Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Power Science Technology

Microgrids May Provide Distributed Energy 159

jobcello wrote to mention a BBC article discussing a new technique for power distribution that might provide electricity using a series of small "microgrids", in a manner similar to peer-to-peer software. From the article: "'This would save something like 20 to 30% of our emissions with hardly anyone knowing it ... A microgrid is a collection of small generators for a collection of users in close proximity ... It supplies heat through the household, but you already have cables in the ground, so it is easy to construct an electricity network. Then you create some sort of control network.' That network could be made into a smart grid using more sophisticated software and grid computing technologies."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Microgrids May Provide Distributed Energy

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 25, 2005 @04:26PM (#13646148)
    "Then you create some sort of control network."

    What sort, exactly; and, will it run Linux?

    * * *

    Why do sentences like that stick out and yell "inexperienced ding-dongs at work" ??
  • This would be cool (Score:5, Interesting)

    by under_score ( 65824 ) <mishkin@be[ ]ig.com ['rte' in gap]> on Sunday September 25, 2005 @04:27PM (#13646155) Homepage
    I've been investigating solar and wind power generation for my home. I'm on an acre and a half, with well and septic. I run some web and mail servers. It would be really nice to be able to have a water supply and electricity supply independent of the grid. If this sort of grid system gets implemented, it may be incentive for me and others to go ahead with local power generation systems so that we can share. I've been reading about in-home control systems that can regulate when and how power is used so that you can immediately get a 15-30% power savings. If this is also done with these micro-grids, a cumulative savings of 50% might be possible. That would be a substantial factor in reducing entropy buildup (emmissions, heat, etc.). Cool stuff!!!
  • by guildsolutions ( 707603 ) on Sunday September 25, 2005 @04:28PM (#13646158)
    With such an advanced soceity as we have, its amazing how frail and utterly devistatable our communications and electrical utilies are. With the recent hurricanes, they estimate MONTHS before some places get electricity back. We have the ability to have blackouts the cover entire states.Havnt we learned from google that one huge supercomputer is not better than a million smaller computers? If each city, each neighborhood has a microgrid for power and communications that was burried and belowground, sealed against weather then our communications and electrical infastructure would remain even after huge natrual disasters such as these hurricanes that we have been so blessed with this season.
  • by deutschemonte ( 764566 ) <lane.montgomery@nOspAM.gmail.com> on Sunday September 25, 2005 @04:31PM (#13646172) Homepage
    I have always thought that the real revolution in fuel cell tech will be with something like this. Either you can have a fuel cell powered generator at one house, or use a larger generator to power several houses.

    In either case it would allow for what I believe is the greatest hinderance to this technology, true energy competition.

    Think about it, your energy costs would be completely independent of where you live (except for shipping costs). We could build clean energy supply stations where they will be most effective (say the desert for example) and then contain and ship that energy anywhere using fuel cells.

    There are a few hurdles to overcome such as local power monopolies and putting protections in place to make sure 1st world countries aren't just importing from poluting energy sources in 3rd world countries.

    But when the technology becomes marketable, this will be a real possibility.
  • Been there, got that (Score:3, Interesting)

    by rlp ( 11898 ) on Sunday September 25, 2005 @04:31PM (#13646175)
    My neighborhood has a set of fuel cell generators deployed at a transmssion site up the street. Runs on natural gas. It's an experiment, and probably would not be cost effective w/o state and federal grants.
  • Holy cow (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 25, 2005 @04:41PM (#13646219)
    When Brian Cohan created BitTorrent, I bet he had no idea that he just singlehandedly save the world!!!
     
    /jumping up and down madly chanting "TAKE THAT RIAA!!!!!!!111!!!!11!"
  • hope it's 'open' (Score:2, Interesting)

    by fak3r ( 917687 ) on Sunday September 25, 2005 @04:53PM (#13646272) Homepage
    an open system would follow an open society and *all* could benefit - wouldn't that be a nice/new way to look at rebuilding of places like NO, and other inner city places. hopeful perhaps, but it'd be a nice application and solve may of society's (current) ills.
  • by YrWrstNtmr ( 564987 ) on Sunday September 25, 2005 @05:14PM (#13646370)
    Aren't a couple of the main benefits of centralized power centralized pollution control and centralized upgrades?

    I keep hearing that 1 large electric plant is better to power transportation than a million tiny gasoline powered generators. In fact, I hear that in here quite regularly.

    Why the dichotomy?

  • Will never happen (Score:3, Interesting)

    by MerlynEmrys67 ( 583469 ) on Sunday September 25, 2005 @05:24PM (#13646405)
    This completely violates the "Banana" doctrine - which of course states:
    Build Absolutely Nothing Anywhere Near Anyone
    Why do you think they put the large powerplants out in the middle of nowhere, so that only poor people are near them, because if you tried to get a permit to build a small generator in the middle of a populated area - the enviroNazi's would shoot it down in a pile of lawsuits and environmental impact statements.

