 |
Technologies :
Communications :
News
The Smart Grid can be described as the fusion of digital communications with the electrical power system, unleashing real-time information flows to dramatically improve efficiency and reliability. This fusion of technologies also represents a mixture of technical cultures. The emerging caricature is of “netheads” (data network engineers), fresh from creating a ubiquitous Internet and conquering the telecom industry, arriving on the scene to “fix” a broken-down electrical system.
On the other side, the “power guys” (power system engineers), proud guardians of the 20th century’s greatest engineering achievement, look at their fun-but-intermittent browser experiences and wonder how anyone thinks this technology is remotely reliable enough. This is a potentially volatile mix – worlds where even the term “network” has different meanings – and industry decision makers need to be aware how this culture-clash might influence Smart Grid evolution.
Netheads make a compelling argument: The grid needs integrated, consistent, flexible, and, most of all, secure end-to-end connectivity. The decoupled layering of the Internet Protocol (IP) suite is the only alternative to today’s vertically-integrated, application-siloed grid systems. Resistance is futile!
But netheads must understand that the vast soup of protocols vaguely included in the “IP suite” was engineered for voice, video, and data applications with rather forgiving humans as the usual end clients. In contrast, many Smart Grid applications are machine-to-machine control systems – with sometimes very big machines, redefining for netheads the term “big iron.” An overloaded datacom network might result in a dropped phone call, a slow web page, or a garbled movie. An overloaded electrical power network can result in a big BOOM!
On the other hand, the power guys need to realize that the protocol layering implicit in IP is essential for long term adaptability, even if less efficient than a vertically optimized solution for a given function. Many traditional telecom engineers learned this the hard way – witness the ongoing liquidation of telecom behemoth Nortel Networks. But this does not mean that “IP-ness” is a one-size-fits-all magic pixie dust, as much of today’s hype might imply. A substation automation, distribution automation, or AMI network “based on IP” does not automatically deliver interoperability or “standards compliance.” IP is simply a tool that helps unlock the benefits of breaking down applications silos.
.
So the netheads and power guys have a lot of work to do – together – and the good news is that it is getting done. But it’s a good thing that engineers tend to be such an affable bunch!
Bob Gohn is a senior analyst with Pike Research, a market research and consulting firm that provides in-depth assessment of global clean technology markets.
.
.
You might also be interested in …
Related SGN channels …
Stay connected with SGN …
| Big Boom and IP |
| Hi Bob. Hope you're doing well. When I read this I couldn't help but think about other functions that use IP. Yes, those examples are the ones most consumers think of. But, currently there are "big boom" applications that run over IP. Those drones shooting down terrorists in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistani...on IP. Remember, IP was made originally for DARPA as a way to withstand a nuclear attack. Maybe IP is coming back to its roots? |
| Michaela Barnes - 02/02/2010 - 17:11 |
| What needs to be fixed? |
| As introduced through the post "Huge Value Destruction as Disruptive Technologies Impact the Smart Power Service, http://bit.ly/amOuW5 )," the Smart Grid is the T&D subsystem of the whole Smart Power Service (SPS) that is emerging as a socio technical system. Even though there are M2M operations, the software agents represent organic instead of mechanic behavior, as there is a need for increasing customers’ investments decisions to make it work. So I suggest that there is nothing to be fixed in the emerging whole SPS. Instead, to complement the traditional utility development of the resources of the supply side, there is the need to mainly develop the resources of the demand side under an effective energy policy. Instead of power guys vs. netheads, we need them working together: power guys concentrating is the delivery only Smart Grid supply chain and netheads on the commercial open market value chain. |
| José Antonio Vanderhorst-Silverio, Ph.D. - 02/02/2010 - 19:54 |
| Structuring to Avoid Incumbent and Entrants War |
