 |
Editor’s note: The author is a member of a Smart Grid Demonstration project partnership between the LADWP and a consortium of top Southern California research institutes including USC, UCLA, and CalTech/Jet Propulsion Laboratory. The project is intended to “green the grid” by developing, deploying and testing advanced Smart Grid technologies. It uses USC and UCLA as testing grounds for innovative technologies to prove the viability of the demonstration technology, and serve as microcosms of the entire city. It is currently the only Department of Energy funded project to have a socio-behavioral component. These behavioral studies will generate ongoing observations, data, and analysis for integration and support of the demand response program.
By Erica Watson-Currie
A Department of Energy report states: “The ultimate success of the Smart Grid depends on the effectiveness of these devices in attracting and motivating large numbers of consumers.” Yet the way Smart Grid is described, implemented, and envisioned as it rolls out to the public may be the very things holding it back. Are the government and utilities creating the very resistance they need to overcome?
Our team has been observing discussions and comments on existing forums to gain a baseline reading of public sentiment. We’ve discovered most of the resistance centers on the following common themes:
.
- Anti-Big Business as evil, oppressive, greedy or abusive
- Anti-ties between business and government
- Privacy concerns
- Anti-governmental intrusion
- References to dystopian science fiction
- Fear of cost increases
Unfortunate Analogy Shift
Electrical power is moving from a water analogy to an information analogy. For decades, power consumers have accepted physicists’ explanations (or their electrician’s description) using a common and familiar – thereby comforting – set of vocabulary matches to an element we lay people better understood: water. That is, it travels in waves and flows through power lines.
When things work properly, current is delivered to a desired point (e.g., one’s toaster, computer, or hair dryer). Broken, frayed, or improperly insulated cables could leak electricity, flooding someone with a nasty surge of voltage. Like aqueducts, power lines become blocked or jammed, resulting in none of the desired current getting through.
With Smart Grid’s advent comes a new analogy, slipping into a data model to describe how it works. Smart Grid enables electrons to be routed past outages or breaks. It will have hubs and servers, and be “intelligent” enough to sense when to use packet-shifting-like-abilities to bypass overloaded or impassable areas, to route power to desired locations.
This all takes place on a network (data analogy), rather than power coming to us via conduits (a water analogy).
Fostering Dystopian Perceptions
Since most end-users just barely understood electricity to begin with, replacing comfortable fluid analogies and terms with tech-savvy Internet-speak compounds our confusion. Humans instinctively fear what we don’t understand. Add terminology suggesting our machines are becoming intelligent (sentient even!), evokes the opening of Terminator movies or the Matrix. Labeling the grid as “smart” and suggesting that electricity travels like data or information, provokes suspicion and alarm about what sort of information it may carry along with it. Rather than a one-way stream like water, power as data offers two-way transmission of information. This awakens fears of government monitoring. It’s not enough that Homeland Security measures provoked fears of wire-tapping; now it’s the wires themselves doing the snooping and reporting.
Continuing to “explain” Smart Grid using analogies which fail to generate end-user understanding; using utilities’ rate structures to reward those who cede control and punish those who refuse; and increasing governmental regulatory actions will result in fueling these fears, increasing end-users’ opposition and resistance.
Erica Watson-Currie holds a BA in Psychology, MA in Communication Management, and a PhD in Communication Theory. In addition to her work as a member of the Socio-Behavioral team on the Smart Grid Demonstration project, she also consults on customer/employee satisfaction and marketing. Information available at Thinker Consulting.
.
You might also be interested in ...
SGN related resources ...
