to work? by tepples · · Score: 1

      If by 'everyone' you mean people who live more then 50 miles away.

      And that's a lot of people until real estate near decent-paying jobs becomes more affordable.

    26. Re:How were electric cars EVER supposed to work? by tepples · · Score: 0

      Or you could not live so far away?

      Then the SO would live farther away from her job. And the rent would increase substantially.

      you are spending over an hour a day in your car without pay.

      Technically, time spent at home is also without pay.

    27. Re:How were electric cars EVER supposed to work? by CastrTroy · · Score: 1

      The sad point is that this is all too common. People live way too far from work. I live 7 km (4.3 miles) from work and I love it. I don't really know how people deal with living so far away from work. Travelling hours each day. The furthest I've ever lived from work was 25 KM (15 miles). Didn't like it at all. I suppose if traffic didn't exist it wouldn't have been so bad, but that doesn't happen for most people either. It was only marginally slower to ride my bike. (1 hour 15 minutes by bike vs. 1 hour by car). Even now with a much shorter distance the travel time on bike is very comparable to car, even though traffic is light. 15 Minute bike ride in the morning really helps to wake you up.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    28. Re:How were electric cars EVER supposed to work? by Glendale2x · · Score: 1

      Huh? My A/C system uses a 40 amp 240 volt dedicated circuit. They are showing these cars as having a 15 amp 120 volt plug. How much do these cars really need during recharge?

      More than that if you want to charge it faster than overnight. Once you get into the fine print the recommended way is a 240V charging station. The Volt, for example, takes 10-12 hours to charge on a 120V 15A outlet. But it will charge in 3-4 hours with 240V. This 240V charging station wants a 40A circuit. Same as your A/C system.

      --
      this is my sig
    29. Re:How were electric cars EVER supposed to work? by tom17 · · Score: 1

      I guess that the increased salary he gets by working 35 miles away is more than equivalent to being paid for the commute at *local* salary prices. Although yeah, that is time you will never get back if you drive.

      That's how it works where I am.

      I do a ~100KM round trip commute but I take the train and that's 'me time' so not really wasted.

    30. Re:How were electric cars EVER supposed to work? by 0123456 · · Score: 1

      hydrogen: takes that same amount of energy the volt pulled out of the wall, but first uses it to somehow produce hydrogen from another source, then puts it in the vehicle, attempting to do the same net work. it's already at a disadvantage unless the hydrogen-to-work path is significantly more efficient than the electricity-work path.

      Hint: hydrogen is mostly produced from natural gas. Though that does raise the question of why you'd want a hydrogen car when you could just burn the gas instead.

    31. Re:How were electric cars EVER supposed to work? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Guess what even the electric car has some drawbacks. Like you mentioned it uses electricity! If that's the only drawback you can find you must be one of those hippies.

    32. Re:How were electric cars EVER supposed to work? by icebraining · · Score: 1

      "Without pay," well, no directly, but those miles can translate to money if jobs closer to his current home pay less and houses closer to his current job are more expensive.

    33. Re:How were electric cars EVER supposed to work? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Your confusion probably stems from not understanding the difference between peak demand and sustained demand. Our electrical grid sometimes has trouble with peak demand. There is no problem with the sustained level of demand. Unless everyone starts charging their electric cars in the middle of the day it's not an issue.

      As for your asserting that electric cars draw WAY more power than consumer HVAC units, my SEER 11 5-ton unit draws 5.5kW and the Nissan Leaf draws 5.2kW. Most people probably have newer, more efficient HVAC and I'm not sure I'd characterize 5.2kW as way more than 5.5kW.

    34. Re:How were electric cars EVER supposed to work? by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1

      Huh? My A/C system uses a 40 amp 240 volt dedicated circuit. They are showing these cars as having a 15 amp 120 volt plug. How much do these cars really need during recharge?

      More than that if you want to charge it faster than overnight. Once you get into the fine print the recommended way is a 240V charging station. The Volt, for example, takes 10-12 hours to charge on a 120V 15A outlet. But it will charge in 3-4 hours with 240V. This 240V charging station wants a 40A circuit. Same as your A/C system.

      Well, there we have it. He just has to plug his Volt into his existing 40 Amp circuit, turn on the car's AC, pump it back into the house and he's golden.

      Sheesh. You'd think this was hard or something.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    35. Re:How were electric cars EVER supposed to work? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No we are NOT talking about a hgue power usage spike. Those cars use a lot less energy than you seem to think. A Nissan leaf at full charge holds about 26 kilowatt hours (8 hours at 3.3 kw/hour). The average houses use up about 50 kilowatt hours per day.

      A 50% boost in usage, at off hours, is NOT hard to do. In fact, off hours will even still be called off hours. The basic problem is you don't know enough about electricity and your usual suspect lineup of hippie friends were RIGHT - even though they were not smart enough to use the internet to get the numbers to prove to you that you were wrong. They were of course smart enough not to insult people with irrelevant facts ( beliefs about organic food? Yeah that is relevant to this discussion).

    36. Re:How were electric cars EVER supposed to work? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And add to that throttling the 1/4 charge over the entire night instead of maxing out to complete in couple hours.

    37. Re:How were electric cars EVER supposed to work? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Kudos for joining the "think one step ahead of the others" club but there are too few of us to make any difference. The masses are being sold on the idea that electric cars are a major part of the solution to our energy crisis but they don't realize that you still need to generate the energy for the car from somewhere or something and, at the moment, that still a fossil fuel powered or nuclear powered generating plant. I've seen some interesting alternatives using solar and interestingly a large chimney but those are still years away and, in the standard photo voltaic cell, dependent on rare earths to create the semiconductors.

      Build you solar collectors with boiler plate technology and we'll be heading in the right direction.

      Have you seen the reverse power connection? There's so much power needed to move the car around that if your car is fully charged and you lose the power to your house you can run most of your appliances in the house off the batteries in your car for a respectable amount of time.

    38. Re:How were electric cars EVER supposed to work? by reboot246 · · Score: 0

      Ford? Did you know that 95% of all Ford trucks ever made are still on the highway? Yeah, the rest actually made it home.

      Fixed Or Repaired Daily
      Found On Road Dead
      Fucked On Recent Deal

      Get a good truck - Nissan or Toyota

    39. Re:How were electric cars EVER supposed to work? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. How many kwh per day does your AC use? take an average of 19A x 240V x hrs. lets estimate it runs only 8 hours of a 24 hr day. Thats 36.5kwh per day

      an electric car uses 250-350 wh/mile. Lets use a 300 watt/hour per mile average. Now what is your commute daily? lets say 50 miles total, round trip.

      300 watt hours per mile X 50 miles = 15kwh

      that is less than half.

      Now, when its flippin hot, lets entertain a 70% increase in AC consumption:

      36.5kwh + (36.5x70%) = 62kwh per day for AC

    40. Re:How were electric cars EVER supposed to work? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, what's the problem with evacuating a couple hundred square miles of city every couple of decades in the name of clean power that costs more than solar or wind?

    41. Re:How were electric cars EVER supposed to work? by plover · · Score: 1

      Rather than do an all at once buy - equipment should be allowed to lock in a price and the grid tell it when to start drawing power - and bring stuff online at a ramp rate that is below the grid's rate.

      That's how the smart grid is advertised as working, because that's a picture people can understand. Raise the price by $.0005 per minute and stop raising it once you've cut enough demand. But it doesn't have to be both instantaneous and simultaneous. The power company can tell one-fourth of the meters to raise the price at 19:58:00, the second quarter of the meters to raise their price at 19:58:15, etc. Or they can fine grain 1/60th of the meters per second.

      But this is a lot of complex talking to meters, scheduled to the second. It's hard to make sure every meter is always working properly, and that each meter has its own correct rate. Do you really want to build a system that harvests a million "I'm meter 1234 and my rate is now $0.0015" messages, and maps every meter in a table? Do you instantly re-poll the meters that don't respond to the rate changes? Are you getting the most value from such a complex centralized system?

      Much easier is a distributed system. Send all the meters a common ramp profile: from $0.1500/kWh at 19:50 to $0.1600/kWh at 20:10. Each meter could randomly pick a time during the ramp up period (between 19:50 and 20:10) when they would set their price to $0.1600. That way you send only one message, and it's the same message to all meters at the same time, and yet you still achieve a slow and predictable shedding of demand. Management of rates is much simpler. You don't even need feedback from the meters, you simply trust they're listening. For more reliability, you continually broadcast the current rate schedule, and if a particular meter misses the message at 19:49:50 they'll get it again at 19:49:51. Of course there's more to it than that, there are different classes of service and rate schedules would be a large set of meter classes, but the idea's the same for all.

      I wish I knew how they were really implemented. But that's how I'd design it.

      --
      John
    42. Re:How were electric cars EVER supposed to work? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      what are you going to use to beef up generation? Nuclear is out since eww scary radiation monster will kill us all!!!! Wind and Solar are out because neither are effective baseload generators. . . We could use good old fashioned clean and safe Coal!

      I wonder which would be greener: expanding coal burning plants to meet the demand of a switchover to electric vehicles or simply continuing to use millions of little fossil fuel burners?

    43. Re:How were electric cars EVER supposed to work? by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      But they draw far far less power than commercial AC. And most I suspect will draw less power than even a consumer AC if designed right. There is charging technology for electric vehicles that can plug into the smart grid and adjust charging speed.

      Now electric vehicles are not going to save the world, I agree. However they're not going to destroy it as quickly as gasoline powered vehicles. If it bugs you, then use neither one and find a way to walk or bike to work.

    44. Re:How were electric cars EVER supposed to work? by Amouth · · Score: 1

      I've got both.. a Toyota and a Ford

      Toyota - my daily driver - great gas mileage - and runs great - knows everything in it and towing behind it

      Ford - used for excessive loads and long trips towing - gas mileage is ok - runs ok (off idle but not much) - has zero clue you have a load in the bed or another car towing behind.

      the Toyota i expect to be usable and reliable - the Ford i expect to be able to drive into the ground and have it still move, it might not want to but it will, it is far more of a work horse. (now granted this is an early 90's F150 not the crap they put out later (and now from what I've heard)

      --
      '...if only "Jumping to a Conclusion" was an event in the Olympics.'
    45. Re:How were electric cars EVER supposed to work? by jafac · · Score: 1

      Here's what we'll REALLY do.

      Lay off more American workers, until nobody has a job to commute to.
      No gasoline to buy.
      No cars to charge any time of the day.
      No homes on which to mount rooftop solar panels.

      Problem solved.

      --

      These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
    46. Re:How were electric cars EVER supposed to work? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We really need to look at average commute distance for the population. Sure some people wouldn't be able to make it to work and home on one charge like you, but some people could make it to work and home for an entire week on 35miles, like me.

    47. Re:How were electric cars EVER supposed to work? by elrous0 · · Score: 1

      Because, unlike solar or wind, nuclear is actually proven, consistent, and practical.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    48. Re:How were electric cars EVER supposed to work? by elrous0 · · Score: 1

      Your ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    49. Re:How were electric cars EVER supposed to work? by elrous0 · · Score: 1

      Don't forget Helium-3 from the moon that we can use for our as-yet-uninvented nuclear fusion reactors.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    50. Re:How were electric cars EVER supposed to work? by elrous0 · · Score: 1

      Do you honestly believe that the torque required to move a 2000-lb vehicle 30-60 miles (not to mention run your car AC/heater, radio, etc.) is comparable to the amount of energy it takes to heat up a tea kettle?!? Methinks you really need to check your math.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    51. Re:How were electric cars EVER supposed to work? by elrous0 · · Score: 1

      I live in a state where the summer average temp is in the high 90's. And last month my entire house only used about 30 kwh a day (not just AC, that's everything). That means that an electric car would eat me up for a 50% increase in energy usage (probably more like 75% more in the fall and spring). You think the grid could handle that if everyone (or even a significant percentage of people) suddenly owned one of those things? You think that power plants that usually only run for 12 hours a day suddenly having to run 24/7 to handle the demand wouldn't come at a price? And that's not even factoring in the yahoos who would be charging their cars during the day. It would be a brownout and blackout festival, you can bet on it.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    52. Re:How were electric cars EVER supposed to work? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, the power grid is nowhere near being able to cope with a system generating syntetic fuel for the evil petroleum cars either.
      The reason the electric car is "going to save the world" is because it's a lot more efficient to convert solar and/or geothermic power to electricity than it is to convert it to petroleum.