| The above post suggests that industry leaders need to structure the power industry as the emergent SPS so that power guys and netheads efforts mutually reinforce each other. The reason why the fusion of technologies that is the Smart Grid seams as a mixture of technical cultures is simply a matter of industry structuring that pits the netheads and the power guys in a culture clash that could influence its evolution. Under the emerging SPS structure we avoid the war between incumbents and entrants, by reducing utilities scope to the regulated power delivery while entrants innovate to compete for end customers sales. |
| José Antonio Vanderhorst-Silverio, Ph.D. - 02/03/2010 - 05:19 |
| Smart Grid = IT + Power : Wrong!! |
| Some people in the IT arena thing that smart grid is about data communications. Some people in power systems believe that it is about the power devices. Both are wrong. Here are other very important elements of smart grid: 1. The electricity consumer, 2. Electricity markets, 3. Microprocessor controls 4. Renewable energy, 5. Electricity policy, 6. Intelligent Algorithms, 7. New power electronics devices, 8. Others. As a hybrid Information Systems/Power Systems person, I estimate IT represents about 25% of a the overall smart grid concept. |
| Santiago Grijalva, Ph.D. Professor, Gerogia Tech - 02/03/2010 - 06:31 |
| Other |
| I like this article and have seen the conflict up close and personal as part of the NIST Priority Action Plan working groups. One thing that the Netheads overlook is the fact that even they don't live a TCP/IP-exclusive world. There are numerous SNA and IPX endpoints that coexist peacefully and share information with the Internet on a daily basis -- and so it will be in the electrical domain. TCP/IP may be broadly applicable and has a place in the information architecture of the grid, but it is not reasonable to expect that every device will have an IP address. |
| Paul Molitor - 02/03/2010 - 06:53 |
|
| To some extent this mirrors the culture war between IT people and real-time control people. However, there are a lot of people who span the power and network cultures. People who are involved in protection and control nowadays have to span those cultures. And they understand where conventional IP networking fits and where it doesn't, or where ordinary requirements of an IT system don't work when applied to real-time power system operations, Sit in on meetings of sub-groups of the IEEE/PES Power System Communications Committee or working groups of the Communications Subcommittee of the Power System Relaying Committee and you will find people who understand these issues. There is some frustration at times because people who are purely over in the IT world sometimes don't understand that real time power system protection and control are not ordinary IT. BTW, that failure to understand was one of the causes of the August 14, 2003 blackout. The IT people at one of the companies rebooted control center servers without notifying the dispatchers that it was happening, just like they would do with other servers in the company. That caused loss of situational awareness at a critical time. There is a need for a lot of education here, and hopefully the Smart Grid will facilitate that. |
| Stanley Klein - 02/03/2010 - 07:52 |
| Missing from the discussion |
| One aspect of this discussion seems to have been missed. Technology is available now to allow for a much more widely distributed generation and storage system for electric power. The power guys and netheads are contesting the turf of a very centralized system that is not the most desirable model and one that is no longer necessary. Consider e-bay and Craigs List as examples of retail auctions that are IT enabled. Apply a similar model to the end user of electric power and enjoy lower energy costs and less carbon emission. |
| bill ferree - 02/03/2010 - 08:18 |
| To Professor Grijalva |
| we certainly agree with you here at SGN that the smart grid is a very complex "system of systems." That's one of the reasons there are several dozen channels on the site. And all of those systems are transforming at the same time, leaving us aiming at a series of moving targets. For instance, a recent SGN article by Richard Tabors highlighted the ongoing evolution of electricity markets -- a topic which both netheads and power guys tend to ignore, yet which could have an enormous impact over the kind of electric power system we end up with. http://www.smartgridnews.com/artman/publish/Business_Markets_Pricing_News/Why-Today-s-Utilities-May-Soon-Be-Obsolete-and-What-May-Replace-Them-1782.html |
| Jesse Berst - 02/03/2010 - 08:23 |
| Spot On |
| Very good article. I'd like to see more technical analysis on this theme -- invites a deeper dive to the extent that it pegs a cultural lever in the smart grid evolution (i.e. smart grid winners and killer apps will synthesize BOTH nethead and power guy cultures as a seamless delivery strategy -- for firms: "best hybrid culture wins"). The race is on... |
| Bob Boyle - 02/03/2010 - 08:52 |
| Memory Lane |
| Ah, brings back fond memories of the infighting within telecommunications business. |