Stay connected with SGN …
| Blowback |
| Ms. Watson-Currie's findings aren't a surprise. What's surprising is that she and others are only starting to understand it. Much of what Smart Grid proponents are advocating on the consumer side of the meter is unnecessary. The useful bits are interoperability and security standards, near-real time availability of demand data, actionable, dynamic prices that are communicated electronically, and rates that make business-as-usual more expensive than taking initiative. The final piece is Grid Smart consumers, who understand their options, understand the consequences of doing nothing, and have available for purchase a variety of appropriate technologies to help automate the task of managing their energy use. Those automation technologies, by the way, should focus on air conditioning, hot water heating, perhaps pool pumps, lighting in commercial buildings only, and electric vehicles when they start arriving in significant numbers. Automation technologies should not be wired to a utility or grid control center because utilities and grid operators have no practical way to manage millions of devices. Instead, these devices should use a combination of price information and user preferences to do their job. We should also resist the temptation to engage every consumer. Let's start with tech-savvy early adopters who can help identify the pitfalls and also help ensure success. Let's provide the essentials and allow consumers and suppliers of equipment and services to figure out how best to deliver value. Using an Internet analogy, policymakers should ensure that consumers have access to bandwidth, but neither they nor the utilities should attempt to decide what content is created and distributed over that network. |
| Jack Ellis - 02/10/2010 - 05:15 |
| IEEE-USA also identifies this issue |
| The IEEE-USA National Energy Policy Recommendations include a recommendation that there be funding for studies of consumer access and usage of Smart Grid functions. Much of the customer site functionality depends on the customer at least selecting one or more options for smart customer site devices. If that selection is too complex or the customer can't afford the smart devices, the customer site functions of the Smart Grid won't work. This is both a matter of consumer sentiment and of usability engineering. |
| Stanley Klein - 02/10/2010 - 05:22 |
| Talking over the customer's head |
| It's no wonder that the customers are in revolt over the smart grid with the utilities talking information packets and computer networking anologies. Engineers talking computer geek aren't at all interested in informing the public. They are interested in snowing and impressing their bosses with their I.T. speak. The water system anology still works, but coming out of the mouths of engineers and operation managers it fails to impress upper management. The smart grid is nothing more than the water system analogy wiith a few more valves that can be opened and closed to route the water through adjacent paipes and around broken water pipes. It's the same as water systems with valves being opened and closed by smart maintenance men with valve wrenches who know which valves to open and close to get the water to where it's needed when needed. If one talkes over the customer's head it's because he wants to or is so stupid that he doesn't understand the water system anology in the first place. |
| Jack Duckworth - 02/10/2010 - 05:42 |
| Good analogy, but . . . |
| Really like the analogy, but if we're expecting the consumer to move this along, then I'm going to cry. Then quit. Never mind the consumer right now - I'm concerned that the utilities don't get the "Speak;" even more concerned that their business models don't inspire them to care. Until utilities experience that "Oh @#$%" moment that compels them to actively seek out the competitive and operational advantages that Smartgrids, Microgrids & whatever-grids can offer, then I think the consumer will be able to forgo the simple pleasure of trying to find the mac address on their toaster. |
| Dana Hillman - 02/10/2010 - 06:22 |
| Blowback |
| I echo Jack Ellis' comments and would like to add a perspective from my marketing communications experience. "New", "Change", "Improved" are great advertising words, but they mean nothing to the consumer without proof of performance. Looking at Ms. Watson-Currie's six bullet points of resistance, we could stick those into the health-care debate as well. And look how well that's gone. Insiders and experts suffer from what is commonly called "the curse of knowledge". They forget that the consumer is starting from square one. In order to change behavior and gain acceptance of what is new, we need to step back and see the picture from the users point of view. To introduce the Smart Grid properly, all the players must first conduct "What if?" scenarios, knowing that the law of unintended consequences is going to be enacted and that they will need to plan responses. For instance, PG&E should have been better prepared to manage the inevitable customer anger over higher bills after smart meters were installed, especially when the users had been led to believe this new technology would actually save them money. |
