Energy Collisions and Autonomous Appliances

Appliance manufacturers are moving beyond energy pain points to energy collisions. Utility-based energy standards are stuck on energy pain. Energy collisions can offer much more benefits to smart grids than can pain points; they can offer still more to the off-grid or near grid building. Collisions are part of a wide variety of autonomous energy behaviors we will see in the near future—if only the energy suppliers will stop blocking them.

Too many energy suppliers are stuck on models of direct control. When they accept using prices, they want to use them to create direct control. (There is a name for this in Economics—drop me a line or comment if you know what it is…). To use a cartoon version of this approach, if I knew that when the yellow light comes on, I will be charged $1000 / minute to run the air conditioning, that yellow light is as good as an on / off switch. This mechanistic approach, seeking only for the right price that will achieve direct control, will not get any better results than the direct control of the 1980’s

The appliance manufacturers have a more engaging vision, in which they can compete as to how well they engage the consumer in better energy decisions. Most appliances can run in high and in low energy modes. The low energy mode may use half the energy but take three times as long. If time is money, this approach asks the question, “But how much?” Do you want that shirt clean and ready in 30 minutes [high energy mode]? Is it OK if it takes 90 minutes [low energy mode]? Is it OK to wait for 10 minutes until the energy price drops? How about 45 minutes? How about seven hours to get the overnight energy prices—or the wind-sourced energy?

The appliance manufacturers know how to do this already. They are starved for information. They want not only information about the price now, but predictions about price in the future. They want to compete on how well they can communicate energy decisions to the consumer.

This model of autonomous response can reach past the relatively low energy appliances. The intelligent thermostat may want to cool more now to in anticipation of higher prices later. The Plug-In Electric Vehicle (PEV) must support the household schedule while deciding when to charge.

There is renewed focus within the autonomous appliance community on energy profiles to support this model. Energy profiles as defined by Open Smart Grid efforts or by ZigBee have a simple model of energy use, low energy mode, turn off mode and ramp time. Building systems and appliances have a more complex mode. That washing machine may use no energy while filling, and then plenty while agitating the clothes. If an appliance understands its own energy profile, it may start filling its tank five minutes before the price drops—and time its final spin to complete before energy prices step up.

And then they began talking about systems working together to avoid energy spikes…

One of the foundational approaches in networking is collision sensing and detection (CSMA/CD) on a shared bus. Nodes on a network can transmit message whenever they want. Each is responsible for detecting when another node is transmitting at the same time, called a collision. When a collision is detected, each node waits a random period of time and then re-transmits. You may recognize this pattern as what humans do in conversation.

Today’s appliance manufacturers are talking about comparing energy profiles avoid the spin cycle and the refrigerator’s compressor cycle from running at the same time. With almost no degradation of performance, these autonomous systems can begin to shape the overall load profile of a building—or of the green neighborhood.

This approach can provide a smoother, more predictable load to the utilities. When combined with price responsiveness. It could produce a very predictable market. It really becomes interesting, however, when it applies to off grid buildings, and something that I call near-grid buildings.

If a building is running on site-generated energy, it has very distinct energy budget. That budget is not merely aggregate energy over 15 minutes, but hard, clear limits on maximum energy use at any moment. That upper limit may be continuously varying as, say, the speed of the wind changes. Continuous autonomous load shaping, based upon detailed energy profiles, may be critical to a distributed energy future.

To get there, we must get beyond price as a proxy for direct control. To paraphrase General Honore, don’t get stuck on pain.

Smart buildings are more important than smart grids

Smart operations in transmission and distribution won’t help us much. An upgrade for utility operations is long overdue, especially if energy distribution gets over its severe case of not-invented-here. This upgrade may be absolutely necessary for the grid to support more dynamic energy markets, ones that will balance electricity supply and demand. The most important smart interactions will come from the grid’s end nodes: industry, commercial buildings and homes. To get the benefits of the smart grid, we must have smart load.

The electric distribution system of North America is falling victim to its own success. It has enabled for us the greatest life style ever invented. It has largely succeeded in creating electricity to cheap to meter…until we bundle the capital costs into the electricity. But that electricity is not reliable enough for sensitive electronics. Wholesale prices for that cheap electricity may leap several orders of magnitude on a hot humid day like today in North Carolina.

