I will admit that I am often skeptical of big business and big government. I'm a traditional liberal who adheres to the principle that, generally, more individual freedom is a Good Thing. From this position, it would be easy for me to join the ranks of the paranoid folks railing against advanced energy management ("smart grid") solutions. But I'm not going along with the radicals. Before I tell you why, check out a few examples of the paranoia I'm talking about:
This paranoia is one of the things that makes America what it is, and it's often a healthy check against runaway bureaucracy. In this case, however, it is setting itself up to do more harm than good.
We can develop technical solutions to achieve our energy goals while protecting personal privacy, thus invalidating the arguments above. The Internet has shown that to be possible through tools like firewalls, encryption, username/password access control, anonymizer services, and data privacy laws.
Proponents of electricity demand response technologies in the form of consumption monitoring and dynamic pricing (enabled by smart meters, in most scenarios) must match Americans' paranoid skepticism with hard facts and powerful privacy protections. Hype is not enough. Failing to do so will empower the critics with sufficient ammunition to bring down the whole effort.
To understand the impact consumer fear and skepticism is having, you need go no further than the National Association of Regulatory Commissioners (NARUC), the state utilities' non-profit interest group. This powerful association has the ear of federal government and is soft-pedaling demand response and smart meter deployments in fear of consumer rejection. From a NARUC statement issued March 3, 2009:
Standards bodies (NIST, IEEE), environmentalists, smart meter companies, ZigBee alliance members, and anyone interested in peak shaving and demand shifting must unite to address the privacy issue head-on, before the radicals use it as a blunt weapon with which to bludgeon us to a slow and painful death.
Read more on this topic in my previous post, Get your grubby hands off of my HAN.
Once they can control anything, they will want to control everything. Do you want to loose [sic] control of when your lights work?-- Jim Holm, comment on WSJ blog post
Smart Grid is part of a global initiative to manage information, all information.... Did you catch that? Smart Grid will allow the government to collect information about you, your habits, and possessions. All they need are a few sensors to know what is in your refrigerator; how long you spend in the bathroom; if you smoke in your home; if you drink alcohol in your home; and how many people are in your home or business at any one time. Science fiction? Don't bet on it.
This paranoia is one of the things that makes America what it is, and it's often a healthy check against runaway bureaucracy. In this case, however, it is setting itself up to do more harm than good.
We can develop technical solutions to achieve our energy goals while protecting personal privacy, thus invalidating the arguments above. The Internet has shown that to be possible through tools like firewalls, encryption, username/password access control, anonymizer services, and data privacy laws.
Proponents of electricity demand response technologies in the form of consumption monitoring and dynamic pricing (enabled by smart meters, in most scenarios) must match Americans' paranoid skepticism with hard facts and powerful privacy protections. Hype is not enough. Failing to do so will empower the critics with sufficient ammunition to bring down the whole effort.
To understand the impact consumer fear and skepticism is having, you need go no further than the National Association of Regulatory Commissioners (NARUC), the state utilities' non-profit interest group. This powerful association has the ear of federal government and is soft-pedaling demand response and smart meter deployments in fear of consumer rejection. From a NARUC statement issued March 3, 2009:
[NARUC ]President [Frederick] Butler, who also serves as Co-Chairman of the NARUC-Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Smart Grid Collaborative, said that too much of the focus on the "Smart Grid" is on end-use consumers who may not understand the benefits or even want new smart meters. Rather than building confidence in the Smart Grid, this approach will likely breed opposition. Instead, President Butler recommended that lawmakers, policymakers, and industry focus on the back-end operational systems, such as upgrades to the transmission and distribution systems.Yes, NARUC is partially right. We could benefit from improvements in the distribution grid. But I sense a war brewing between the "grid expansionists" and the "demand reductionists". Both approaches have the potential to improve penetration of renewable power generation. Both can improve grid reliability. Both can create jobs. But only consumer empowerment through consumption feedback and demand response measures, in combination with a revenue-neutral carbon tax, will reduce greenhouse gas emissions and reduce our dependence on fossil fuel power generation.
Standards bodies (NIST, IEEE), environmentalists, smart meter companies, ZigBee alliance members, and anyone interested in peak shaving and demand shifting must unite to address the privacy issue head-on, before the radicals use it as a blunt weapon with which to bludgeon us to a slow and painful death.
Read more on this topic in my previous post, Get your grubby hands off of my HAN.
Leave a comment