I couldn't help but bite at the questions Winner leaves open at the close of his third chapter: "Techne and Politeia". argues that instead of building a socio-technical system first, and subsequently worry about it's implications, that we should instead evaluate these technologies as much as possible beforehand based on their inherent qualities. Winner, writing in 1986, asks many questions regarding the future of solar energy, including: "How large should such systems be? How many will be built? Who should own them? How should they be managed? Should they be automatic? Or should the producer/consumer of solar power be actively involved in activities of load management?" (57)
Forecasting, Winner argues that this is a chance to incorporate personal responsibility into energy generation through distributed generation (DG) primarily in the form of rooftop photo-voltaic installations. He suggests that what will most likely occur is business as usual with large scale centralized plants feeding power into the grid like a coal-based, or nuclear plant would, remaining in control of the utility companies. He says that other values besides the “efficiency worshipper” mentality should be assessed when investigating new energy sources. What he doesn’t touch on are the vested interests of the utility companies, namely, reliability. I have written about Bill Post in a previous blog entry, but this sentiment was echoed at a seminar with folks from the IEEE (Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers) this week. Instead of shunning DG, they took it to be a matter of fact for the future in some capacity and argued that it would behoove the utility community to think about ways of integrating consumer based generation into the grid system before the mix increases.
In a discussion today with a former member of the Arizona Corporation Commission (our elected regulatory body for public utilities), I inquired about the REST law and the DG component. I hate to take up room explaining it, but it goes something like this. AZ must include 15% of renewable energy to their total portfolio by 2025. Of this 15%, 30% must come from DG sources by 2012. (for information about this and incentives, check out this great site: http://www.dsireusa.org/) This ramp up of distributed sources is very aggressive, and does not incentivize utilities investing beyond this percentage point. I asked why this number was not left open, or allowed for more flexibility in the mix of renewables. My answer was simply it was a quibble on the bench between commissioners and it needed to be decided… not quite the satisfactory answer, but illustrates the sometimes complex, sometimes to the point way in which decisions get made. While there are some fairly ambitious standards for DG, the fact remains that the easiest way to meet the REST requirements is through large scale plants (on the order of 17+ Megawatts as opposed to 1-2 Kw for household DG and more for other entities depending on their size).
The point of all this is that solar (and renewables in general) have evolved into a mixed bag energy source which demands that we look at both centralized and decentralized manifestations. While DG certainly has the chance to become a source of personal consumer responsibility, many issues remain in terms of cost, interconnectivity (making sure that the energy produced by citizens can be fed back into the grid at a favorable rate and ensuring that the infrastructure is up to date), and convincing certain players that the energy system will be changing very soon. The management of these systems is diverse, from large scale solar arrays by utility companies, to third party solar “leasers,” to fully engaged citizens managing their own installations. In this sense, Winner’s either/or analysis misses the current trajectory developing in renewable energy systems. DG requires that energy companies relinquish absolute control of the energy source and allow multiple actors to contribute.
It is clear through the past semester that the at least some people making these decisions (in industry, government, academia) are well aware of DG as a complicated component of our future energy supply. Changing the assumptions of engineers about how energy is delivered to the customer are key. Convincing utilities to invest in distributed energy is in everybody’s best interest. While foresight is desirable, technical systems have a tendency to produce unintended consequences (though people are constantly formulating decisions along the way). I would like to say more but feel I am not being very eloquent at the moment.
No comments:
Post a Comment