| Sheldon Reiffenstein - 02/10/2010 - 06:29 |
| Blowback Attack |
| Jack Ellis is on the money. One further point is that PV will get cheaper and cheaper, so power consumers will increasingly become part-time power producers. They will then be more appreciative of the conservation options and real-time electricity market the smart grid enables. Some of those suspicious of Big Business and Big Government will join microgrid islands. International markets may drive this, as the developing world replaces tin roofs with PV roofs and builds radically distributed power grids from the bottom up and from the neighborhoods out. |
| Lance McKee - 02/10/2010 - 06:34 |
| Costs: the Key Motivating a Large Number of Customer |
| The analogy is mistaken because of a fatal architecting flaw. The flaw has led to an illusion on interoperability without truly understanding the operability of power systems, as Dr. Richard Tabors has explained. To learn about operability you need to look at the concerns given by the well known industry expert, Jack A. Casazza. The response to Casazza’s concerns are given in the 2007 EWPC article "Engineers Needed for Lower Prices (to read the document, please copy the link to a web browser - here and below - http://bit.ly/b57Ywp )," whose summary says "The paradigm shift from the vertically integrated utilities to the electricity without price control paradigm will lead to lower costs, lower profits and lower prices after a reasonable delay. To accomplish that, engineers need to take the transportation function that allows the market between supply and demand run efficiently." That flaw led to an E1R2 (Economic First, System Reliability Second) Policy, which, by the pervasive effect of the paradigm of the obsolete Investor Owned Utilities Architecture Framework, has fueled the interoperability illusion. Based on the architecture imperative of ultraquality, that led to the R1E2 (System Reliability First, Economic Second) policy, I discovered that the proper structure of the power industry is that of the EWPC article "A Single System & the Enterprise War (in http://bit.ly/aGR8y1 )," whose summary says "A single integrated emergent power service system is optimally structured into the enterprise and the grid subsystems, that are highly cohesive with lightly coupled interfaces. The enterprise subsystem is designed to enable an architecting war among Second Generation Retailers (http://bit.ly/8t94ZR ), while the grid subsystem remains regulated." |
| José Antonio Vanderhorst-Silverio, Ph.D. - 02/10/2010 - 06:41 |
| Data network analogy: wrong!! |
| We have to be very careful with analogies. In particular with the analogy to data networks. Thinking that electricity would work as any other commodity was what caused th California electricity market debacle and the Enron scandal. It has taken economist 10 years to understand that. The physics of electricity is very peculiar: there is very little storage or routing capabilities. An analogy to data networks is currently impossible. I agree that the consumer is THE most important component of smart grid. I belive the highest danger for the electricity infrastructure are people that have no clue about how electricity systems work to talk about how electricity systems should work. |
| Prof. Santiago Grijalva, Georgia Tech - 02/10/2010 - 06:44 |
| Thres Jacks and One Grijalva |
| I started my post without any of the above posts and forgot to check before posting. I would like to add that besides Casazza, the other two Jacks, Duckworth and Ellis, have a great knowledge about the operability issues of the industry. I checked this time, and the last post is by Prof. Grijalva, which is right on. |
| José Antonio Vanderhorst-Silverio, Ph.D. - 02/10/2010 - 06:58 |
| blowback? this is just the beginning folks |
| There's so much wrong-headed and unappealing about the smart grid, the truly shocking is industry hubris in fantasizing that anyone would buy it in a million years. SG is just an vast marketing and lobbying juggernaut lackng the slightest connection to markets or demand. Does no one see this? Sorry, but take some of your battery power generation and connect the terminals to your earlobes or other sensitive areas. And note that this blog doesn't' yet even acknowledge the collapse of the whole scheme now ongoing with Climategate. AGW and the icy sobering up from carbon-footprint hysteria is now the greatest scandal in science history. It is all done. The past 6 months have completely destroyed the underlying SG proposition. Does no one see this? We are truly a world and an industry in deep trouble |