    53. Re:How were electric cars EVER supposed to work? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't try to reason with the hippie environmentalists, They will never understand that removing pollution from one source (ie oil use in cars to electricity) that the pollution will simply be transferred (ie power plant production) So instead of having all those cars with little pollution generated in a wider overall area, you will have mega-concentrated pollution in small areas (where the plants are installed)

      Solar/Wind/Tidal can not provide the output needed that the other plants produce, so they are useless with the exception of hydro, which requires massive dams being built in a few waterway choke points to get the levels needed.

      Power usage will increase, not decrease. Until the greenies get that nothing they come up with will ever work because it is always based on decreased usage.

    54. Re:How were electric cars EVER supposed to work? by ComplexSimplicity · · Score: 1

      Compiler error, end ")" missing.

    55. Re:How were electric cars EVER supposed to work? by JazzLad · · Score: 1

      He must be a Brit, no American makes tea for 6-8+ hours at a time.

      --
      "If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear." - Every fascist, ever
    56. Re:How were electric cars EVER supposed to work? by rsborg · · Score: 1

      The big question that seemed/seems lost in all this "The electric car is gonna save the world!" hype is how an energy grid that can barely handle our energy needs AS IT IS is supposed to function when a significant portion of the population replaces their evil petroleum cars with electricity-draining electrics. When I've asked that question in the past to my usual suspect lineup of hippie friends (who also think that organic food and wind turbines are going to save us all too), the only answer I ever got was a vague "Well, most of that'll be happening at night, when the power demand is down anyway." But we're talking HUGE power usage spikes with those cars. Think of how much our system is already taxed when HVAC units have to cool a 10-degree-higher heat wave. Now imagine half the population plugging cars into the gird every night that draw WAY more power than any consumer HVAC unit.

      You do realize that baseload power requires that we run some power plants at night, right? Sometimes burning fuel for no reason other than the stop/start process is more expensive than just running it all night.

      Electric cars are supposed to eat up that slack... right now we have much less than .000001% of cars charging on the network at night. Once that goes up to something concerning like, say .001% we might want to worry. This article and it's entire premise is FUD similar to the "birds will die because of wind power" bullshit that the anti-alternate energy folks like to spew (100x more birds die due to buildings and telephone poles than to wind turbines).

      --
      Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
    57. Re:How were electric cars EVER supposed to work? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, first off, you need to consider how efficient electric cars are compared to gasoline ones. Most of the gas burned is wasted heat, not transferred to energy.

      If all the gasoline cars were magically converted to electric and powered by gasoline-powered generators, it'd probably reduce consumption by a third overnight.

      But more to the point, think of all the infrastructure committed to delivering gasoline. You think it just magically appears overnight? There are thousands of work-hours involved from production to refining to distribution. It'd be no different converting it to electricity, except more efficient in the motors, and that would save considerable amounts.

      And as another poster said, the grid can already handle a good portion of the required capacity with smart management.

    58. Re:How were electric cars EVER supposed to work? by Amouth · · Score: 1

      i blame gremlins .. if the RAF can do it so can I.

      --
      '...if only "Jumping to a Conclusion" was an event in the Olympics.'
    59. Re:How were electric cars EVER supposed to work? by shermo · · Score: 1

      True, but "making a cup of your favourite hot beverage" is pretty bad for the power network.

      *Attempt to link article about kettles causing power spikes at the end of coronation street failed due to Slashdot Lameness Filter*

      Understandable - Coronation Street is pretty lame.

      --
      Insanity: voting in the same two parties over and over again and expecting different results
    60. Re:How were electric cars EVER supposed to work? by Registered+Coward+v2 · · Score: 1

      Much easier is a distributed system. Send all the meters a common ramp profile: from $0.1500/kWh at 19:50 to $0.1600/kWh at 20:10. Each meter could randomly pick a time during the ramp up period (between 19:50 and 20:10) when they would set their price to $0.1600. That way you send only one message, and it's the same message to all meters at the same time, and yet you still achieve a slow and predictable shedding of demand. Management of rates is much simpler. You don't even need feedback from the meters, you simply trust they're listening. For more reliability, you continually broadcast the current rate schedule, and if a particular meter misses the message at 19:49:50 they'll get it again at 19:49:51. Of course there's more to it than that, there are different classes of service and rate schedules would be a large set of meter classes, but the idea's the same for all.

      I wish I knew how they were really implemented. But that's how I'd design it.

      I'd even go a step further - design smarts into the chargers for cars that can be interrupted so that a utility could load shed as needed as well.

      --
      I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
    61. Re:How were electric cars EVER supposed to work? by rhakka · · Score: 1

      there are a few things you're not considering though.

      1. each car is a battery. Now what was that nagging problem with renewables? Primarily it is that of intermittent production. which a grid full of modular batteries would be FANTASTIC at utilizing. Hell, imagine if you can tell your electric car specifically to be charged enough to drive you the 10 miles to get home after work. All day that car could be storing and RE RELEASING energy to the grid as necessary, making you money to offset the cost of the charge you need to drive home. and it would be distributed storage.

      2. This isn't going to happen overnight. Cars last over 10 years in most cases. people are slow to adopt new technology. we have time to improve infrastructure.

      3. of course we have to invest much more heavily in electrical production.

    62. Re:How were electric cars EVER supposed to work? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The big question that seemed/seems lost in all this "The electric car is gonna save the world!" hype is how an energy grid that can barely handle our energy needs AS IT IS is supposed to function when a significant portion of the population replaces their evil petroleum cars with electricity-draining electrics. When I've asked that question in the past to my usual suspect lineup of hippie friends (who also think that organic food and wind turbines are going to save us all too), the only answer I ever got was a vague "Well, most of that'll be happening at night, when the power demand is down anyway." But we're talking HUGE power usage spikes with those cars. Think of how much our system is already taxed when HVAC units have to cool a 10-degree-higher heat wave. Now imagine half the population plugging cars into the gird every night that draw WAY more power than any consumer HVAC unit.

      Not necessarily - its typically about 250 wH per mile, so for a 15 mile commute thats equivalent to about an hour of central ac run time per car per day. On top of that, it would result in more base load; i.e. load that doesn't change and follows predictable patterns.

      At one point in time, microsoft was crippling the internet for the same reason - millions of pcs that were all scheduled to update at the same time. All it would take is for the chargers to be smart enough to stagger their start times over the course of an hour or two, combined with the staggering caused by time zones.

      Also, keep in mind that there is increasing evidence that these 10 degree heatwaves are a direct result of global warming, partially caused by cars.

    63. Re:How were electric cars EVER supposed to work? by Lanteran · · Score: 1

      Protip: Hydorgen cars are electric, they just use a denser, yet harder to make energy storage medium. Also, Lithium electric cars take nowhere near that long to charge/range.

      --
      "People don't want to learn linux" hasn't been a valid excuse since '03.
    64. Re:How were electric cars EVER supposed to work? by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      Methinks you need find out the differences between torque, power and energy.

      My post was about power, because that's what the post before was about.

      Torque and energy are neither the same thing as power, nor the same thing as each other. You can't compare them. So no I don't need to check my math. You just need to stop posting about things you don't understand.

    65. Re:How were electric cars EVER supposed to work? by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      No American knows how to make tea at all. That's why I left the options open.

    66. Re:How were electric cars EVER supposed to work? by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      It sure is. That's why I used it as the comparison. It's the kettle on during the commercial break of a popular show is the hardest spike the grid has to deal with. And they cope with that alright. They have people who's job it is to predict it. Spikes from charging electric cars will be both less severe and easier to predict.

    67. Re:How were electric cars EVER supposed to work? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yea I will hold my breath for that to happen, in the meantime who is going to beefing up this enormous nationwide grid? thats right a team of workers pouring out of a 2 ton quad cab V8 Chevy

      Them's fightin' words, son. Any self-respecting lineman drives a Ford. And we sure as shit don't carpool.

      I think lineman ought to drive the volt.

    68. Re:How were electric cars EVER supposed to work? by badkarmadayaccount · · Score: 1

      That won't be a problem, just contract the spetialsts the HFT industry employs.

      --
      I know tobacco is bad for you, so I smoke weed with crack.
  4. Could be worse by DrData99 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You could be charging your car at 2AM in the afternoon!

    1. Re:Could be worse by blair1q · · Score: 1

      We're working on that.

      Signed,

      Top Men

  5. These researchers misunderstood the idea by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 2, Informative

    These researchers clearly misunderstood the idea of a "smart" power grid. It is not intended to let you control when you consume your electricity so as to save money. It is intended to let the government/corporations control when you consume electricity.

    --
    The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
    1. Re:These researchers misunderstood the idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, to be accurate, it's more along the lines of "you (the consumer) pick the hour, we (the power company) pick the minute." That and the appliance would tell the company ahead of time that it has been told to wait until electricity is $0.0X cents/KWh to start up, so the power company can use that information for planning purposes.

      But yeah, these "researchers" sure aren't enhancing the reputation of MIT by pretending the "smart grid" is as stupid as a lamp timer. One wonders who funded this study, since stupidity like this doesn't usually exit the "research" community and enter the media without someone paying for predetermined results.

    2. Re:These researchers misunderstood the idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm not sure if you're joking or not, but at least part of the goal is, in fact, to give the utility some control. Power companies in my area have programs whereby they install a "smart" thermostat that lets them switch off your air conditioning temporarily at times of peak demand. In return, consumers pay a slightly lower price for power all year round. In the past, we've had rolling brownouts on the hottest days. There's been none of that this summer, despite an unusual number of very hot days. I don't know if the improvement is directly attributable to the thermostats, but I'll bet they're a factor.

    3. Re:These researchers misunderstood the idea by benjamindees · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately I'm afraid you may be right:

      One way to improve that trade-off, Roozbehani explains, would be for customers to actually give utilities information about how they would respond to different prices at different times. Utilities could then tune the prices that they pass to consumers much more precisely, to maximize responsiveness to fluctuations in the market while minimizing the risk of instability. Collecting that information would be difficult, but Roozbehani’s hunch is that the benefits would outweigh the costs.

      Price? Why don't you just tell us how much you're willing to pay...

      --
      "I assumed blithely that there were no elves out there in the darkness"
    4. Re:These researchers misunderstood the idea by Bob+the+Super+Hamste · · Score: 1

      Less the government more the grid operators. That data from the various smart devices will be fed into the network apps and market apps to better use limited resources.

      --
      Time to offend someone
    5. Re:These researchers misunderstood the idea by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      You sound more than a little paranoid.

      The purpose is of course to smooth out the demand, such that less power stations have to be built to cope with peaks. And to make most use of greener sources of power.

      If you see that as sinister, then you have a mental problem.

    6. Re:These researchers misunderstood the idea by 0123456 · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure if you're joking or not, but at least part of the goal is, in fact, to give the utility some control.

      Why would anyone other than the power company want that?

