Environmental Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
variability in electricity prices than they might experience as part of a larger-scale system,
because electricity prices fluctuate with demand.
This simultaneous potential for both benefits and risks explains how opposition to
innovative small-scale grid projects can sometimes be grounded in the traditional business
model and public service mandates to minimize people's exposure to risk. But depending
on which risks and benefits are prioritized (e.g. economic, political, social, cultural, or
technological) and who is bearing the risks or reaping the benefits, these initiatives can be
viewed favorably or negatively by different key actors.
Implementing smart grid at any scale involves a diverse portfolio of potential
technologies, as discussed in
Chapter 3
. The technologies that are most central to any
specific community or small-scale grid initiative, whether it be storage technology or
responsive islanding technology that automatically separates from the main grid when
power goes out, depend on the function, structure, and motivation of the specific project.
For some actors (including individual locavolts who are eager for engaged independent
involvement in their electricity generation) the promises of small-scale, community
engaged projects may far exceed potential pitfalls, while for other actors (including
conventional investor-owned utility companies whose business model is based on selling
power they distribute), the pitfalls may exceed the promises.
Although each small-scale initiative is distinctive in how it relates to broader notions
of creating a smarter grid, all small-scale or community initiatives share some important
commonalities in terms of advantages and disadvantages, central technologies, and key
actors whose interests are well served, or not. We begin this chapter by first defining
several key terms, including community-based energy, microgrid, nanogrid, locavolts,
and prosumer. We then highlight the promises and pitfalls most obvious in small-scale
electricity system initiatives, identify the technologies that are most central in these smart
grid approaches, and describe the key actors and their interests most directly impacted
by community-based or small-scale projects. We then describe in detail three different
small-scale community initiatives that illustrate the diversity of approaches and the
tensions among various actors as they attempt to achieve the promises and avoid the
pitfalls. While many industrial parks, college campuses, and military bases are also
developing distributed generation, in the selection of these three cases we focus primarily
on communities.
The first case describes the ongoing (at the time of writing) community struggle to
municipalize the electricity system in Boulder, Colorado. Our second case explores the
neighborhood-scale Pecan Street smart grid project in Austin, Texas, which is a partnership
between the public and private sectors supported primarily by the federal government. Our
Search WWH ::
Custom Search