Working for the common grid
Reducing our collective carbon footprint can be as easy as plugging in.
In the old days all the cool guys and gals who wanted to show up “the man” devoted a lot of their creative geekiness to figuring out ways to get “off the grid,” devising Rube Goldberg-ish mechanicals and homemade micro-tech geared to living outside the nation’s energy infrastructure. It was laudable self-reliance—sometimes run amok—but it belongs to another age.
These days the best way to get back at “the man” (who is that guy anyway?) is to get back on the grid. Microgeneration or cogeneration projects are sprouting around the country, recently fertilized by the Obama administration’s stimulus package.
The idea behind this innovation harkens back to E. F. Schumacher’s “small is beautiful” approach to energy resourcing and conservation. The old model of energy production is based on the notion of massive, centralized energy creation sites, large and expensive nuclear, hydro, natural gas or coal-powered plants, that are then wired to a vast grid network that might deliver energy hundreds of miles away.
Such a large-scale approach is costly and intrusive and creates irresistible opportunities for government and corporate malfeasance, corruption, and plain old incompetence. It also creates a delivery system that by some estimates wastes as much as 10 percent of the energy it produces in transfer and bottleneck losses.
Many of the nation’s 10,000 energy facilities are old and inefficient producers of energy, some maxing out at no more than 33 percent efficiency. The 5,600 small-scale “distributed generation” sites around the country tend to be better users of their fuel sources, running at 65 to 90 percent efficiency.
The small-is-beautiful approach maintains the grid but rejects the large-scale production site in favor of hundreds of micro-sites: Not a chicken in every pot, but a solar or wind microgenerator on every rooftop creating, during peak performance, enough energy to power a home and perhaps return a trickle of energy back to the grid where it can be distributed to other energy consumers.
Sound too good to be true? It’s already happening. Cogeneration systems in the U.S. commercial and industrial sectors already are producing 135 billion kilowatt-hours for their own use. That’s approximately 3.6 percent of U.S. generation. In Europe the distributive generation grid has been progressing in Germany for 10 years, and the United Kingdom is moving ahead with a national plan of micro-production which has the support of 71 percent of households surveyed.
China is, of course, gearing its industrial machinery to produce the hardware and technology that will power the future in a distributive grid. One of the world’s most famous microgeneration projects is Vatican City, where solar panels are growing like ivy across venerable rooftops, and Pope Benedict XVI himself has applauded the Vatican’s goal to become the world’s first carbon neutral state.
The small-production method has obvious cost benefits, but it also reflects a practical path to sustainable energy production and promises significant reductions in climate-change gases. Certainly not least of all, the site-based distributive model protects individual energy users from massive outages that have occasionally and catastrophically darkened regional power networks. Just think of it as subsidiarity electrified.
The United States has not made as much progress as Europe in building a distributive-grid model for residential needs, but that could be changing. In Illinois Commonwealth Edison has begun an experimental program that plans micro-solar power plants on the homes of 100 local energy consumers in Chicago’s northwest suburbs. “We want to see whether consumers have the ability, with this technology, to become little utilities. They will be able to buy and sell electricity at a real-time hourly price, which is very close to the wholesale price, from their homes,” said Val Jensen, ComEd’s vice president for marketing and environmental programs, in a Chicago Sun-Times story.
Of course you don’t need a big old utility like ComEd to come in and install your powerplant. Let’s not forget that liberating do-it-yourselfism that powered the first generation of micro-energy producers. Get your own solar or wind system going, and get on the grid. It will do your wallet and our communal future a small but beautiful service.
This article appears in the May 2010 issue of U.S. Catholic (Vol. 75 no. 5, page 39).
Who's Under Your Carbon Footprint
By Dan Misleh (not verified) on Wednesday, June 9, 2010Thanks, Kevin, for excellent insights, as always. Small can indeed be beautiful.
Readers ought to consider taking the St. Francis Pledge to Care for Creation and the Poor in an effort to both reduce their carbon footprint and be reminded about who's under that footprint: those without the resources to combat climate impacts both in this country and around the world.
To learn more about this effort that is supported by the US Conference of Catholic Bishops and nearly two-dozen other national Catholic orgnizations, go to: www.catholicclimatecovenant.org.
Dan Misleh
Director
Why don't we
By Al (not verified) on Tuesday, June 8, 2010and why can't we laments Ted K. The American people are pretty common sense wise and would even be willing to sacrifice some for the overall good of the Nation. Problem is that there is no sound energy plan and every plan being proposed today is really a tax or environmental scam being passed on as an energy or climate bill. Lots of possibilities for alternative energy, all at this point requiring us to pay much more for our energy than with natural gas or oil based fuels. You have to have a good energy policy to address power generation, distribution and the transportation issues providing a way ahead that does not break the families bank or seriously damage the economy on the way to its goal. Solar panels on each house would appear to be one way to get there but it requires significant capital up front and no guarantee as to when you will break even. I'm sure that experts working under good leadership could come up with a good plan but that leadership is not present in the Obama administration. They are too busy taking over the country to worry about the consequences - let's call it trickle up poverty.
Energy conservation is even more imprtant
By Ted K (not verified) on Tuesday, June 8, 2010There is no doubt that these little power generators can be useful. But for most people, those living in the cities, this is not a practical direction. Sure one can get little solar lights on a balcony, or even a windmill on top of an appartment building, but the real problem comes from having to use all this excessive power in the first place.
We have to conserve more energy. There is so much that can be done: do we really need so many air conditioners, do we need suh high indoor temperatures in the winder, why are incandescent bulbs still being sold, why are standards for insulating buildings and their windows not more strict, etc.
And in this respect, transportation is perhaps the biggest culprit in needlessly wasting energy. It is beyond insanity that so many people in our civilisation actually use private automobiles to go to work daily. Public transport particularly using electric traction is by far more energy efficient than moving tons of metal for that one person using the shamefully wasteful intenal combustion engine of his car. Clearly the structure of our society and its economy has to be re-thought before the world is further irreparably harmed. And in doing so we may realise that we do not need all that energy in the first place.