| david engle - 02/10/2010 - 07:27 |
| Agree agree agree |
| All: I had no idea anyone was uninformed enough to attempt to use networking metaphors to describe the Smart Grid. That wasn't a Smart thing to do...it was plain DUMB. Want to start this: Show folks how much power they are using while they are ASLEEP! Show them how much they use while they are at WORK! When folks see that they are using KWH while the house is unoccupied, they'll think on their own about ways to cut costs. The other comments here are right on target as well. |
| Dave Maples - 02/10/2010 - 07:36 |
| Good point - and there is a lot more |
| I had just written about something similar on my blog. I was describing differential pricing to a friend and his response was "those SOBs, they charge me more when I need it most!" I tried to explain how it would lower costs and result in a lower utility bill but he would have none of it. There is a general distrust of institutions in the US and we have been told that the US is the most technologically advanced country. If it is not broken why fix it? The benefits to the end user are not clear. As for the information metaphor, I think that is a general mistake not just for regular people, but also in smart grid investment. I saw Gates giving a talk on investment and he said that the smart grid was a bad investment. I was shocked initially, but thought about it and realized that the huge costs will be in infrastructure and the IT part is just a layer on top. Smart meters lower the cost to power companies of reading the meters, but I can imagine they do not spark much consumer interest. Here in Palo Alto, the heart of Silicon Valley, the local municipal power company tried to put in smart meters and were stopped by popular consent. At first I was appalled but looked at the numbers and realized the opponents were correct, there was no benefit to the users and not enough benefit to the small utility in savings to make it worth it. Naturally, I can see that smart meters (and transformers) need to be part of an infrastructure to better use distributed generation, for demand response, smart houses and so on, but these things do not exist yet much of the smart grid is conceptual. I suspect it will be difficult to move forward with it on many levels. The linguist, George Lakoff, has shown in several places how we interact with the metaphors we use to organize the world around us. I agree 100% that we need metaphors. What about a body? The electricity is the blood and the nerves control the blood vessels. This post inspired me, I am going to start using that metaphor and see how people respond. I am going to try it with my friend and say "if you are running, you need more blood to your leg muscles,ves so your nervous system opens the blood vessels in your legs so more blood can get there. But your brain needs blood too, so at some point your nervous system says "no more extra blood for the legs, you have to slow down." I'll post if it works on my blog. |
| Don Steiny - 02/10/2010 - 09:22 |
| Culture Gap: Engineers don't have customers. |
| TRAMS DIRG is SMART GRID backward; my screen name. At the intersection of technology and social science is where Apple strives to be. For the engineers tasked with smart grid solutions the people problem (social science) is not their expertise, technology is. Engineers are the problem solvers for electric companies, but this is a much different kind of problem and one that engineers do not have the back round to solve. It's a people problem not an engineering problem. The Smart Grid is built for utilities but paid for by end-users. Stop explaining/debating the usefulness of the smart grid. As a consumer I DON'T CARE why you think something is important "What is in it for me?" is all that matters. Put the customer at the center of the question then form every response you have. Stop trying to educated the customer and learn from them. Reverse engineer your smart grid message. TRAMS DIRG = customer smart |
| Phil Baltazar - 02/10/2010 - 12:24 |
| Not as hard as all that |