| Warren Grasty - 02/03/2010 - 09:09 |
| Good comments |
| I appreciate the comments! I hope you all sensed my bit of hyperbole and oversimplification. Of course, IP is in fact used today in many critical systems, and the smart grid is & will be a very complex system of systems. There is amazing work going on that is bringing together diverse techies who were not previously in the same circles (at least not since engineering school...). These needn't be battles, but we simply need to appreciate our respective strengths and blind spots in the process. Onward! |
| Bob Gohn - 02/03/2010 - 18:45 |
| A Single System & the Enterprise War Part 1 of 2 |
| This post, the next, and the first two, will be posted in the Electricity Without Price Control Blog, which now has over 200 articles and posts. I like what is emerging in a very valuable and very deep dialogue that was started by Bob Gohn. Several interesting contributions have been added. So with a lot of respect for very important and intelligent contributions, I will add the following two more post to my two posts. So, please correct me if I am wrong, but there are cultures and subcultures. In that sense, there has been for quite some time a real-time control subculture within the utility culture. Now we see emerging many subcultures to satisfy professor Santiago Grijalva and my friend Jesse Berst. I guess all of the elements go beyond the Smart Grid and to the emerging whole SPS. More than two years ago, in the EWPC article “The Anti-System Utility http://bit.ly/d87cTM ),” I used Warren Causey’s insights on the two utilities’ cultures, that he called the grid and the enterprise, to conclude that they “don't operate as a system because of a monopoly mindset of incumbents investor owned utilities and political interference.” I guess the anti-system utility is another way to explain in simple terms the ongoing value destruction The culture of the grid is that of the power guys and it is shared by transmission and distribution guys. The culture of the enterprise is the culture of the netheads. As architect Louis Sullivan argued “form follows function.” This is where bill ferree post about centralization fits, which I argue also fits well with the idea of a Smart Grid with end-to-end connectivity. Thus as the old form of what I call the Investor Owned Utilities Architecture Framework and its many heterogeneous incremental and increasingly complex extensions need to be replaced by a paradigm shift to an emergent whole SPS form, that is highly simplified. |
| José Antonio Vanderhorst-Silverio, Ph.D. - 02/03/2010 - 20:27 |
| A Single System & the Enterprise War Part 2 of 2 |
| As can be seen at the end of the article Electricity Without Price [Control Architecture Framework http://bit.ly/8laqyl ),” instead of having a war between incumbents and entrants, “Most value creation will be the result of an architecture competition centered on the Silicon Valley Model, which will lead to the final architecture of the EWPC Smart Grid, which is just one of the disruptive components of the whole.” Please update “the final architecture of the EWPC Smart Grid” to “the final architecture of the emergent SPS.” After SPS structuring, today’s’ utilities have a chance to elect the low risk primary regulated Smart Grid with the power guys’ culture or go to war with the secondary commercial subsystem entrants with netheads’ culture. Following the insight of the Enterprise Architecture Management Group announcement, that says “This group is for those architects who focus on the enterprise as a whole, as a single system within its environment,” I sort of disagree with Jesse and Bob on the idea of letting the status quo influence the architecture. In response to the suggestion to change to system-of-systems, the synthesis of the response was that to optimize the architecture, subsystems will result from the enterprise architecting job. My architecting work started on the vertically integrated utilities, because I discovered a fatal flaw in the Energy Policy Act of 1992, as Open Transmission Access led to the separation of T&D. Richard Tabors’ argument was probably based on inactive distribution and inactive loads, which was completely contrary to the essence of the book Spot Pricing of Electricity. On page four of that book says that “the four basic criteria [freedom of choice, economic efficiency, equity, and utility control, operation and planning] can be achieved only by returning to the first principles of economics and engineering and by viewing the utility and its customers as a single integrated system. The result of this integration is the spot price based energy marketplace, which the subject of this book.” |
| José Antonio Vanderhorst-Silverio, Ph.D. - 02/03/2010 - 20:28 |
|
 |


|
Predictive life cycle asset managment smart grid apps.
 |
© 2009 SmartGridNews
|
 |