My post earlier this week about incorporating end users of
the Internet into the network to enhance its performance and stability reminded
me about a research project I was involved in back in 1979 at MIT.* A group of us, led by the late MIT professor
Fred C. Schweppe (one of the world’s experts in electric power systems control)
took a look at how a dynamic electric power system might function. The term for the project was coined by project
member Richard Tabors, who was trained in biology: “Homeostatic utility
control.”
As Richard reminded us, a human body responds in real time
to changes in the environment and other challenges to moderate heart rate,
respiration, and the like to keep us on a steady keel. We eat that Halloween
candy, and our pancreas figures out how much insulin we need to convert sugars.
We take a run to work off the candy calories, we get hot from the exercise, and
we sweat to cool down our bodies. We
face the danger of a territorial dog as we run, our adrenaline flows, and the
hormone stimulates all kinds of physiological adjustments, which then relapse
to base levels when the threat is gone.
We all wondered whether a regional electric grid could do
likewise if signals to and from the periphery were employed.
Specifically, the question we sought to answer was whether
an electric power system that incorporated demand side management and disbursed
power generation at the site of customers would, with a pricing regime that
transmitted the real-time marginal cost of electric power production, be
stable. In other words, would customer
responsiveness to actual minute-by-minute prices result in a more efficient
system—or would it spin out of control in a fit of instability. (Remember, in a
power grid the demand for electricity has to be supplied essentially
instantaneously to maintain voltage levels, frequency, and other key
parameters.)
Our research question was hypothetical at the time. There were very few distributed electric
power sources in 1979, and what energy conservation and load management
programs existed were not premised on customer response to real-time price
signals. But we all envisioned a world
when such things would be commonplace.
Well, the analysis showed, as well as could be determined
based on lots of assumptions, that a network that integrated customer-level
supply and demand price-responsiveness could indeed be stable (as stability
would be defined by power systems criteria.)
We fast-forward to today, a world in which distributed
generation and load management are rapidly infusing regional power grids. Think about those solar panels on your roof
that supply you and also sell power back into the grid, or appliances that
respond to price signals to operate during off-peak periods. With improvements
in computer technology and telecommunications infrastructure, it is likely that
the conclusions about stability we reached back in 1979 are still true. Today’s power systems, too, are likely to
have more resiliency than the power systems that existed back then. There is less dependence on a few, very large
generating units. There is more
redundancy in electricity transmission capacity. And locating power generation closer to load
centers reduces a portion of transmission system losses that occur when power
is sent over long distances.
I’m currently on the board of one of the organizations with
some responsibility in this arena, ISO-New England, the supervisor of electric
system reliability and the entity that designs and operates the markets for
capacity and energy in this six-state area. You can imagine that the many sectors
in this regional power exchange (e.g., transmission owners, generation owners,
investors in “alternative” resources, end users, power marketers, and others)
have divergent financial interests. I’ve been tremendously impressed, during my
tenure on this board, at the degree to which the participants work together—notwithstanding
their individual financial interests—to help design a system that works for the
benefit of the consumers in the region, with due consideration for environmental
protection.
But good will and a sense of regional purpose will not
necessarily yield consensus in this forum or in similar forums in other regions
of the country. Among other things,
participants have different time frames over which they engage in capital
formation, cost recovery, and return of capital. Important public policy questions remain,
too, because the electric power system is not only ubiquitous, but because its
output has become an essential input to our lives—affecting public safety,
education, other utility services, our personal lives, and commerce. Thus, the manner in which distributed
generation and load management are introduced into the electric power system
will remain a topic of hot discussion in the body politic and before federal
and state regulators.
Contrast this vibrant debate with my earlier post, in
which I noted that Akamai’s reach into the distributed network to be present on
your home computer occurred without much public discussion or government regulation.
I do not argue with the technical merits of the solution employed, but I note
that the question of how the resulting enhanced value of the Web is shared
among its participants has not reached the public consciousness. Maybe things
are going so fast because of the exponential growth in Internet traffic that
such questions can only be viewed through a rear-view mirror.
While the stakes for the Internet are high, even the Web
requires electricity to run. I urge my readers, whether running hospitals or
involved in other industries, to become informed as to the issues facing our
electric power system and not only be wise buyers and sellers in that
marketplace but also active participants in the public discussions surrounding
this sector. Our job, together, is to help ensure that the rules governing the
enhanced distributed network do not produce a zero sum result but rather create
value for society as a whole—and that the manner in which that value is shared
across the sectors is broadly viewed as fair and proper.
--
* Summarized here: "New Electric Utility Management and Control Systems," MIT Energy Laboratory Technical Report, No. MIT-EL-79-024.
--
* Summarized here: "New Electric Utility Management and Control Systems," MIT Energy Laboratory Technical Report, No. MIT-EL-79-024.
No comments:
Post a Comment