| I was glad to see someone citing Lakoff's work on metaphors. I think Erica's analogy does have flaws per Grijalva's post, but only if one uses the analogy strictly for the delivery of electricity. I perceive that Erica's job as a communicator and consumer relations manager led her to the data analogy because she is confusing the T&D aspect of Smart Grid with the new production/consumption relationship that Smart Grid IT brings about. These, to me, are separate layers in the stack, though they affect each other in the same way that any kind of data transparency affects the actual distribution of a commodity. If you think about this from the perspective of the consumer, it actually does make sense to switch from a commodity-based "flow" metaphor to an information-based "network" metaphor. The consumer's relationship to their utility is manifested in the commercial transaction of their electricity bill. Up until now, this relationship has been completely one way, from producer to consumer. With smart grid comes the ability for the traditional consumer to take on some of the roles of the producer as well: selling power back to the utility (PV, PHEV), opting for more local distribution (TES, DG), choosing the sources of their power (some utilities offer "clean green" plans), and affecting the distribution of energy with their choices (Demand Response). In short, consumer actions and choices now have more influence on the distribution and even the transmission side of the grid. Consumer behavior will be more of a factor for system operators. Likewise, the behavior of the system will be more transparent for consumers, affecting their usage choices. The curtain has been torn. When you think of it in that way, it makes sense that people will need to start understanding their relationship with their utility as a network in which they play a role, instead of passively receiving. But I disagree that this is scary to the public. There is a whole new generation of consumers who now expect to MATTER: to be able to share their thoughts in real time on social media, react to traffic updates by phone, cast instantaneous votes to determine the outcomes of media contests and even follow mobile chefs in their food carts via Twitter. These are people who will be very comfortable with metaphors involving Sharing, Influencing, Redirecting, etc. Good luck on finding a smart grid metaphor for the iPhone generation. (Also, it's wonderful to hear from Jack Ellis!) |
| Sharon Talbott - 02/10/2010 - 13:10 |
| Blowback and the Data Network Analogy |
| Hi Sharon, nice to hear from you. I'd point out that the Internet is a useful metaphor for how regulators and policymakers should approach the Smart Grid. The Internet is a system for moving information around. Policymakers have gone to great lengths to ensure "neutrality" in the sense that no actor, even the owner of the pipes and wires, can dictate what content moves over those pipes and wires or which content is entitled to higher priority treatment than other content (much like FERC's non-discriminatory access policies for electric transmission). Instead, the unfettered ability for content producers to decide what to offer and consumers to decide which applications and what content they wish to use has led to an explosion of innovation and creativity. Consumer-facing elements of the Smart Grid (because only some of the elements of the Smart Grid are about consumer interactions) should operate in the same way. No utility should be able to reach into a home or business without the customer's consent, and no utility should be able to dictate which devices are allowed to interact with the grid so long as they comply with industry standards (which in essence requires nothing more than a standard electrical plug). This could all be greatly simplified. It should be simplified. This industry used to be exciting and dynamic. Unfortunately, times have changed quite a bit. As for the customer who complains about paying more for electricity when it's needed most, isn't that the whole point? Because if it isn't, then the whole Smart Grid concept is a huge waste of time and money. |
| Jack Ellis - 02/10/2010 - 14:37 |
| SHOW ME |
| All the hype is nothing but an infomercial to the average person. They place the same amount of faith with Smart Grid as the weight loss programs, ... simply sales, all talk, no benefit, you just want their money. This was the same acceptance with the PC and the Internet ... until they (we) figured out the benefit. If you want buy in, develop and prove real value for real people ... we are waiting ... still waiting ... still waiting ... |
| John Csomay - 02/10/2010 - 17:13 |
| Fear & loathing --- KISS method |
| There certainly is fear of and resentment of any big entity that can control our lives--credit card companies, banks, insurance companies, government, etc. The difficulty Washington is having making necessary health care reforms illustrates how those invested in the status quo can use fear and resentment felt by the vast majority of people who can't or won't make the effort to understand a complex subject, to stifle needed change. We should certainly expect the same phenomenon for attempts to replace the old electric system with the new. For that reason, care should be exercised to make sure smart grid implementations are done in the least threatening way. Consumers must feel it is their choice to adopt the new technologies and feel no hint of coercion. Additionally, to get widespread buy-in, the mechanics have to be easy. Though I've met no-one who has an iPhone who isn't fascinated by it, there are many, many folks who want just a phone and really don't care to have a computer that fits in a shirt pocket. These same folks are probably not going to be eager to spend time learning energy management software and assigning i.p. address to their appliances, just to save twenty bucks on their electric bill. |