Many businesses have unflattering terms to describe their customers. Consumers. Marks. Johns. For utilities, the word is load. But cheap dumb load is becoming too expensive. New cybersecurity concerns may make direct control, and direct control liability, too expensive. Even the much touted benefits of direct control of electric vehicle load become elusive in the mid-term.

Distributed energy resources are a challenge as well as opportunity. Used unwisely, they can increase the difficulty of managing the grid. Some implementation of central supply management to support wind farms show more gas burned in fast-start generators than if no wind was used at all. This is why the lion’s share of priority smart grid standards are for economic interactions rather than for control.

Energy management systems in the end nodes will have to become autonomous systems able to respond to economic signals from the grid, including predictions about future prices. Those economic signals must be great enough to spur investment. Because the risk of adopting new technologies is lower for individual end nodes than it is for any utility, some homes and commercial buildings will be able to adopt new technologies more rapidly than can the grid. The smart grid roadmap points to standards to enable this change, and to create opportunities through dynamic pricing

A mix of purchasers, ranging from early adopters to the risk adverse, will result in more normal markets for energy technology, e.g., the Pemberton innovation diffusion and Rogers technology adoption curves. This will attract more venture capital to distributed energy, particularly to energy storage. It is a simple fact that there are more storage options at the smaller scale of the end node than there are at grid scale. There are a lot of ways to store energy, and the curious might look to IDEA (District Energy) to expand their perspectives.

End nodes may have a mix of energy storage technologies. Thermal. Chemical. Hydrogen. Capacitors. Once they are the, the proper use of excess on-site generation is filling storage rather than selling to the grid. This can arguably result in 20% efficiency gains for each alternative energy without requiring new technology. This is a significant step on the road to net zero energy buildings. And net zero energy buildings are the smartest kind of load, able to responds significantly to each price signal from the grid.

For too long, we have leaned on the utilities to maintain our life styles and our civilization. It is time to give them a hand. It is time for smart load.

The price of energy

It was a busy week at the smart grid SDO conference. I was working with three of what the smart grid roadmap (www.nist.gov/smartgrid) calls Priority Action Plans (PAPs). These action plans are schedule, price, and messages for Demand Response (DR) and Distributed Energy Resources (DER). The technology of the grid is harder, and riskier, but these standards are what will give them a path to market. These standards will define the competition to make products in the end nodes of the grid. By the middle of next year, we will have three key standards out of this process.

Two of these standards are components. These standards will live inside other communications. Because these components will be common to many domains, meaning they will be inside business and buildings as well as in the grid, they will be much more useful than if they were built as one standard. These components are schedule and price.

Readers of this blog know that I have long wanted a WS-Calendar. WS-Calendar will be the web service form of ICalendar. ICalendar is used to exchange schedule information with others. When you go to a travel web site book and click on “Add this to my Calendar”, you are using ICalendar. When I invite you to a meeting and you click on the attachment to add it to your calendar, you have used ICalendar.

Schedules coordinate behavior between people. Web services schedules can coordinate behavior between business processes. Smart energy coordinates activities between energy supply and energy demand, including building systems and business processes. A web service for schedules can flow across domains, and be understood by each. The Calendar Consortium (www.calconnect.org) has committed to delivering an ICalendar for web services by year’s end.

You cannot understand price unless you understand the product you are buying. You can have commerce with any product, but standards make markets. For electricity, a product may have other characteristics such as source (wind or coal) and regulatory burden (carbon offsets). Mike Oldak of the Edison Electric Institute (EEI) calls these attributes terms and conditions, because they define the power contract. Schedule is also a part of the electrical product; power delivered at 2:00 am is worth much less than power delivered at 2:00 pm. Price and product must go together.

Product definitions need to be machine readable to really change the way we interact with the grid. Nearly everyone who has anything to do with electricity delivery, from policy to substation has agreed to work together to define the product. The North American Energy Standards Board (NAESB), is taking the lead on defining the requirements. NAESB will work with the utility stakeholders to define the characteristics that are relevant to markets.