      Here's an idea: if you can't produce enough power you could... build more power stations. This is all about increasing profits for power companies by screwing over their customers rather than increasing the amount of power they can generate.

    7. Re:These researchers misunderstood the idea by jbengt · · Score: 1

      Here's an idea: if you can't produce enough power you could... build more power stations. This is all about increasing profits for power companies by screwing over their customers rather than increasing the amount of power they can generate.

      Historically, here in Illinois, the power company monopolies were allowed a percentage of capital investment as yearly profit. So they would have loved to build more capacity. Still, there comes a point when you're considering building for a peak load, but only using a small percentage of that peak on average, and you're not going to want to invest $billions since you're income won't substantially increase, but would rather give back some of that would-be capital cost to get people to use less during the peak load, instead

    8. Re:These researchers misunderstood the idea by cdrguru · · Score: 1

      The US hasn't built a major power plant since some time in the 1970s from what I understand. We have built thousands of "peeker plants" which are natural gas fired and the intent was that these would only be turned on to support the grid in periods of high demand.

      They are all or almost all running 24x7 today.

      Can't build a power plant without community agreement and you aren't going to get that. Nobody wants a power plant in their backyard and the current government regulations require community input and lots of environment impact studies. The end result is no more power plants and no new transmission lines.

      The US could probably use 100 2000GW plants right now, for both new capacity and replacing obsolete coal-fired plants. They are not being built, not scheduled to be built and anywhere past a licensing stage.

    9. Re:These researchers misunderstood the idea by Hatta · · Score: 2

      The problem isn't the smart meters. They're a good idea. The question is, who pays and who realizes the benefits? Are they going to lower prices now that their costs are lower due to the smart meters?

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    10. Re:These researchers misunderstood the idea by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      It's intended to let power companies actually know what they're doing. Instead of just measuring how much electricity is flowing out of the power generators they will now be able to see where the power is actually going as well instead of guessing. There is wasted power now because they turn on peaker power generators (the dirty coal fired ones) just in case there's a spike in demand even if there isn't one. And the excess power is just wasted as there's no way to store it. Similarly if there are problems in the network (downed lines, substations shut down, etc) it takes time now to respond and diagnose and fix the problems. I think the big revolution is not necessarily the smart grid in the home but it will be the smart grid in the distribution network (it's already there mostly in transmission networks), that's what is going to save a lot of power. The home smart grid is mostly to stop the power companies from being blind to usage, but this just happens to the most consumer visible portion of the smart grid.

    11. Re:These researchers misunderstood the idea by Darinbob · · Score: 2

      Well, there is a bit of cause for paranoia at times. Power companies are absolutely about making a profit. If it weren't for government regulation there would be no cause at all to conserve electricity because more usage means more profits. Power companies used to actually encourage the use of more power. The hands-off free market approach wasn't working. The trick is how to make that greed motive actually work to cut usage. The California model was to decouple utility profits from sales; a fixed cost goal is set and if revenues exceed this then the excess is returned to consumers but if usage falls below this goal then the utility keeps the profits.

      Of course we'd never have gotten to the point of creating these regulations if the consumers hadn't gotten so thoroughly pissed off at the utilities. In California, the biggest laissez faire conservatives despise PG&E just as much as the biggest co-op commies.

    12. Re:These researchers misunderstood the idea by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 1

      Right, that's why the government has mandated the roll out in certain areas.

      --
      The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
    13. Re:These researchers misunderstood the idea by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 1
      I don't see it as sinister. I just know what happens when you give other people the power to make decisions for you. If it is someone you know, who knows you, it may turn out for the best. If it is someone you don't know, who doesn't know you, it never turns out for the best in the long run.

      The purpose is of course to smooth out the demand, such that less power stations have to be built to cope with peaks. And to make most use of greener sources of power.

      Well, yes, it is just a happy coincidence that the best way to do that is to give some faceless bureaucrat the power to decide when I can run my washer and dryer.

      --
      The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
    14. Re:These researchers misunderstood the idea by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 1

      You are absolutely correct, and it is just a coincidence that the same people who are pushing this are the people who talk about how much they admire the fact that the Chinese government can "just get things done". It's not that these people want power for the sake of having power. They want power for the sake of doing things that are in "everybody's best interest", but that people are too stupid to do for themselves, or even to know that they want done.

      --
      The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
    15. Re:These researchers misunderstood the idea by rhakka · · Score: 1

      I want the power company to tell me the pricing so I can decide what power to draw. that's "giving the utility some control" because they set the price.

      I would be very willing to give the power company lots of control over my power in exchange for cheaper rates. I design heating systems that have used electric thermal storage units with just such a deal: the utility guarantees your house will be heated. But 99.99% of the time, they are charging your thermal storage when THEY have excess electricity to dump. the cost savings of this is huge because it's power they would otherwise have wasted. They make a few cents on otherwise waste power, I save a ton of money, and the peak load the next day for the heat (or cooling, with ice generators or chilled water storage) is blunted as well so the utility doesn't have to build more peak capacity which is expensive, and wasteful.

      You don't sound like you understand the economics of power generation very well.

    16. Re:These researchers misunderstood the idea by Leebert · · Score: 1

      The US hasn't built a major power plant since some time in the 1970s from what I understand.

      You understand wrong. For example, near me: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandon_Shores_Generating_Station

      Units online in 1984 and 1991.

    17. Re:These researchers misunderstood the idea by kiwimate · · Score: 1

      Not really the grid operators (they care, but for different reasons). The transmission networks are just dandy. The distribution networks are the ones that would potentially be strained by the PEV scenario.

    18. Re:These researchers misunderstood the idea by black+soap · · Score: 1

      Google will manage the whole thing, in exchange for all the data they would get to collect about the daily habits of every business and consumer in the country.

    19. Re:These researchers misunderstood the idea by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      "Faceless bureaucrat" is still sounding paranoid.

      Government regulations have lowered the death rate in many industries and on the roads over the years. So your claim that decisions made by people you don't know never turns out for the best is very obviously completely wrong.

      Some decisions people you don't know turn out the worse for you. Some turn out the best for you. And that's no different from decisions people make for themselves. For example many people decide to smoke - that's a decision that invariably turns out for the worse.

    20. Re:These researchers misunderstood the idea by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      As you say it's the nature of private companies to seek to increase the amount of product they sell. It's best for the state to run utilities.

    21. Re:These researchers misunderstood the idea by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      I don't know. If there''re real competition amongst suppliers, the theory is that the price will go down for consumers. But I don't have a lot of confidence in that.

  6. In the fine words of Yogi Berra... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Nobody goes there anymore...it's too crowded."

  7. Do we have the intelligence to do this? by Relayman · · Score: 1

    I doubt that the few people with the intelligence to do this will even get close to being involved with the "smart grid." Be prepared for a decade of power more unreliable than we have now (almost every company I work with has a backup generator).

    --
    If I used a sig over again, would anyone notice?
    1. Re:Do we have the intelligence to do this? by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      Presumably new fridges etc will come equipped to interact with the smart grid as a feature. Participation will not require intelligence - it'll just happen as appliances get replaced.

    2. Re:Do we have the intelligence to do this? by Relayman · · Score: 1

      I think you missed my point: The smart grid requires smart people to design it. I'm not seeing how that's going to happen since there is no economic reward system to sufficiently pay the really good people to work on this. It's going to end up being a bunch of incompatible standards resulting in an unreliable and easily gamed (crooks, I mean sharp businesspeople, WILL exploit it) system until it all gets sorted out. Meanwhile, the market for standby generators and alternate (non-grid) sources of power will increase dramatically.

      --
      If I used a sig over again, would anyone notice?
    3. Re:Do we have the intelligence to do this? by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      It's hardly the most complex of engineering problems.

  8. Rest of the world by Albanach · · Score: 1

    The rest of the world already has peak and off peak tariffs. This is really no different.

    Given not everyone will get a smart meeter at once, it should be easy for them to map how usage changes along with price and time of day. The suppliers can know before customers what price changes are about to happen, and should be able to adjust their supply accordingly.

    1. Re:Rest of the world by jbengt · · Score: 1

      The rest of the world already has peak and off peak tariffs. This is really no different

      No, there are already peak on off-peak rates, among other rate intracies. This is different. This is controlling the demand in real time in response to inputs, rather than creating a schedule that everyone knows ahead of time. As the article states (if you read past the headline), it is really a common, fairly well-understood control problem about how to make sure a feedback loop is stable.
      Come to think of it, someone should put in place some dampening for high frequency trading, too.

    2. Re:Rest of the world by thsths · · Score: 1

      > Come to think of it, someone should put in place some dampening for high frequency trading, too.

      We already have that, it is the rotational inertia of the turbines and generators in big power plants. Those things are huge, so spinning up or down takes a while. This is the reason that everybody talks about the grid frequency, because it is an indicator for power stored in inertia.

      What be need is a power store fast enough to pick up when the frequency drops. There are schemes in place to remove big consumers from the grid, but that is a very intrusive operation. So power plants often run around 105% of the required power, just to be able to cope with the spikes. Hydro-power could help here, but unless you live in Scandinavia, it is very difficult to implement. Compressed air storage is another interesting approach, if the technology matures towards a reasonable round trip efficiency.

  9. easy by RelliK · · Score: 1

    Existing grid can *already* support converting 70% of all the cars to electric, provided that they all charge at night. You really do not appreciate the difference in power usage difference between day and night. Build more power plants & transmission lines and you can get that number even higher. The article is a troll, btw.

    --
    ___
    If you think big enough, you'll never have to do it.
    1. Re:easy by No,+I+am+Spratacus! · · Score: 0

      70%? Source, please. If everyone slowly charges their cars over 10-16 hours, this might work, but if many people want to charge their cars at the same time, it will bring the grid down to its knees. An electric car charger can add as much strain to a grid as a whole house.

    2. Re:easy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "f many people want to charge their cars at the same time, it will bring the grid down to its knees".

      Source please?

    3. Re:easy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... using polyanish assumptions. Almost all of these studies, pro and con, reject the existence of housewives. They will fuck this up horrible. "Hurry up, quick charge, damn car. Why are you always out of battery when I have to pick up the kids!?!" I know, I married one.

    4. Re:easy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm going to pull numbers out of my [bodypart|item of headwear], but I'd doubt whether an overnight car charge will exceed the power draw for daytime aircon.

      Levelling power demand and balancing to production is A Good Thing btw.

    5. Re:easy by Narcocide · · Score: 1

      Maybe YOUR house, Kimosabe. One of those battery powered grocery-getters wouldn't even make a DENT in my numbers.

    6. Re:easy by geekoid · · Score: 1

      SO, basically, you are telling us you have no clue how much energy an electric car draws or how much energy a hous uses?

      4 hour charge, 6.6 KWh. Not really that much.

      I suggest you look at AC and Heating electricity usage.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    7. Re:easy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I'll bet your wife married a real douchebag.

    8. Re:easy by operagost · · Score: 1

      I plan to solve the problem by using a portable gas generator to charge my Volt. Then I can be green AND keep a load off the grid!

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    9. Re:easy by russotto · · Score: 1

      SO, basically, you are telling us you have no clue how much energy an electric car draws or how much energy a hous uses?

      4 hour charge, 6.6 KWh. Not really that much.

      Slightly greater than the average for the entire rest of the house for those 4 hours. Or, in other words, "that much".

    10. Re:easy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you missed the point. Although there are peak times, the demand still ramps up and down as people turn on/off devices asynchronously. Smart meters will provide a common "event" to trigger the starting of appliances, which could result in severe and sudden increases in demand, which currently doesn't happen. I don't see how the article is a troll.