| bill ferree - 02/10/2010 - 19:37 |
| The Smart Customer |
| Hi All The main thing we have to do is 'talk to the customer' upfront. We need to engage in constructive dialogue with simple examples to explain the benefits of dynamic pricing (personal out to global), get an idea of the way customers might react and their concerns, modify our approach to the customer interface accordingly and encourage them to participate in the process. Obviously the Smart Premises systems need to be automatic (HAN/BMIS) but 'trained' by the customer to respond as they wish it to when executing appliance control and even 'negotiation' with the central system. The dialogue needs to be done with customers in groups; neighbourhoods, community, social, workplace etc etc to get an exchange of ideas and concerns and engender 'competition' in energy efficiency. You must have already tried to list the potential issues (try it on yourself), as a lot of guided prompting will be needed to get at what people really think. So, 'empathise with the customer' is the message. Now, to keep this short I'll use some links. We have some intense debates on this subject, with a lot of 'psychology' material, on the Linkedin Professional Network Smart Groups' discussions. First, my stuff. If you go to http://stephenbrowning.110mb.com/project Please select the 'Smart' link then the two 'Customer Engagement' documents. These carry the original proposal and then the development of the ideas with an example (GB based). I hope your corporate IT Internet interfaces will allow you to access my space. I don’t think it is ethical for me to publish the important comments others have made on the Psychological issues, on my webspace. So, in the next comment below I'll give you the links to the Linkedin Discussions. I'm afraid you will need to join the Network and each Group to get at them and I apologise here for asking you to have to do so. |
| Stephen Browning - 02/11/2010 - 01:00 |
| Linkedin Smart Customer discussions |
| OK here we go... Linkedin Group Smartgrids/Gridwise Discussion entitled "How do you engage consumers beyond the home energy management? What are the "cool" features that will encourage market adoption?" This has over 120 comments. I think we did Smarft Customer Psychology somewhere round 80-90 but it is difficult to be exact. http://www.linkedin.com/groupAnswers?viewQuestionAndAnswers=&gid=115900&discussionID=8293769&sik=1265879302059&trk=ug_qa_q&goback=%2Eana_115900_1265879302059_3_1 Linkedin Group Smartgrids User Experience Discussion entitled "What is good User Experience, and Why Does it Matter?" Comments 5 and 6 especially http://www.linkedin.com/groupAnswers?viewQuestionAndAnswers=&gid=2539928&discussionID=12810126&goback=%2Eanh_2539928 Hope that helps Regards Steve |
| Stephen Browning - 02/11/2010 - 01:11 |
| Grrr. |
| Wow! What a large number of LONG comments! Nobody sends "electrons" anywhere; they wiggle back and forth in most of the system, and in the rest, for every one going one way, another is coming back beside it. People who want credibility shouldn't use that slang. This piece is a saddening example of choosing a catchy theme (power is data) and then flogging it to death, overshadowing any useful information. To me, the bullseye is painted on cost of generation. Give the customers a rudimentary understanding of cost of generation. (Lush color paintings of 5 plants with $/kWh.) So like any red-blooded American the customer says, "I don't give a damn; it's someone else's money," so you explain how if they think of it as theirs it'll cost them less of it. |
| Pete Cann - 02/14/2010 - 01:01 |
| Georgia Consumers 4 Competition 2 Provide the Example |
| Further to my post "Costs: the Key Motivating a Large Number of Customer," please take a look at the post "Georgia electric consumers want competition to help protect against higher prices, just like they have for natural gas" http://bit.ly/aAVxDi |
| José Antonio Vanderhorst-Silverio, Ph.D. - 02/15/2010 - 12:52 |
| Thanks for the feedback! |
| I'm really enjoying learning more from the links some of you have suggested! Great resources I might not have found otherwise. |
| Erica Watson-Currie, MCM, PhD - 02/15/2010 - 13:09 |
| Why do I (consumer) need a smart grid? |