    Nice idea - I have heard that transmission takes about 20-30% of our electrical output (especially when California gets its electricity from the Northern Oregon border, if not even farther away) - so anything to move the generation plant closer to the people that actually use the electricity would be a huge benefit.

  • by suitepotato ( 863945 ) on Sunday September 25, 2005 @06:25PM (#13646746)
    The reasons are many and varied and mostly center on physics. If you look at best case scenarios with current off the shelf technology and the efficiencies as you scale up, there's a sweet spot where the size versus distribution versus etc. all reaches an optimum level. Our present system is much closer to that sweet spot than microgrids or the other end of the spectrum, one giant planet-wide power station.

    We could use high temperature superconductors, fission reactors and with fusion later when they get it to work, and a lot of clearing of the way by the federal government for deployment which is now held up by people using the environment as a smokescreen when what it comes down to is a lot of NIMBY and more to the point a bountiful opportunity for pitiful and pathetic unimportant people to make themselves feel important.

    I live in a state where every highway project takes years longer and millions more because the enviros hold up everything *after* the damage is already done until they've milked out the publicity for themselves and finally it gets done in the end and there was no change and nothing saved in terms of environment and plenty of time and money wasted. All for their inane ego festivals.

    Right now those same imbeciles are doing everything they can to keep the power transmission companies from fixing outdated and antiquated transmission lines and equipment which first keeps efficiency low and cost of the power transmission high, second it keeps jacking up the danger of massive local outages every year, third it increases the danger to the workers who maintain the system, fourth it increases the chance of creating a regional chain reaction outage, and fifth it increases the chance of a catastrophic failure on one of the big circuits going through the woods and starting a fire.

    They are also trying everything they can do to prevent us from tying into regional grids through the west side of CT into New York and across the sound to Long Island. And lastly doing all they can to stand in the way of a gas tanker and pipeline facility. The sanity of putting liquid natural gas ships more than ten miles offshore is obvious in this new age of mega-terrorism and conversely the insanity of making the tankers put into ports near population centers equally obvious. They just don't care. It's all about them.

    The best thing we can do with our end of things as consumers is insulate, make efficient use of what we consumer, and use solar electric, thermal, and hydro *where* economical and efficient on our homes. When superconductive storage systems finally come around, we can store the energy compactly that way onsite and until then, unless we want to deal with the danger of poisonous battery chemicals and five thousand pounds of them per home, we're better off simply having a system where we use the energy we generate first and the main grid's power secondly.

    But generators aren't going to cut it. We're going from a few hundred stations to a few million and with less efficiency and more pollution and no inspection. Tack on inspection and you can add the psycho enviro leftists to the far right terrorist under every bed paranoids as one more group pushing us closer to a police state; no way would they let fossil fuel generators increase like that without mandating mandatory inspections on your property at any time for any or no reason with no prior notice and reserve the right to shut you down whenever they felt like it.

    I don't see a need to create a massive new intrusion on our rights. Like I said, insulate, make efficient use, be efficient in generation where it is fitting to generate it yourself.

    Fittingly a lot of the enviros of today were the Mother Earth News types of twenty-five years ago advocating that we all use wood and coal stoves, forge and smelt our own metals, and operate pig farms to feed methane stills. Their former zeal for old low tech is utterly incompatible with their stated beliefs of today. Much like the pictures of them in mullets, gold chains, and neon orange leisure suits were twenty-five years ago.
  • Actually... (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Once&FutureRocketman ( 148585 ) <otvk4o702@@@sneakemail...com> on Sunday September 25, 2005 @07:53PM (#13647177) Homepage
    The utilities will never allow it. Seriously, this is one of their worst nightmares, and one of the major reasons that they consistently oppose programs that promote distributed renewable. They are, for the most part, regulated monopolies. Their political power derives from the fact that, no matter how much they suck, they are the only game in town. Change that, and they start to become superfluous. And they know it.
  • Already In Use (Score:3, Interesting)

    by RzUpAnmsCwrds ( 262647 ) on Monday September 26, 2005 @04:40AM (#13649004)
    At my university (University of Colorado at Boulder), we have an on-campus 33MW power plant. Waste heat from the plant is piped around campus to heat buildings, and the electricity generated is enough to power the campus, with 8MW left over that is sold to the grid. The facility also produces chilled water through a massive vapor-phase system that is used to cool the physics and other nearby buildings.

We are each entitled to our own opinion, but no one is entitled to his own facts. -- Patrick Moynihan

Working...