    11. Re:easy by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      but if many people want to charge their cars at the same time, it will bring the grid down to its knees.

      Let's have your source please.

    12. Re:easy by GooberToo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      70%? Source, please. If everyone slowly charges their cars over 10-16 hours, this might work, but if many people want to charge their cars at the same time, it will bring the grid down to its knees. An electric car charger can add as much strain to a grid as a whole house.

      You entirely missed the point.

      By design cars are planned to support multiple charging modes. The most basic designs assume a fast charge and a slow charge. Those charging at night will use the slow charge method.. Furthermore, there has even been discussion on allowing the car to participate in the smart meter network such that it can intelligent switch based on current grid load in the neighborhood.

      So long story short, typical charging at night, is fully expected the charge cycle to be spread out over at least 6-8 hours; if not longer.

      Its not like the people planning this stuff are absolute fucking idiots. Making such lame assumptions tends to point the finger in the opposite direction.

    13. Re:easy by No,+I+am+Spratacus! · · Score: 1

      Your math does not work out. 6.6 kWh over 4 hours is 1.65 kW, which really is not significant. However, a Tesla battery has a capacity of about 53 kWh. According to Tesla, the battery can be charged in 3.5 hours, but that is when using a 220V 80A outlet. Follow along here: 53kWh / 3.5h = 15.15 kW. If you honestly think that 70% of households drawing an additional 15 kW would have no appreciable effect, you might be overestimating the capacity of the grid.

    14. Re:easy by knorthern+knight · · Score: 1

      > You really do not appreciate the difference in power usage difference
      > between day and night. Build more power plants & transmission lines
      > and you can get that number even higher

      Do you have *ANY* clue how difficult that is in the LSA (Litigious States of America)? It can take years of lawsuits merely to extend powerlines several miles. New hydro/coal/natgas/nuclear power plants are just about impossible. Remember the fiasco in California several years ago? People like to blame Enron, but Enron was merely making the obvious bet on the market. No new powerplants for umpteen years... of course power rates were going to shoot through the roof.

      --

      I'm not repeating myself
      I'm an X window user; I'm an ex-Windows user
    15. Re:easy by networkBoy · · Score: 1

      I don't know about his wife, but mine did ;)

      --
      whois gawk date unzip strip find touch finger mount join nice man top fsck grep eject more yes exit umount sleep dump
  10. Time to get power storage systems by bobs666 · · Score: 2

    We need to store power so that we can only use that power at a constant rate 24/7.

    1. Re:Time to get power storage systems by Tofof · · Score: 4, Funny

      Great idea. Maybe we could do this with a high-energy-density liquid! Something like long hydrocarbon chains that are straightforward to break when we want to reclaim the energy...

    2. Re:Time to get power storage systems by h4rr4r · · Score: 1

      Too bad they are a bitch to make. Digging them up is one idea, but it releases a lot of stored carbon dioxide and burning the stuff in ICEs is pretty inefficient.

    3. Re:Time to get power storage systems by mikael · · Score: 2

      We used to get storage electric heaters in the UK - they had an electric heating element combined with insulated ceramic bricks. Off-peak hours, the heating element would heat up the bricks, then enough heat would be retained and released by the bricks during the following day to provide heat to the room. An insulated flap would allow for the control of released heat. The heating element could also be left on all day as a further boost.

      --
      Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
    4. Re:Time to get power storage systems by pLnCrZy · · Score: 1

      Oh if only I had mod points.

      +50 -- Effin awesome.

  11. Spontaneous Consumption by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I suspect the electric utilities will be able to sense the usage trend and adjust accordingly. It's preposterous to imagine consumers will change their power consumption habits all on the same day, same week, or even the same month.

    1. Re:Spontaneous Consumption by Albanach · · Score: 1

      I suspect the electric utilities will be able to sense the usage trend and adjust accordingly. It's preposterous to imagine consumers will change their power consumption habits all on the same day, same week, or even the same month.

      I think the fear is that devices will be programmed to start running when electricity drops below a certain cost. So, say the price drops below 10c/kwh suddenly everyone's electric car will start charging at once, and that surge could cause problems for the supply network. Of course it's also easily dealt with by introducing random small delays in the price update time or other programmatic methods.

    2. Re:Spontaneous Consumption by black+soap · · Score: 1

      So, you are looking at runaway prices like when California deregulated the energy market and the automated computer programs all manipulated the price immediately? Or maybe you are referencing the stock market, where automated trading algorithms seem to be designed to respond to eachother to produce price instability?

  12. Obligatory ALF reference by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Planet Melmac. Yeah, it was a great place until it exploded."
    —"What happened?"
    "Everybody plugged in their hair dryers at the same time."

  13. we have more then what is needed on generation by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    we have more then what is needed on the generation side but what is lacking is the power transmission that needs to have alot more wires / links.

    1. Re:we have more then what is needed on generation by cdrguru · · Score: 1

      We are on the ragged edge of capacity on the generation side, but there is currently enough to go around most of the time. People are going to have remote-cutoff controls put on air conditioning and other high-use devices soon, but the overall impact should be small. Unless of course there is continued growth in demand. Since the native US population is shrinking you would think this wouldn't be a problem. Except every new immigrant (legal or illegal) is another 10-20 KWh on the grid and we are getting 100,000 of them a year.

      Yes, transmission is a problem, but the problem is made much worse because of the social issues surrounding transmission lines. Ever single reader of cutting-edge publications like the Weekly World News (famous for Bat Boy pictures) "knows" that the radiation from electric power lines causes impotence, cancer, autism and a host of other bad things. So, it is the duty of ever Weekly World News reader to protest any proposed transmission line construction in their area because otherwise their flowers won't grow.

      End result of this is that it is almost impossible to build a new transmission line except in the middle of nowhere. So any idea you might have of seeing HVDC cryogenic superconducting transmission lines in your area is a complete fantasy - they can never be built. The protests will be too strong. It will be thousands of soccer moms thinking you want to kill their children.

  14. Everybody Panic! by loftwyr · · Score: 4, Funny

    He's right! And if everyone in town flushes their toilet at the same time, all the pipes will burst and we'll all die!

    1. Re:Everybody Panic! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      This is why my whole town flushes at 2AM when toilet usage is at its lowest.

    2. Re:Everybody Panic! by Narcocide · · Score: 1

      Actually recent water conservation efforts in the Southern California region have shown that to keep the pipes from bursting under excess pressure we actually need to avoid using too little water. So flush away; it is the incoming pipe that is pressurized, not the drain.

    3. Re:Everybody Panic! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, because pressurized pipes work the same way as electrical grids. Seriously, who modded this up? I thought this was news for nerds, not sound bytes and stupid analogies for idiots.

    4. Re:Everybody Panic! by CastrTroy · · Score: 1

      Similar thing for my city. They had a big campaign to get people to use less water. Well, it worked. So well in fact that they had to raise the cost of water so that they could make enough to keep the water services adequately funded. Turns out that for water, the cost to operate the services has very little to do with the amount of water consumed. For example, it takes about the same amount of money to operate whether they have to process 5 million cubic metres or 10 million cubic metres (made up numbers). Basically they had a such a reduction in usage that rates doubled to make up for the difference in usage. Internet, Water, and to some extent electricity work this way. The main cost is in getting the system abel to handle peak load. And using the system at less than peak load is basically just wasted capacity. Electricity (at least coal, nuclear natural gas, and other fuel based methods) have an input required so they don't suffer from this as much. But if you look at solar, wind, hyrdoelectric, then they have to be built to the maximum capacity, and anything not used basically is wasted.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    5. Re:Everybody Panic! by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      Quick, wake up the kids! It's pee time!

    6. Re:Everybody Panic! by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      Yup. Big problem with utilities. That's why California decoupled usage from profits. We just need to do the same thing with french fries now, figure out how to have food producers and sellers encourage people to eat less instead of saying "supersize that for only a penny more".

    7. Re:Everybody Panic! by BitterOak · · Score: 1

      Those old enough to remember the show ALF will recall that his home planet of Melmac was destroyed when everyone turned on their hairdryers at the same time one day.

      --
      If I can be modded down for being a troll, can I be modded up for being an orc, or a balrog?
    8. Re:Everybody Panic! by black+soap · · Score: 1

      In my city, some of the longer streches of pipe weren't getting enough flow, the chlorine wasn't surviving all the way to the end user, allowing bacteria to grow in certain of the water lines. To reduce this they had to go around opening fire hydrants up to let water flow out, throughout the city, on a shedule. It isn't a problem now that we are in drought, though (we are usually in a drought, if you actually look at the numbers), but when it is a wet year, people use sprinklers less, and bacteria grows in the pipes.

    9. Re:Everybody Panic! by black+soap · · Score: 1

      "For a nickel more, we won't give you any more fries, and we'll give it to you as a "diet supersize."

      Then they don't even have to make extra fries.

  15. Since no one else has noticed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "4 AM in the morning?"

    1. Re:Since no one else has noticed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...at night when the sun is down and everyone is sleeping

    2. Re:Since no one else has noticed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What's the problem? Haven't you heard of 2 AM in the afternoon? Next you're going to complain about ATM machines and PIN numbers.

  16. solutions... by datapharmer · · Score: 2

    The solutions here are a case of "No shit Sherlock." Put in a random offset in the update cycling - They do the same thing for automatic software updates already. If you schedule for an update every half hour it might actually update anywhere from 15 minutes to 45 minutes (adjust delay as needed for application). The random staggering keeps everyone from grabbing an update (and thus cycling their power hungry appliances on) at the same time.

    --
    Get a web developer
    1. Re:solutions... by benjamindees · · Score: 1

      Of course that's the obvious solution. Just mandate a certain "resolution" to the timing of power-hungry appliances, somewhere around fifteen minutes or so to begin with. If you set it to come on at 3:45, it will actually come on sometime between 3:37 and 3:53. Just make it clear and standard and limited to large loads and there shouldn't be any problem. Over time the resolution can be increased as the grid becomes more flexible.

      --
      "I assumed blithely that there were no elves out there in the darkness"
    2. Re:solutions... by gstrickler · · Score: 1

      "Smart" devices, particularly automotive chargers can also ramp and/or limit their power draw to allow time for supplies to increase/decrease. Randomization of start times combined with ramped power draw and communication with the grid make it a non-issue.

      --
      make imaginary.friends COUNT=100 VISIBLE=false
    3. Re:solutions... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Power companies already do that. It's an opt-in system. You get a small financial reward depending on how they cut your power to your big energy devices (heating/AC, hot water etc).

    4. Re:solutions... by YrWrstNtmr · · Score: 1

      Of course that's the obvious solution. Just mandate a certain "resolution" to the timing of power-hungry appliances, somewhere around fifteen minutes or so to begin with. If you set it to come on at 3:45, it will actually come on sometime between 3:37 and 3:53.

      And if the "On" is tied to the nightly price drop at 3;45 AM, people will accuse them of playing with the start times to eke out a few extra minutes at the higher rate level.
      And the accusation may be well founded, because some bean counter will do that.

