A 15-year Grid Transformation

Last month's column discussed what is holding back grid modernization. This month, we will assess how far we have come in the last year on grid modernization.

How Far Have We Progressed?

I have been writing articles on various aspects of grid modernization for over a year. Jesse Berst asked me if it was time to assess the change in the nation’s views or actions regarding grid modernization. Let us take a look.

First of all, grid modernization is not the goal. It is the vision by which we can transform our grid into that structure and level of performance needed to support a 21^st century economy.

We do have a problem. The actions that are necessary to modernize the grid take much longer than a year to see measurable change. At GridWeek in April, Jim Rogers, CEO of Duke/Cinergy, discussed the term “cathedral thinking.” Even though today’s industry leaders may not see the final outcome of a transformed grid, they must do their part to make it an eventual reality, hopefully in time for the next generation.

The nuclear people got it right in the late 80s when they started teaching key performance indicators (KPI) at the plant, fleet and national level. They recognized improvement was necessary and that any single-year comparison could be counter-productive. The nuclear industry decided it was long-term improvement that mattered. They started tracking KPI across the industry and it took five years for the true trends in the industry to emerge. Twenty years later the nuclear industry is successful on all 13 key performance indicators. This is probably the best approach for the transmission and distribution industry as well.

Things That Have Changed

Now that I have made the case that tracking performance over one year is non-conclusive, let us describe some changes over the last year that seem to fit some element of “cathedral thinking”:

·  GridWeek 2007 – a key event in bringing attention to the need to act differently across all elements of policy, regulation, technology and integration regarding grid modernization.

·  DOE Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability (OE) Distributed Systems Integration solicitation – a key large-scale invitation for utilities, vendors and researchers to jointly propose projects that focus on integrating modern grid strategies that the robust trends suggest we employ.

·  Significant industry alliances about intelligence in the grid – some privately led, and some government led, but all exploring how to make modern grid strategies fruitful in the future.

·  National Interest Electric Transmission Corridors (NIETC) – Secretary Bodman announced the first two NIETCs at GridWeek in April.

·  State hearings on EPACT 05 – as required, most states are taking a hard look at the electric infrastructure across their state and engaging the industry in discussion about it.

·  House Bill 3221, Subtitle B – Smart Grid Facilitation – if it survives Appropriations, the Smart Grid Facilitation Act of 2007 could become a key long-term driver for change in the industry. This is “cathedral thinking.”

While this may seem like a lot of change, these six items do not exemplify a change in the industry, only a change in some initial thinking. However, it is a start and consistent with an overall grid modernization strategy.

Things That Have Not Changed

Unfortunately, there are no published plans by U.S. utilities for grid modernization strategies beyond a few advanced metering infrastructure (AMI) implementations. Our industry has a history of piloting much and deploying little. 

We are not over the hump on AMI, arguably a first step toward a modern grid. If the industry stays the course on AMI, we will be ready to transition into another grid modernization step sometime in 2012 or 2013. We do not know what that step will be, because we do not have a plan. This is not “cathedral thinking.”

Thus, piloting additional new technology and deploying  what has already been proven continues to be the most common activity in the utility of the future arena. We are not sure which ones to deploy because we do not have a plan. So, we move to the next pilot. This is not “cathedral thinking.”

The Bottom Line

Grid modernization is a 15-year (or longer) transformation. We should establish metrics that show the true nature of our progress or lack thereof. Then the industry must stay the course even beyond each of our personal contributions to the effort. The nuclear guys got it right. Cathedral thinking is the answer.

Next month, we will take a look at the Hobbit Theory of Grid Modernization.

Email Steve Pullins