OASIS will take the product from NAESB and create an open standard for communicating price information in the Energy Market Information Exchange (EMIX) Technical Committee (EMIX). The EMIX TC will also incorporate the WS-Calendar specification from CalConnect when it becomes available. It is our goal to define a message that can be used throughout the grid, from the generator to the home. OASIS will then work with NAESB to bring the standard back into the business process and regulations of the grid. The EMIX TC is now in formation, and you can read the proposed charter at the link below. Contact me if you would like to join.

Some of you know the Energy Interoperability TC, already underway. The Energy Interoperability TC builds upon the work of the OpenADR (Automated Demand Response) specification. The Energy Interoperability TC blurs the distinction between DR and DER by communicating information about prices now, and anticipated prices in the future. To the grid, at some level, it is all the same whether I turn off the lights, run off a battery, and fire up a generator when I get a message to reduce demand. The Energy Interoperation TC will deliver market information (price, product, and schedule) to the end nodes (Industry, commercial buildings, and homes) of the grid. The Energy Interoperability TC has been meeting for a month, but you can still join it, too. A link to its charter is below. When it’s work is done, it, too, will be submitted to NAESB and the IEC.

Drop me a line to learn more or need help to join one of these committees.

General Relativity and Control Systems Standards

I suspect most of my readers can just about remember light speed, the 100 foot barn, and the 110 foot log from learning about relativity. The barn had doors at each end, and one set would close the instant the other doors opened. The challenge was to transport the log through the barn. The answer had to do with light speed and collapsing space, so that as one got close enough to light speed, the log shortened, and it could fit through the barn. It was a simple enough calculation as to how fast one could go to make the log shrink how much. When each of us had completed the math, the professor sprang the surprise on us: "OK, what is happening from the perspective of a cockroach on the log?"

I haven’t been writing much recently, because I have been writing all of the time. The national smart grid roadmap is a project being completed in double time. The EPRI team is diverse and whip smart. The workshop participants are opinionated and have hundreds of millions on the line. I would be surprised of the process was not contentious.

The real problem, though, is no one thinks of the cockroach. Each player on the multi-disciplinary team sees the problem set up the way that they want things to work. Power grid engineers see homes and offices as just one more set of slow devices to turn on and off. Homes and offices see the grid as a secretive and not very reliable partner they have to work with. Green and sustainable energy folks seem to see the laws of thermodynamics as as much a social construct as are the tariffs and business procedures of the grid. Utilities executives see distributed generation as an inefficient way for middle class hobbyists to get their obsessions paid for by those less well off.

The cockroach was moving every bit as fast as the log he was sitting on. While an observer saw space, and the length of the log, contracting, the cockroach was sitting on the log and saw it remaining at 110 feet. The cockroach actually saw the barn getting shorter still, and not likely to let the log pass. However, the cockroach also saw was time dilation instead of space dilation. To the cockroach, the two doors no longer open and close simultaneously, giving the log just enough time to slip through.

And that is the problem with the smart grid. The grid operators do not see the problems of the buildings. The building owners do not see the problems of the grid, because they are hidden by the rules and market design. Venture capitalists do not see a path to profitability in funding projects with years of indecision by the utilities built into the sale cycle. “If only those others would learn about how hard my problems are…” None of them will embrace the perspective of the others; they happen to have other jobs.

Today, I have been wrestling with “Architecturally Significant Interfaces”. Grid architects tend to see the world as late 60’s open plan houses, with no proper rooms to divide the houses activities. Open up the kitchen to the dining room and living room. (I wonder how much great rooms are responsible for the tendency to eat take-out in front of the TV.) Open up the master bedroom to the great room as a loft; it is open and honest, and who cares if it scares the kids. Heck, pry the doors of the bathrooms, so everybody can interact, no matter what they are doing.

A good architecture divides the house into rooms, and thereby defines how people live there. It does not determine the furniture or the wall paint. The conceptual model of the smart grid (read it yourself, chapter 3) describes the functions of the grid and the buildings and people who participate in it. The Architecturally Significant Interfaces could define how information is handed between them; if selected correctly they will free up those in reach room to innovate, without concern for those in other rooms. If we end up with an open floor plan, we will have a mess, wherein in the name of openness we will need a family meeting to before we can decide to change anything.

Relativity—it relies on acknowledging different perspectives. Without acknowledging a few architecturally significant interfaces, the smart grid will assume a perspective held by no one. And that will be a prescription for failure.