    5. Re:solutions... by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

      Umm not really that simple. You are thinking of this a nothing more than simple collision detection issue. Just as Ethernet detected when a packet collision happened it then waits a random within a range amount of time before retransmission. The problem here is that for an electric car you could also end up with a race condition. You see that car has to charge for X amount of time and must be Charged by x. Now if the charger waits for the price of electricity to reach X it could wait until it is too late to charge the car. So you would have to have the charger say if it is x amount of time before say 8am charge it up no matter how expensive. At that time you could have a big spike in energy use.
      Now your random wait will help prevent all the chargers jumping on at once so you will not have an almost square wave style spike but it still look very much like a spike when the price drops to x and then will fall off when the price drops to y.
      I would say that you are over trivializing the problem a good bit. Make smart charging stations could destabilize the grid if not done correctly. Think of the effect that program trading has had on markets before safeguards where put in. Not an unsolveable problem to be sure but also not the trivial duhh you seem to think it is.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    6. Re:solutions... by Lehk228 · · Score: 1

      it would work better to allow prospective buying, compliant devices would electronically transmit their usage profiles (time @ power) and the buyer would set a deadline to complete, the supplier would send a binding quote to the buyer, the purchase would be fulfilled by the utility company sending a signal to the device when to start and which profile to use, rather than buying power at a certain time, you would buy power at a price, the supplier would set the time and they would guarantee delivery based on your devices charging profiles so it would be delivered by your deadline.

      --
      Snowden and Manning are heroes.
    7. Re:solutions... by benjamindees · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure whether you just didn't understand my post (and the OP for that matter) or don't understand the smart grid in general. The power company doesn't actually have any control over when your dishwasher comes on or your car starts charging. What I suggested was for some governmental authority to mandate a random fuzz be added to the timing function of consumer level devices. This is not something that "bean counters" at the power company would have access to. And most individuals would not be able to alter it either.

      --
      "I assumed blithely that there were no elves out there in the darkness"
  17. WTH! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If I'm understanding this correctly, the system is based off of the speculated commodity pricing of electricity within a region. Does anyone else see a problem with having the grid shift power demand based on a fairly volatile variable that is being introduced here? Investor or Corporate profit should not be a determining factor on whether or not I should run the dishwasher when I get home from work, or on saturday morning.

    1. Re:WTH! by jank1887 · · Score: 1

      with the right metering scheme, they basically pass their commodity pricing to you. so, you get to decide whether or not you should run the dishwasher when you get home from work, or on a saturday morning, based on what you want to pay. If you want to pay less, you'll run the dishwasher when it's cheaper for you if you're given the ability to make that differentiation. As it stands you have no financial incentive not to run your dishwasher at peak times, so you run it whenever.

      regarding the system, it's about load leveling. current systems strain to meet peak energy demand. if they could incentivize shifting energy from that peak, it makes the system's ability to meet peak demand easier. (otherwise we'd need to build more power plants. then NIMBY takes hold.)

    2. Re:WTH! by JamesP · · Score: 1

      Price variations on this case are not based on speculation

      They are based on the fact that, at night, power consumption drops considerably.

      Even though most forms of energy generation have a certain level of control over the power generated, at night you can say there is a surplus (since most forms have a generation floor)

      --
      how long until /. fixes commenting on Chrome?
  18. One way to solve this by OzPeter · · Score: 1

    I was at a talk last year about how to solve this issues. The proposed solution was to take the decision to use/not use power out of the hands of the consumer by having smart appliances that could be regulated from an outside source. Basically you would nominate "desires" and the "system" would attempt to optimize power usage to meet those desires over the entire local neighborhood (IE delay running the dryer now to put a quick charge in the car so you can go out to dinner, as dinner is more important to you now than the dried clothes are). This was being proposed in order to smooth out the demand peaks that are being expected when everyone in the street had electric cars and wanted to charge them all up at once, and how this affects the local power infrastructure. The talk presented some interesting data that showed that with minor tweaking you can readily smooth out major peaks.

    The question I raised was basically "Yep the technology works, but how are you going to change the mindset of people away from ME ME ME to US US US?".

    --
    I am Slashdot. Are you Slashdot as well?
    1. Re:One way to solve this by operagost · · Score: 1

      The question I raised was basically "Yep the technology works, but how are you going to change the mindset of people away from ME ME ME to US US US?".

      Red herring. People who don't want to cede control of their homes to bureaucrats aren't selfish, they're wary of despots. It goes way beyond being annoyed that you had no clothes for work because Mr. Smith didn't let you run the dryer. It ends at having your oxygen machine cut off because Mr. Jones wanted to set his air conditioner to 68 degrees.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    2. Re:One way to solve this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What happens when you wake up in the morning to find that the energy overlords couldn't fit your car charge in, or your cloths have been sitting in a dryer wet all night long. Three cheers for energy "bread lines." I can't wait.

    3. Re:One way to solve this by Idarubicin · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The question I raised was basically "Yep the technology works, but how are you going to change the mindset of people away from ME ME ME to US US US?".

      The same way - and the only way - you usually get large numbers of people to engage in apparently cooperative or altruistic behaviour: bribery. Offer people a small reduction in electricity rates (or a cash rebate, or some other real-money incentive) in exchange for allowing the utility to remotely adjust/control their consumption.

      Many utilities (in the United States and elsewhere) are already doing this with air conditioner thermostats. They offer a rebate or rate break in exchange for giving the utility the ability to remotely shut off your air conditioner for a set period of time (generally no more than one hour per day, and often less) during high demand periods. Some have gone to even 'smarter' systems, which allow the end-user a small number of 'overrides'. (Usually you can go without the A/C for a few minutes, but if you're hosting a party and need the cooling, then you can have it on a handful of occasions each year. This little bit of added flex)

      I see no serious technological, political, or social barrier to implementing a similar system to regulate charging systems for electric vehicles. If anything, there's even more flexibility here--the car (and its owner) don't care whether it does its six hours of charging between 9pm and 3am, or between midnight and 6am, or as a dozen 30-minute blocks spread over the whole night.

      --
      ~Idarubicin
    4. Re:One way to solve this by blair1q · · Score: 1

      Anyone buying an EV right now is already on the US side of that equation more than anyone driving a Hummer.

      So the solution is to implement the grid-controlled demand loading now, while your socially conscious early adopters are driving the technology.

    5. Re:One way to solve this by CastrTroy · · Score: 1

      My local utility already has something like this. They install a special thermostat, which they can control remotely. They are allowed to increase the thermostat by 1 degree during peak usage. You of course (if you even notice) can set it back down 1 degree after it changes. This is a volutary program, and the local utility even pays you and installs the thermostat free of charge. So while I think that people wouldn't want the local utility deciding when they can charge their car and do laundry, most people wouldn't mind their A/C getting turned up a single degree, especially since they can set it back.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
  19. Congestion Control... by John.P.Jones · · Score: 1

    In order to successfully mitigate congestion in a network requires the sender having detected packet loss to cut transmission rates exponentially and then linearly increase transmission rates until congestion is detected (exponential back off). I suspect that power congestion response in a smart grid would be similar, perhaps by doubling the current price if demand is exceeding production but only linearly decreasing the price as production exceeds demand.

  20. "Smart" is not a substitute for energy storage by alispguru · · Score: 1

    Which is why, absent mega-watt-hour storage for electric power, wind and PV solar are not useful sources of grid electricity. Once they get above a few percent of the capacity of the grid, their instability currently(*) requires another source of energy that can react quickly when they go up or down in contribution to the grid.

    (*) Sorry...

    --

    To a Lisp hacker, XML is S-expressions in drag.
    1. Re:"Smart" is not a substitute for energy storage by geekoid · · Score: 1

      There not good source of base power.

      Solar panels can drastically offset the energy drain from electric cars.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    2. Re:"Smart" is not a substitute for energy storage by jovius · · Score: 1

      Couldn't that be solved by creating intelligent micro-grids, which contribute the extra energy back to the greater grid? Instead of continuing along mega-powerplant route it might be useful to create many smaller and local power plants.

  21. Profit From Arbitraging Electricity Pricing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I've been looking at a (commercial grade) battery backup for my house, and my thought is, why not let the battery backup pay for itself by charging itself every day at 2 AM (or whenever the power's cheapest) and discharge it at 5:30 PM when the power price is the highest and make 8 - 10 cents/kWh a day. Unfortunately, my utility doesn't have smart meters, so I'm stuck with the flat rate, so I haven't done too much research beyond an initial glance. Has anyone looked into this more in depth? Could arbitraging the electricity price more than pay for itself over time?

    1. Re:Profit From Arbitraging Electricity Pricing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      IANAEE* but wouldn't that really put the skids on the lifetime of your batteries? Batts only have a finite number of charge cycles before they die so I think that might cost you more in the long run!

      * I am not an electrical engineer

    2. Re:Profit From Arbitraging Electricity Pricing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Depends on the loss of your storage medium.

      Saying between 50-92% efficiency, you'd lose 8% off the top, having the most efficient charger/inverter.

      Then, add the cost of materials and a grid-tie system.

    3. Re:Profit From Arbitraging Electricity Pricing by h4rr4r · · Score: 1

      Some batteries will cycle millions of times. You have to pick batteries suited to your application. In this case niether mass nor volume is a factor but price and cycles are. Cheap lead acid is there fore the way to go. Depending on price it might be worth doing. Far better to spend the money on PV panels or a turbine and sell that power then buy power when it is not enough though.

    4. Re:Profit From Arbitraging Electricity Pricing by JamesP · · Score: 1

      With a flat rate I think this could work only if you have an alternative generation method in your house (like solar, etc)

      But yeah, with smart meters this would be much easier.

      --
      how long until /. fixes commenting on Chrome?
    5. Re:Profit From Arbitraging Electricity Pricing by rust627 · · Score: 1

      Theoretically a good idea
      One problem
      Efficiency, or lack thereof.
      When you charge a battery (DC) from the mains (AC) there is a power loss. Efficiency of charging a battery is not 100%, this being slashdot I am sure someone can give a more accurate figure, but I believe it is less than 80%.
      Now, there is a small, (but still measurable) storage loss, leakage if you like, from battery systems.
      And finally, converting this stored DC power from your (Very Expensive) Battery back ups through your (very expensive) True sine wave invertors, back to AC, also has an inherent inefficiency, once again , I am sure someone could give a more accurate figure than I can at this moment, but I believe the efficiencies are below 60%.
      In order to improve efficiencies, some places that install solar power are starting to discuss with their clients the installation of 12 and 24 V DC LED lighting so that all lighting in the building is powered from the batteries regardless of the peak or off peak status of the external supply. This reduces the loss of power as the electricity is converted from low Voltage DC to Higher voltage AC.
      So the end result is, yes it probably could work for you in the long term, but only if you modified as much as possible of your house to run at 12 or 24 Volt DC in order to avoid the inefficiencies of inverting the stored power back up to AC.
      Or you could go with it and charge the batteries from solar panels and amortise the cost of the panels over a period of time, this will work out cheaper than buying power from your local power company. the more panels you have, the less electricity you have to buy, do it right and you can actually make more power than you use.
      There are documented cases of people doing this and selling power back to the grid (many power companies, in order to be seen as 'green' are keen to do this), one case i heard of recently involved a couple in england who make about 1,800 pounds a year selling their excess solar and wind generated power 'Back to the grid'.

      --
      da da da dum indeed.
  22. Randomization by karl.auerbach · · Score: 1

    In mulitcast network code it is common to randomize scheduling by a factor of +/- 50% in order to reduced synchronization effects.

    Similarly, power use scheduling could be randomized across some range.

  23. I've been saying this for years by DerekLyons · · Score: 0

    "In other words, it's OK if you're the only person charging your Chevy Volt at 2am in the morning, but if a whole town does it exactly the same time... there will be issues."
     
    I've been saying this for years - despite what boosters of electric cars would have you believe, there isn't a magical well of electrical power available at night. The utilities have spent the better part of a century either finding customers for the overnight low demand period or optimizing their networks to not generate unneeded power in the first place. Even without this, you cannot place additional loads on the network without there being consequences.

