Comments on: The case for a distributed, smarter, cleaner power grid post Hurricane Sandy

By: RMReid

RMReid — Tue, 20 Nov 2012 14:54:09 +0000

The Author of this article has absolutely no clues about power generation and transmission!!

By: Tom Preiss

Tom Preiss — Fri, 09 Nov 2012 23:12:37 +0000

This is wy Chinas partner with
Wsttinghouse to billed 40 modern nuclerreactore puats them sofare ahead off us energy wise and environmental. It also give them the ability to generate clean hydrogen full for substations and peak electrical us. Also breeder reactors don’t produce nuclear wast.

By: octeapi

octeapi — Sat, 03 Nov 2012 11:01:22 +0000

Affirmative Action Energy

We can dismiss the millions who no longer can afford higher costs for energy as a result of the 100′s upon 100′s of billions required to implement a smart grid, by simply celebrating diversity and inclusion because those negatively effected are widely dispersed and therefore invisible.

By: Johnw

Johnw — Sat, 03 Nov 2012 00:36:57 +0000

Great converse but the biggest problem is much less “exotic” than what peep here think is important: TREES. TREES and POWER LINES DON’t MIX. What the “solution” is I dunno, but it ain’t cutting all of them down…

By: John Christopher Supertramp

John Christopher Supertramp — Fri, 02 Nov 2012 20:54:55 +0000

PoE maybe? ;).. Power over Ethernet

By: Bill

Bill — Thu, 01 Nov 2012 14:38:21 +0000

Dude.. If your smartphone only works when plugged in to the grid then you need to have it fixed..

By: Rubie

Rubie — Thu, 01 Nov 2012 06:25:14 +0000

the fark you on about? i dont want no solar panels on my roof, nor do i want a gas generator polluting in my neighbourhood. are you retarded? they build these toxic power stations far away for that reason, who would want pollution in the heart of their city. YUCK

By: Michael

Michael — Thu, 01 Nov 2012 02:54:31 +0000

There are plants located in new york, plants located in other states. Over 300 of them located through out the entire USA. How the hell will one “bomb” cut off the entire grid? It wont!. Also it is not cost effective at all to go off grid, solar is also insufficient to supply power to even a quater of those on the east coast as it doesnt get enough sun. The only reliable decentralised generation is gas fired cogen, but think about it, that would be relying on the gas grid which is even more vulnerable than the electricity grid as entire states may run from just one plant. Do your research before typing up a load of bullshit!

By: Adelaide aware

Adelaide aware — Thu, 01 Nov 2012 01:33:11 +0000

Off grid systems and decentralization is the way to go. It can all be done cost effectively today with normal residential houses. All it takes is a little thought.

Our civilization is built around these centralized power systems. One bomb or one catastrophe can instantly send us back to the stone-age. As evident today

Smart grid??? Beware! Large power companies are pushing this agenda as it makes their systems operate more cost effectively. This is only an extension of centralized system. This article has political motivations. The electricity companies globally are trying to make power distribution cheaper on a mass scale. One big issue is, peak power requires massive infrastructure. Ie bigger generators heavier power lines etc. By using smart grid technology they don’t have to increase infra structure.

During peak load events they will just switch off non critical power. IE dish washer, laundry, TV etc. (peak events are during heat waves)

Smart grid basically undercuts profits made by solar installations and battery storage systems. Sure smart grid takes away the peaks, but it also makes sure big power protects its profits.

Smart grids are good but just be aware of the political motivations!!!

By: John Cooper

John Cooper — Wed, 31 Oct 2012 21:54:12 +0000

Let’s be clear – first, Thanks to Katie for introducing this important topic – we are utterly reliant on electricity and the grid as it is currently designed is incredibly vulnerable. That is to say, it has multiple “single points of failure.” It resembles a tree, with a trunk, then limbs, then branches, then twigs, then leaves, delivering a one-way stream of power but a disruption (fault) somewhere along a line can cause those downstream to lose power (outage) until the fault is addressed by a line crew. In contrast, the internet (on the large scale) more closely resembles a spider web or a fishing net, where information packets leave a server, proceed down multiple paths, finding the most efficient collection of paths to get the information transmission to its destination at another server. If a point fails, the info packet can reroute (go around) the failure and still make it to its destination. (If the your communication network is down because of electricity, that doesn’t impact the information – its waiting on the server to download when you get power back). The grid is not designed like the internet, at least not yet. Katie’s argument is quite sound – we need to do both things: first, optimize the grid by adding sensors and automating processes with digital devices, but also second, we need to add distributed energy devices that can provide a Plan B when the grid fails – no more Single Points of Failure, no more Outages, just switch over to your onsite power supply. Continuity of electricity has become too important to put all our energy eggs in the grid basket – Think Outside the Grid, folks!

John Cooper, Partner, NextWatt Solutions