| I loved the article. Debate over analogy misses the point - What motivates the consumer to adopt? I agree that knowing more details about power usage may help a consumer make choices, however, after some benefit is realized but costs continue to escalate at 6%+/yr - what is next? I believe the smart grid offers much more to the operators than the consumer in terms of ROI and delayed plant investment. Conservation or optimization of energy use can only go so far without reducing quality of life or costing too much. It seems that after replacing all of my long life appliances, lights and HVAC, adding energy storage to capture lower priced night time rates and smart everything, I will be greener - just not in my bank account. I suspect that in two or three years, a solar array, perhaps with storage will have a better ROI than merging my house with the Grid - with no loss of privacy or freedom of when I use power! Every government controlled, non-competitive or regulated entity always raises tariffs when conservation reduces income so we never realize the promise of conservation - it is an illusion. I believe competition and expanded/new sources of energy would have a greater impact on energy costs and a better ROI to the consumer. Les |
| Les Wilson - 02/16/2010 - 13:43 |
| Storage! |
| Thanks Les. Also thanks Jack Duckworth, earlier neglected. I don't have Obsessive-Compulsive Personality Disorder, I don't think suffering is better than not suffering, and I agree, there's a limit to energy saving. In fact, to me it isn't even on the table. The idea is making timing of load suitable for generation. This is what storage does. Storage has a cost, and in so far as a customer can shape their own load, they can (should) pocket the money they're saving after reasonable overhead. Which is what? No idea. But it'll change as time goes on. I do agree, though, that if we need more power we should build power plants (preferably renewable) and transmission lines as necessary. If most customers would pay for the storage given a choice, dynamic pricing may be pointless. (Nobody's filled me in on whether we could generate enough solar power for ourselves here in the cloudy Northeast.) |
| Pete Cann - 02/17/2010 - 08:44 |
| Smart Grids Analogies and such |
| I echo many of previous comments and will answer the question the article poses. The government and utilities create the very resistance to overcome BECAUSE the smart grid discussion as framed (save energy, save environment, efficiency et al) and strategies implemented by the utilities & policy makers revolve around keeping an outdated inefficient infrastructure as the predominant "system". Utilities consider 'smart' technology that which enables them price optimization (real - time metering), expense reduction (labor, capital investment), and resist competition to the outdated energy business model. Since efforts so far have been about greater control and monitoring of the existing infrastructure, the goal is obvious: maximize margin and preserve the existing system. The marketing spin is all lip service. There is NO benefit for customers. So efforts to get the consumer to "buy it" will be met with great resistance. It's simple to the consumer: reward us with direct savings for conservation across the board in TOTAL COST(units, fees, distribution charges, taxes et al). IF the smart grid was truly about saving energy and making it more effective, distributed generation technology would be encouraged. This is not the case as utilities lobby AGAINST alternate distributed energy: "We're probably not going to be in favor of anything that shrinks our business" -Ed Legge, Edison Electric Institute. Their business model is dying and they're fighting hard to keep it with help of "policy" makers (Gore, Reid et al) with a purposely misguided solution - an electric superhighway. The regulatory relationship with legislative policy makers has NO concern for customers, NOR efficiency, and is why this type of "smart grid" solution will (and should) be resisted. An apt analogy is telecomm industry where many users are abandoning the fixed old infrastructure (POTS) for mobile only. This would happen to energy if 'allowed', and further advances of distributed generation microgrid technology will 'retire' the old utility business model. |
| Mark Pugacz - 02/18/2010 - 20:32 |
| The Architecting Approach that Satisfies Customers |
| Under the follow up SmartGridNews commentary "Smart Grid Backlash: How to Put an End to Consumer Resistance," which can be read in the link http://bit.ly/9lDQOO, I added an EWPC comment with the same heading as this one. |
| José Antonio Vanderhorst-Silverio, Ph.D. - 02/19/2010 - 12:18 |
| Valid reasons I would not want Smart Grid |
| The Smart Grid idea using technologies to monitor and possibly limit my personal energy use in my own home goes back to the term Big Brother in my mind. I am already in a grid tie solar system and these types of technologies would induce my investment in going fully off the grid where I would not be subject to such limitations or intrusions. |
| Gordon Neuls - 06/10/2010 - 08:16 |
|
|
|
Meter ownership
|
© 2010 SmartGridNews
|
|
Twitter
Facebook
Linkedin
RSS