    1. Re:I've been saying this for years by geekoid · · Score: 1

      of course, but it is afar manageable then most people seem to believe' OTOH, most people who complain about this have no idea what ti takes to charge an electric cars. It's takes lot less electricity then they 'think' it does.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    2. Re:I've been saying this for years by BasilBrush · · Score: 5, Informative

      I've been saying this for years - despite what boosters of electric cars would have you believe, there isn't a magical well of electrical power available at night.

      Yes there is. You've been wrong for years.

      The utilities have spent the better part of a century either finding customers for the overnight low demand period or optimizing their networks to not generate unneeded power in the first place.

      But they haven't found enough customers for overnight electricity to make the demand anything like during the day. As to "optimising the networks", power station capacity that is there during the day is also there at night. Whilst much of it is currently taken off line, if night time power demands increase, then they can leave more of them on-line at night.

      Of course there are consequences to changes. But that's a very different thing from there being catastrophic, or even difficult consequences.

    3. Re:I've been saying this for years by anon*100 · · Score: 1
  24. tada super capacitors by hypergreatthing · · Score: 2

    Perfect solution. Charge capacitor whenever you want at the lowest cost hours. Use said stored charge to power any devices you want at home including your car.

    Yeah i know doesn't exist now/yet. But i don't see why it couldn't, you're moving capacity from the grid to the end point.

    1. Re:tada super capacitors by blair1q · · Score: 1

      Um, the car is a super capacitor...that you discharge in the morning and after work.

      And you are charging it at the lowest-cost hours: in the middle of the night.

      The problem seems to be, so is everyone else. Which is not just going to raise the night-time price, but will melt the grid. If these guys are right and nobody sane is listening.

    2. Re:tada super capacitors by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      And the incentive to make and develop this technology won't exist until there's a need for it. And there won't be a need for it if the 12am usage costs the same as the 12pm usage.

    3. Re:tada super capacitors by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is a little problem. The power from lines is AC. Supercaps only store DC. Adding any inverters in there will result in significant reduction in efficiency.

    4. Re:tada super capacitors by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So, a reality-based reply to a monumentally ignorant and stupid comment is -1 around here?

  25. This is just a bug by DontLickJesus · · Score: 1

    Systems can be built to deal with this problem, calling it the end of the idea is simply short sighted.

    --
    Where genius and insanity become confused true wisdom is found
    1. Re:This is just a bug by blair1q · · Score: 1

      I have an idea: when you buy an electric car, buy a 5-kW gas generator to go with it...

      Don't laugh. Someone is probably doing it right now.

  26. SELL !! SELL !! SELL !! SELL !! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    God damn you sell to save your ass !!

  27. Reservations by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    While not a technically simple answer, this could be solved with "reservations". Your car wants to charge at 2am for 4 hours, it uses the (given) network to ask for that much power at that time. If it is granted the reservation, that many kWh are counted at the smart meter and sold at a discounted rate. If a large amount of power is drawn without a reservation, it's charged at the base rate. If your car *must* charge for 4hrs at 2am and is refused a reservation, you might get a partial discount "for trying". To make the system actual able to load-balance, your car asks for 4hrs of charging anywhere between e.g. 11pm and 7am, and the utility tells it when it get that block. If the meter was actually designed to separately keep track of a few key load circuits *separately* ("the house", car, HVAC), this would work "better" in that the kWh's being charged for can actually be *accounted* to a given device.

    The utilities have been doing this in reverse for a long time, with a "utility curtailment" signal sent to HVAC systems to turn them off. However, to my understanding those are typically done in the form of rolling blackouts, neighborhood at a time....

  28. hmmmm...I was wondering... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "...Chevy Volt at 2am in the morning..." Is there some time other than the morning that 2am occurs?

    1. Re:hmmmm...I was wondering... by BitZtream · · Score: 1

      Last Call?

      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
  29. Stop. Reverse it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Rather than scheduling my car to charge when demand on the power grid tends to be low, stagger everyone's charging so that the grid's efficiency is maximized. So instead of waiting for low-cost power, we lower the cost of power.

  30. Shocking by ThatsNotPudding · · Score: 1

    ....what?

  31. Easy fix by AJWM · · Score: 1

    My local power company pays me (or rather, discounts my bill slightly) to let them mount a remote switch on my house A/C unit. This lets them shut it off for short periods during peak demand.

    Installing a similar circuit on e-vehicle charging systems would take care of oddly-timed peaks if everyone in the neighborhood is charging their car at the same time.

    tl;dr - just make the grid smarter.

    --
    -- Alastair
    1. Re:Easy fix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      tl;dr - just make the grid smarter.

      The fear is that they make it too smart for its own good.

      Everyone installs your shutoff, and then the Big Brain detects that there's too much load so it shuts off everyone's chargers. Only now there's enough free load to charge so it turns them back on. Only now its overloaded so it turns them off. On. Off. On.

      Or instead of the communist central planning method, they use the "free market" method: Everyone is charging so the price goes up to match the high load. So everyone's chargers shut off to wait for a lower-cost time to charge, so the load and the price goes back down. Everyone's charges kick back on so the load and price comes back up. Off. On. Off. On.

    2. Re:Easy fix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... sorry boss, cant get to work today.... yeah they shut my car charger off... who? the power company.... yes seriously.... because they give me a 2% discount on my bill.... no i cant charge it now and be in by lunch.... because its hot out.... well everyone is using their AC so they shut off my car charger again.... what do you mean "... and the horse i rode in on"?

    3. Re:Easy fix by Quiet_Desperation · · Score: 1

      Everyone installs your shutoff, and then the Big Brain detects that there's too much load so it shuts off everyone's chargers. Only now there's enough free load to charge so it turns them back on. Only now its overloaded so it turns them off. On. Off. On.

      So you program in some hysteresis. This is Control Theory 101.

  32. Minute by minute my ass by spectro · · Score: 1

    I got my smartmeter here in Texas more than a year ago. So far the best data I can get is delayed by 2 days and at 15 minute intervals.

    There are some mythical devices called HAN that you are supposed to buy somewhere to use for instant monitoring inside your house but I have yet to find anybody selling them.

    --
    HTML is obsolete. It's time for a new, simpler and richer markup language.
    1. Re:Minute by minute my ass by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      http://www.bluelineinnovations.com/Products/

    2. Re:Minute by minute my ass by greed · · Score: 1

      ...and if that Blue Line device doesn't do it for you (mine failed due to weather ingress in the bit that goes on the meter), you can just go outside and look.

      At least, if you've got an LCD readout meter. All the models I've seen cycle between at least "total kWh usage" and "current kW load". (For the old spinning-disk-of-aluminum inductive units, grab a stopwatch and see how long it takes for the black mark to come 'round again.)

    3. Re:Minute by minute my ass by blair1q · · Score: 1
    4. Re:Minute by minute my ass by spectro · · Score: 1

      *facepalm*

      BlueInnovation energy monitors is a 2 piece device where you have to install something by the meter itself.

      The smartmeter I have in my house has a transmitter compatible with something called "Home Area Network" (HAN) devices. It doesn't need anything installed in the meter to transmit the readings.

      Once you acquire HAN-compatible power monitor, you have to call your electric provider and activate it to allow the smartmeter to send data to it.

      I have found many references to such devices being sold but nobody actually selling them.

      --
      HTML is obsolete. It's time for a new, simpler and richer markup language.
    5. Re:Minute by minute my ass by spectro · · Score: 1

      If only there were a way to search the world for information about such things...

      You, 6 digits id dare to tell a 5 digit id about google? :-p

      None of the devices in these links is compatible with my smart meter.

      Here is a device that is compatible with my smart meter (uses ZigBee) but nobody is selling it yet :-s

      --
      HTML is obsolete. It's time for a new, simpler and richer markup language.
    6. Re:Minute by minute my ass by blair1q · · Score: 2

      You, 6 digits id dare to tell a 5 digit id about google? :-p

      On the off-chance you hadn't been anywhere but /. in the past 40 years.

  33. Re:Distributed by taiwanjohn · · Score: 2

    Both storage and production should be distributed as widely as possible. If half the homes in your neighborhood have solar panels, wind turbines, and on-site storage, then there will be much less need for the coal-fired "utility" plant to adjust to localized spikes.

    --
    XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve your problem, you're not using enough of it. --AC
  34. Re:Utmost by taiwanjohn · · Score: 1

    Upmost is a b-grade peripherals manufacturer in Taiwan. I think you meant utmost instead. ;-)

    --
    XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve your problem, you're not using enough of it. --AC
  35. Not just power... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Back when I was supporting a particular software package with definitions updates I had to tell people to set their update times to ones that do NOT end in 5 or 0, and if they have a lot of boxes, have different segments on different times as well. When they didn't, they tended to get bogged down with all the other machines on their network wanting the updates at the same exact time, and all the people trying to hit our servers at the same time as well.

    You've got 10,000 computers trying to get updates from your host at 12:00am, what do you think is going to happen?

    Now also look at the internet where you've got around 4 million computers all trying to get the updates from the software producers update server at 12:00am. Yeah, it's the internet, and that particular server is geared for some heavy spikes, but it's still going to get lagged to all hell under those circumstances. Save yourself and everyone else a headache and schedule it at a different time.

    Now as to why I say no times ending in 5 or 0, it's because of the tendency of people to choose times ending in those two. I'd guess that over 90% of the people will usually choose a time that ends in 5 or 0, so to reduce your traffic congestion as much as possible, use the other 8 minutes instead.
    (It's kind of like going to a store with 10 checkout lines, and for some reason there are around a dozen people in lines 5 and 10, but no more than 1 each in the other lines.)

    It's going to be the same with anything else that can be scheduled. People will tend to stick with the default, then they go for on the hour, then on the half hour, then on the quarter hour, and if they have to choose again, it will still probably be a time ending in 5 or 0. Break from the herd and avoid getting trampled.

    1. Re:Not just power... by BitZtream · · Score: 1

      You've got 10,000 computers trying to get updates from your host at 12:00am, what do you think is going to happen?

      I'm going to use a lot of bandwidth ... 10k hits isn't really that big of a deal for any modern web server. Apache and IIS will both handle it on a single machine if configured properly.

      While I don't work for some crappy AV company, I can say that serving 10k users at a single point in time is only marginally difficult if you don't know what you're doing. Trivial if you do. Get back to me when you start talking millions of users wanting updates at a single point in time.

      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
  36. Get out of the Dark Ages and into the 21st century by kheldan · · Score: 1

    What we need to do is stop being superstitious about nuclear power and build safe nuclear power plants, and actually operate them with the emphasis on safety, rather than the emphasis on cost-cutting (read as: profitability). "Alternative" energy solutions are fine and dandy, but they'll either never catch up with demand, or will catch up too slowly. We may yet have fusion power, but it's still far enough away that we can't make that part of the equation. Nuclear fission may not be the best long-term solution, but it's the best solution we have right now.

    --
    Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
  37. Re:Utmost by Osgeld · · Score: 1

    my bad, and thanks for not being a dick about it ... thats pretty rare

  38. A smart grid by BitZtream · · Score: 2

    Wouldn't allow everyone to receive the power at one time. If the plants were overloaded, two things could happen, A) pricing jumps up automatically, causing some devices to not consume power due to their price rate limiting.

    Second, all the smart equipment in the grid could simply not pass full amperage through to the receiver while the plant is spooling up. The smart meters can provide rolling blackouts as needed to keep the grid under control. These smart devices in the home would be aware of they reduced power availability and simply wait until the grid told them there was sufficient power to activate.

    Smart devices that want to turn on at certain times would not turn on exactly at that time, there would be a random number generator which adds some sort of randomized delay so that you set it to run when the price drops to $0.05/hour, and when that occurs, it waits some random amount of time between 0 and 30 minutes. All smart devices do the same thing, effectively giving the grid time to compensate and allow plants to spool up as needed. The smart devices can also be told the grid is overloaded so please wait.

    We're talking about a SMART GRID ... you simply program the devices to avoid the problem. If you don't, its not a SMART grid, its just a grid with some silly controllers on it.

    Second, once the power company realizes that everyone charges their electric cars at 2am during the price drop ... they simply spool the plants up in advance so they are ready for the load. It'll be rather predictable, kind of like the early morning when everyone gets up and starts using hair dryers and electric ranges, microwaves, electric hot water heaters and all that. They just spool the plants up in advance as the load is rather predictable.

    Someone at MIT is missing the tree because they keep looking at the forest.

    The grid and these devices are communicating with each other, the grid can simply tell the devices to wait a minute, its not ready, and if they try now they are going to get denied. This isn't a difficult problem to solve, I'm fairly certain it would be trivial to implement the software required on the cheapest of microcontrollers. An Arduino for instance would have no problem dealing with this from both the grid side or the home device side.

    --
    Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
  39. Opt in to send in pre-programmed times by johnny6vasquez · · Score: 1

    If the end user has programmed their charging to begin at 2am every night, maybe the power company can offer a slight incentive to have people opt in to send their schedules in advance.

    This way the utility will know in advance that a ramp up in demand will occur at 2am and in turn schedule their equipment to start up in time.

    Not everyone may elect to send in their schedules, but enough may be motivated by the incentives to be able to indicate a general trend which can be extrapolated to the whole user base.

    It seems like it would be a reasonable feature for the power meters to incorporate.

  40. Re:Losing control by 0123456 · · Score: 1

    Does it bother anyone else that many are proposing that we allow utilities the right to tell us when we can and can not use certain appliances within our own house?

    But it's Green, dude.

    The odd thing is that most industries want to sell you more stuff, whereas the energy industry keeps trying to sell less stuff and raise prices. Pretty soon we'll be better off running our own generators instead of buying grid power.

  41. On-site service by tepples · · Score: 1

    I doubt many people consistently drive more than 100 miles a day.

    Then you doubt that many people work in parcel delivery or other forms of on-site service. I doubt clients will let service technicians steal their electricity.

    1. Re:On-site service by Bob+the+Super+Hamste · · Score: 1

      And as a total percentage of the work force how many people work as truck drivers, cabbies, or express couturiers? Besides there there will more than likely be company vehicles and not their personal ones. On a average day I drive about 80 miles to and from work with and any errands I need to run. Now provided that it isn't cold and traffic isn't bad because of a snow storm I could get buy with a Leaf. Also it seems reasonable that a large special purpose (delivery van, semi truck style vehicle) would be a perfect option for an electric vehicle. The are large to begin with, have extra space and can pretty much be guaranteed to be carrying only a single person. So we could replace the engine and transmission with an electric motors at the wheels, and thus have the old engine bay area, fuel tank area, and part of the passenger compartment filled with batteries. It doesn't seem unreasonable to me that this would be a viable option. Also commercial drivers have mandatory rest periods which could be used to recharge the vehicles so if there were electric vehicles in the trucking fleet truck stops and rest areas would have an incentive to put in charging stations where people pay by the kilowatt hour.

      --
      Time to offend someone
    2. Re:On-site service by tepples · · Score: 1

      And as a total percentage of the work force how many people work as truck drivers, cabbies, or express couturiers?

      I was thinking of repair technicians too. I guess I'm just biased because I just had warranty service done on my Dell laptop. Instead of bringing the laptop into a store, the technician came to my door. Also plumbers, electricians, etc.

      Also commercial drivers have mandatory rest periods which could be used to recharge the vehicles

      I've been told long-distance freight trucks have teams of two drivers: one drives for eight hours, another drives for eight hours, then they rest. Is the rest long enough for the next day of driving?

    3. Re:On-site service by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 1

      And as a total percentage of the work force how many people work as truck drivers, cabbies, or express couturiers?

      I wouldn't think express couturiers would be all that much problem. Not like the sewing machines use all that much electricity.

      Or perhaps you were thinking of couriers, not dressmakers?

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
  42. did it really need mit to figure this out? by Truekaiser · · Score: 1

    Isn't it obvious that if you design the system so people can take advantage of 'off-peak' hours cost it would eliminate that time being 'off-peak'?
    Or do people not realize that there are millions of other people in this country alone who in the same system that would be seeking the same monetary savings?
    Are we too short sighted to see that in such a system as these same people chase each newer, and shorter 'off-peak' time that it would eventually end up being a system that had NO off-peak time resulting in higher costs for all? Not to mention that in such a system we willingly allow others to dictate what we do with what we pay for after we pay for it like we don't own it to begin with?

    1. Re:did it really need mit to figure this out? by Quiet_Desperation · · Score: 1

      The idea is just to get everything out of the peak and spread it around a bit.

      However, the total, found by integrating over the day, stays the same. It isn't like the whole day will jump up to that peak level.

    2. Re:did it really need mit to figure this out? by Truekaiser · · Score: 1

      That's what will happen in the first round. The following 'off-hour' peaks will be shorter and shorter till basically 'off-peak' will not be lower then peak demand.

  43. Peak of PV and AC by tepples · · Score: 1

    Doesn't PV output peak at roughly the same time that demand from air conditioning and business lighting peaks?

  44. What's mine is mine and what's your's is mine by Latent+Heat · · Score: 1
    Ah, the power company.

    I was offered a "deal" on some kind of residential demand metering.

    I mean some deal. The off-peak price went down a little, but the on-peak price went up a lot. It is one thing to purchase some kind of switch or Smart Grid interlink so that the dehumidifer only runs at night and that the water heater only runs at night. But the way this deal was structured, I would have to do almost everything -- cook, wash clothes after 11 PM at night to even break even.

    If the deal was essentially "revenue neutral" for a common pattern of residential usage and you got a discount for shifting time-of-use, I would have said bring it on. But to raise my electric cost unless I became a total night owl, fuggedaboudit!

  45. The real issue by gearloos · · Score: 1

    The problem is not that we don't have enough power. We have enough power in generation. The problem is nobody wants wires in their backyard so there is no way to upgrade the transmission and distribution systems to meet demand. A decent amount of excess power is actually available to be imported from neighboring states when needed. There is actually a very robust market just for exchange of power. It is really only a couple days out of each year when we get close to capacity of the transmission lines.

    --
    "Computers are a lot like Air Conditioners" "They both work great until you start opening Windows"
    1. Re:The real issue by cdrguru · · Score: 1

      Today there is some excess capacity that can be transferred between states. An example is a goodly part of California is run from the Palo Verde nuclear plant outside Phoenix. It isn't practical today to build a power plant in California, so they take what they can get from Arizona.

      This is coming to an end real soon. Arizona does not have infinite capacity to supply California. As demand in Arizona grows less and less will be available for California. The result will be that stuff starts getting turned off in homes during the day to keep the offices powered, and vice-versa in the evenings. Sure, there will likely be plenty of capacity available at night - but if you want to run something that takes as much power as the home air conditioner you may want to think about turning the air conditioner off while you are doing it.

  46. Why doesn't it dynamically adjust as usage varies? by HalAtWork · · Score: 1

    Why doesn't it dynamically adjust as usage varies? Plug in at the right time and you lock in the price for a determined time (which is shown to you on said smart meter). Problem solved.

  47. Power over Ethernet by tepples · · Score: 1

    A capacitor stores DC.

    Then run 48 V DC over Cat 6 throughout the house and replace various small appliances' power supplies with DC ones. If 48 V DC is good enough for telcos, it ought to be good enough for homes.

    1. Re:Power over Ethernet by Lehk228 · · Score: 1

      IIRC 48V DC is used by telco's for two reasons, one is they can make easy battery backups and 2 there are more stringent safety rules above 50V

      --
      Snowden and Manning are heroes.
  48. Re:Losing control by BitZtream · · Score: 1

    Its not 'no you can't do that' its 'if you do that now it'll cost you $1.50, but if you wait till midnight, it'll cost you $0.25'.

    --
    Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
  49. Same problem as not-so-smart grid by overshoot · · Score: 1
    It doesn't take a computer to really screw up the grid, though.

    As pointed out in the Risks Forum twenty years ago, we're moving more and more to constant-power loads on the electrical supply. When most power was resistive lighting, dumb motors, and heat, we had a nice positive slope to the load/voltage curve and the system was quite linear. Now we have a rapidly increasing proportion of "smart" loads -- ones which use switching techniques to effectively get constant power. Your computer is one, but so are newer air conditioners, refrigerators, vehicle chargers, etc.

    So?

    A constant power load has an effective negative impedance: as the voltage goes down, the current goes up. And that's unstable. When the cumulative load line shifts to zero impedance, it all becomes unstable. A brownout will actually result in an increase in current, bringing the system down with no warning.

    Sleep tight, chilluns.

    --
    Lacking <sarcasm> tags, /. substitutes moderation as "Troll."
    1. Re:Same problem as not-so-smart grid by cnkurzke · · Score: 1

      whoa grasshopper!

      nice thought, but please read up just a bit more about
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrical_impedance#Complex_impedance

      which - yes - is complex (pun intended) but has nothing to do with "always on" loads.

  50. Needs a SLA model by stereoroid · · Score: 1

    SLA = Service Level Agreement. Instead of saying "off peak = midnight - 6am", the utility agrees to provide power for an agreed duration at the off-peak rate, for those purposes e.g. "3+ continuous hours between 10pm and 6am". They can vary the time to suit their loading: some days it might kick in at 10pm, other days at 3am.

    Some days you get only the 3h you absolutely need, other days it might be available all night. You don't care if you're asleep, do you, as long as they meet the SLA and the night jobs get done? If they don't, there would be a penalty, of course.

    --
    (this is not a .sig)
  51. How many people have electric cars? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    For this to be an issue, a lot of people would have to buy electric cars at the same time. Basically, everyone gets there Smart grid on Friday then everyone runs out and buys an electric car on Saturday and the electric company had no idea this was going to happen.

    If the number of electric cars grows organically then the grid, either Smart or Regular, should be able to handle it. If there are issues then it has to do with the generators or the company not the grid.

    And how would this be different that if everyone suddely bought electric cars and recharged them at the same time on the plain old not-smart grid?

  52. Don't worry... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No one is actually buying Chevy Volts.

  53. Timing! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Simple.

    If "2am in the morning" doesn't work, just choose 2am in the afternoon.

  54. Skynet needed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Obviously what we have here is a failure to centrally communicate. A central computer or network of computers can schedule grids to come on and off during off peak hours based on the load in each power grid. Priority could be scheduled by previous usage and trumped by need (emergencies). After a while, spikes of energy will be averaged and plants will be able to anticipate the need.

    Google and Amazon network are built not to go down when usage expected to be high, same basic principles apply over time.

  55. Peak Hours by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Peak Hours will always be peak hours. I work for a power company in rural Nebraska where over half our load is just irrigation. Farmers run their irrigation all night and we control them during peak hours set forth by our wholesale providers. We run more load during off peak hours then we do during controlled peak hours. Big business and farming accounts for well over 75% of our load and revenue , however, households account for over 75% of our customer base. Customer load can't even shake a stick at business loads on any system, I don't care how many Chevy Volts the customers have charging. This article was not well researched and seems to be written by someone that doesn't understand the industry.

  56. Hmmm by drolli · · Score: 2

    off peak power usage is a technology of the 60s-80s, e.g. for heating to use electricity used in industry during the daytime.

    i always imagined a smart grid would mean that not everybody turns on at 2am but that you get even a little bit a better rate but letting the company decide when your car will be charged (e.g. sometimes between 1am and 8am).

  57. A spoonfull of jitter helps the power go down by WaffleMonster · · Score: 2

    Just randomly bias each smart meter or print different peak/off peak times on everyones bills.

    Realtime minute by minute rates could actually use feedback from the grid to improve reliability or respond to emergencies where n-1 could otherwise not be achived. You just include grid stability in the cost calculation.

  58. That is not smart ... by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

    Sounds to me that MIT does not know what a smart power grid is, sigh.

    --
    Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
  59. My wife wrote her thesis in E&E in 1990 on thi by Paul+Fernhout · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Basically, as part of her graduate work in Ecology and Evolution at SUNY Stony Brook (about 1990), my wife (Cynthia Kurtz) did computer simulations of digital organisms, and discovered that sometimes being "dumb" is really being smart, because you don't stick with the smart crowd who ends up competing over the same resource. People did not want to believe her results because they went against all the "foraging theory" of the time. She only got an MA out of that, not a PhD. She presented her results at an early ALife conference. Now people rediscover that effect in smart power grids...

    --
    A 21st century issue: the irony of technologies of abundance in the hands of those still thinking in terms of scarcity.
  60. Is the summary wrong or the article? by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 2

    Smart grids don't work like the summary is suggesting!
    a) there is no power plant spooled up ... it is surplus power that is sold cheap
    b) it is not that you just "activate your dishwasher". It is a market operation: I buy power for the actual price, is the buy order processed, the dishwasher activates.
    It is impossible in a smart grid that to many dish waters activate.

    --
    Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    1. Re:Is the summary wrong or the article? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your first point isn't quite right. There is no surplus power, only surplus generating capacity. Electricity isn't stored so generation must be balanced moment-by-moment to the load. When your dishwasher turns on, a generator needs to burn a little more coal, a flywheel slows down a bit, a penstock lets a little more water flow, a capacitor discharges through an inverter, etc. There's no tank of "surplus" electricity sitting around anywhere.

    2. Re:Is the summary wrong or the article? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Right now, under certain circumstances bulk consumers of power are actually payed to consume power.

  61. Re:Get out of the Dark Ages and into the 21st cent by vgerclover · · Score: 1

    This is not about power generation but rather power distribution. Try this: take a common wire, open it up and separate a single copper hair. Use that to bridge an AA battery. It will get hot quickly, as the battery is discharging at its top speed. Now shortcircuit an electrical plug without protections. The hair will melt away quickly. That's what might happen to the grid.

  62. Re:Get out of the Dark Ages and into the 21st cent by Lehk228 · · Score: 1

    before, the excuse was that Chernobyl happened because the soviets were reckless and it would never happen in the west.

    what's the excuse for Fukishima, which BTW was recently measured at 10+ SV/hr and i have heard unconfirmed reports that 10 was not so much a reading but the maximum that the meters can read out and so it could be any amount higher than 10

    --
    Snowden and Manning are heroes.
  63. Re:I Use to Have A Lot of Respect for M.I.T. by LifesABeach · · Score: 0

    Oh my! My Mod'er is having a bad day... XD

  64. Re:Get out of the Dark Ages and into the 21st cent by kheldan · · Score: 1

    I have an electronics and engineering background, so I understand the point you're trying to make; however if we had more power plants then distribution wouldn't be a problem anymore. One of the major hurdles preventing more power plants from being built is environmental concerns. I also understand that your average environmentalist would rather have his right arm cut off rather than allow a nuclear power plant to be built, but let's face it: they don't want any power plants built. The more extreme environmentalists don't even want solar or wind generating facilities built because they think even that harms the environment (think of the poor animals!). What I'm saying is that people need to stop having these knee-jerk reactions to nuclear power, and we need to operate them in the most conscientious way possible, because they can and will be a major hazard if mis-managed. Additionally there are cutting-edge designs out there for smaller-scale nuclear reactors that are, compared to current-generation plants, virtually intrinsically-safe, cost a fraction to construct and install, would take a fraction of the time to complete, and could be more widely distributed.

    The space program suffered numerous setbacks before we landed men on the moon. Few can debate the benefits we've reaped because of those achievements. I am cognizant that "setbacks" with nuclear power have much longer-lasting and wider-ranging ramifications, but we cannot continue the way we are; we cannot go backwards, we must go forwards.

    --
    Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
  65. Re:Get out of the Dark Ages and into the 21st cent by kheldan · · Score: 1

    Believe me I thought that of anybody the Japanese would be meticulous and cautious in managing something like nuclear power, but Mother Nature caught them with their pants down, apparently. What has happened there is regretable, but I don't think the knee-jerk reactions I've been hearing about from all over the world are appropriate or warranted. We need to learn from incidents like in Japan, yes, but we do not need to abandon nuclear power at this time, like Germany is planning on doing.

    Read my reply to the comment above yours, if you like. I had more to say on the subject.

    --
    Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
  66. Use RSVP as an example by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If the grid is smart why not use a protocol similiar to RSVP (Resource Reservation Protocol) or call admission control to place a request in for "smart power" and if there is enough capacity the request is granted and the device automatically starts consuming power. Process the requests in FIFO order while managing generation ramp-up.

  67. Re:Distributed by cheater512 · · Score: 1

    Except when the air is still and its cloudy. Then coal and gas would have to work so much harder.

  68. Worm by koan · · Score: 1

    I'm sure someone mentioned it already but it may be possible to shut off everyone's power at exactly the same time.
    http://www.ioactive.com/services_grid_research.html

    Imagine a worm spreading over the mesh setting all the smart meters in LA to pulse on and off...wonder what that would do...

    --
    "If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
  69. Grandmother, eggs by overshoot · · Score: 1
    Thanks for the advice but I've been making a living with S parameters since before Commander Taco was born.

    It's not the "always on" aspect that causes the problem, it's the fact that the load V/I curve is hyperbolic with a negative slope rather than linear with a positive slope. Since we're primarily concerned with frequencies much less than line, things like power factor aren't really important and since the function is dominated by the real components at those frequencies, it could be called "negative resistance" but too often "resistance" is used to refer to a zero-intercept linear function so the more general "impedance" is less confusing to most. Pedants, of course, can always find something to complain about.

    --
    Lacking <sarcasm> tags, /. substitutes moderation as "Troll."
    1. Re:Grandmother, eggs by badkarmadayaccount · · Score: 1

      I'm in my last year in HS, my specialty is physics, and I did not understand what the actual problem is. Could you please explain?

      --
      I know tobacco is bad for you, so I smoke weed with crack.
  70. Re:My wife wrote her thesis in E&E in 1990 on by Paul+Fernhout · · Score: 1

    Here is a link to her thesis:
        http://www.cfkurtz.com/publications.html
    "Kurtz, C.F. 1991. The Evolution of Information Gathering: Operational Constraints. M.A. Thesis, State University of New York at Stony Brook. Also available here. "
    http://www.cfkurtz.com/Kurtz_EvolutionOfInformationGathering_1991.pdf
    "I present two new approaches to the study of information in foraging theory. First, rather than determine the cost a forager should pay to obtain information, I concentrate on the consequences of information use in an interacting population. I describe a density-dependent model which tracks genotypes with high and low information access through evolutionary time. Stable polymorphisms result. I suggest that the value of information is not monotonically increasing. Second, I present a scheme for partitioning the information used in the decision making process. Three types of information are recognized: internal information, or an individual's internal state; external information, or environmental factors; and relational information, or rules for predicting transformations of internal state. Interactions between the three types are examined in an extension of the basic model."

    She says this paper is more succinct, but it is not online: "Kurtz, C.F. 1991. The evolution of information gathering: operational constraints. In From Animals to Animats, eds. Meyer, J.A. and S.W. Wilson. Proc. 1st Int. Conf. on Simulation of Adaptive Behavior, Paris, MIT Press."

    --
    A 21st century issue: the irony of technologies of abundance in the hands of those still thinking in terms of scarcity.
  71. MIT AND SLA by tokencode · · Score: 1

    It took people who went to MIT to figure we can't have a "smart" grid decide to charge all our cars at the exact same moment? If that was your thesis you should request back all of tuition. And if there is ever an SLA agreement associated with my electric bill that has terms I have to adhere to, I'm going off-grid.

  72. Grid to Computers: What took you so long? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Yep, turns out that operating a gigantic, synchronously operated, dynamic and nonlinear machine with millions of interacting parts in real time and right up to the edge of its limitations ain't so easy to do after all. It's only now that computers+software are getting "smart" enough to keep up with the (supposedly) dumb ol' electric grid.

  73. Re:My wife wrote her thesis in E&E in 1990 on by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    power grids and organisms are two different, very different items.

  74. is that they dont understand how smart grid works by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    if at 2 pm , there is a peak demand then prices will shoot up . Then the cars will stop charging which will make it non peak . This will start an oscillation in power demand . The utilities can make this oscillation damped and thus it will reach a steady state soon .This is from elementary control theory , does not the so called they know it?

    further the smart grid is not to decrease energy demand , but to equalize it across time so that the utilities need not build excess capacity .
    so i don't get were they pose a problem :)

  75. Re:My wife wrote her thesis in E&E in 1990 on by Paul+Fernhout · · Score: 1

    "power grids and organisms are two different, very different items."

    Ture, but I guess I was not clear enough. Consumers of power are like the organisms; the grid is more like the ecosystem. What makes sense individually may be bad both collectively (as a less than global optimum) and also for the individuals (given that other smart individuals do the same thing, which leads to competition or in this case other instability in the system). So those who do the dumb thing may make out better or be better for the system, because there is less competition for what otherwise seems like a good deal to everyone. In general, this is an issue about local optimization by "smart" actors deciding based on local information vs. global optimization. It is part of the reason diversity has value.

    It is also an example of both "market failure" and individual failure and probably has applications to financial markets as well. For example, if everyone thinks the same stock sector is undervalued, and starts buying in it, they may bid up the price for stocks there past what they are worth (but as everyone is buying, it becomes a bubble), whereas stock sectors that are not such a bargain might have been better choices for reliable value from dividends.

    --
    A 21st century issue: the irony of technologies of abundance in the hands of those still thinking in terms of scarcity.
  76. Negative impedances by overshoot · · Score: 1
    I'm assuming you understand Ohm's Law: the back EMF across a current path is proportional to the current and the resistance (or more generally the impedance.) That's a simple linear relationship, but electrical loads aren't always linear. Sometimes you have to use the more general case of

    dE/di = Z(i)

    in other words, the slope of the curve at a given point. Now, you can't have a literal negative resistance where a positive current results in a negative voltage -- that generates power. However, it's not at all unusual to have a situation where an increase in current results in a reduction in current. There are even simple primitive semiconductor devices that do that (look up Esaki diodes.)

    Now think of what happens when the mains supply has a limited ability to provide current. With a positive impedance load, a drop in the supply voltage results in a drop in current. That's a "brown out." In a power network, it's a simple relationship that makes it fairly easy to manage the load, since the supply voltage isn't guaranteed to be rock-steady. More loads, more current, voltage drops, current drops, balance achieved until they put more generators online.

    When you have an actively managed load such as computer power supply (draws as much power as it needs regardless of the line voltage, the current is inversely proportional to the voltage. Which, if you think about it, is a negative impedance relationship. Now when you turn on an extra computer, the network current increases and the voltage drops -- and the current increases, the voltage drops some more, etc.

    Crash the electrical grid.

    --
    Lacking <sarcasm> tags, /. substitutes moderation as "Troll."
    1. Re:Negative impedances by badkarmadayaccount · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't a DC network bypass that problem? Or at least be easier to balance?

      --
      I know tobacco is bad for you, so I smoke weed with crack.