Powered Up: California moves to upgrade aging grid system to meet voracious demand for the juice

An unusual experiment began a few years ago in suburban Irvine, when rows of homes, inhabited by UC Irvine faculty and staff, afforded a high-tech peephole from which to observe how humans interact with electricity.

The houses were outfitted with tools for use with the advanced electricity system glowing on California’s horizon, prepping residents for a near future when things worth having will carry the prefix “smart”—as in smart appliances installed in smart homes attached to the smart power grid.

The complex system that powers the world’s fifth-largest economy is at a turning point. Utility executives, policymakers and regulators are peering into a future where California has shed fossil fuels and is fully buzzing with electricity. Before the state completes its shift to a modern, safe, sustainable energy grid, it has to decide precisely how that should be accomplished.

Among the key issues:

• The grid is aging, large pieces of it having been installed to serve a state with a few million people, not today’s 40 million. Some of the system’s vulnerabilities—even its lethality—have been laid bare by wildfires, when power was interrupted by flying tree limbs and communities were devastated by blazes sparked by broken equipment.

• The 100-year-old system in which power flows one way, from mega-utilities to their millions of customers, is coming apart. Power now runs into and out of the grid from multiple sources, all the time.

• By law, the state must obtain all of its power by 2045 from clean sources, including sun and wind, which are cheaper than ever but unpredictable and difficult to fully harness. For example, more solar power may be generated in the middle of the day than the grid demands. That abundance presents a technology problem: how to store excess energy until needed.

• The “internet of things”—devices that connect us to each other and the grid—offers convenience but also requires users to relinquish some degree of privacy.

Such modernization requires a better understanding of what we need from the grid, and what the grid requires from us. Enter demonstration projects like the five-year experiment at UC Irvine—sponsored by the university, the Southern California Edison power company and the federal Department of Energy—sort of a real-time Truman Show in which homeowners were the subjects. Their households received smart appliances, LED lighting, water heaters, insulation, air conditioning, solar panels and batteries, even electric cars and charging stations. The trade-off for residents was that their every decision was remotely monitored: which lights were flicked on and when; which families used air conditioning or hot water more than others; which wall sockets residents used.

Gene Tsudik, a UC Irvine professor and one of the participants, is a computer scientist specializing in privacy and security. His professional antennae were fired up when teams of installers left behind clicking, ticking, blinking monitors that provided his family’s interface with the grid. “I was very well aware that even simple devices that transmit wirelessly can triangulate the movement of people in the house,” says Tsudik.

One takeaway for Scott Samuelsen, director of UCI’s Advanced Power and Energy Program, which ran the project, is that while the adoption of smart-home devices is growing fast, regulations and consumer protections that should accompany them are not keeping pace. “The market is out of control with respect to regulation [of devices],” Samuelsen says. “We are in a free-for-all.”

Some aspects of grid modernization are indeed under way. Regulators have ordered power companies to make their equipment safer, particularly to withstand—and not cause—wildfires. Much of the equipment we can now see will either be buried safely underground or armored heavily to protect it from the elements.

But other aspects—policies, regulations, new business models—could require another decade to resolve. Some policymakers envision a centrally managed Western grid serving everyone from the Rocky Mountains to the Pacific, not ruled over by California alone. Others see more and more micro-grids forming, ranging from a family with solar panels to hospitals, malls and small counties taking care of their own electricity needs.

The rise of smaller, local alternatives to the big utilities, such as Marin Clean Energy and Sonoma Clean Power, is known as community choice aggregation (CCA); the movement sparked in the Bay Area and has spread across the state. Small aggregators now have 2.5 million customer accounts. Marin Clean Energy (MCE) and Sonoma Clean Power (SCP) have both brought new customers to their utilities, and amassed significant reserves in recent years in order to offset any potential rate hikes. The PG&E bankruptcy has led to some uncertainty but won’t impact the rates of local CCA participants, say officials at the local utilities.

In a recent interview, as PG&E was about to file for bankruptcy protection, MCE chairman and chief executive Dawn Weisz told the Bohemian that “we partner with PG&E and are certainly monitoring the situation, and beyond that we don’t anticipate there being any impacts to our customers,” as she noted that the utility was sitting on about $50 million in reserves intended to absorb any rate fluctuations—while also serving to bolster the utilities’ credit rating. Sonoma Clean Power is carrying about $40 million in reserves, says SCP spokesperson Kate Kelly.

These local power hubs must report their activities to the state Energy Commission and the Public Utilities Commission, in much the way legacy utilities do. The companies are not currently subject to all of the same rules that govern the big utilities across a web of complex issues, including compliance with California’s clean-energy goals, but the state is in the process of formalizing additional regulations.

California’s grid operator and its cadre of electrical engineers are concerned that runaway innovation could outstrip oversight and create precisely what the grid, even the modern grid, can’t abide: imbalance.

“Changes are happening rapidly and we’re trying to keep up with that,” says Mark Rothleder, a vice president at the California Independent System Operator, which manages the state’s grid.

“There will be new players, new resources, new opportunities,” he says. “We have to be open to innovation and we have to ensure our technology that manages the grid can enable those resources. We have to pay attention.”

Source: CalMatters. CalMatters is a nonprofit, nonpartisan media venture explaining California policies and politics. This article was prepared in partnership with the ‘Sacramento Bee.’ Tom Gogola contributed reporting.


Powered Up, by Julie Cart, Cal Matters, February 19, 2019.

Modern energy infrastructure could mitigate California’s wildfire crisis

What is the value of technology that can sense a problem with a power line and cut the electricity flowing through it faster than it’s able to hit the ground and ignite nearby vegetation? What about mini independent power grids that can disconnect from the main utility and function in the case of a system-wide failure — allowing critical infrastructure like hospitals and first responders to still operate while mitigating the potential fire hazard for the larger community?

Clean technologies like these that allow greater control over the power grid already exist.

They’re the kinds of solutions that should make hard choices easier — like the decision that local utility PG&E had to make about whether or not to keep power running during November’s fire in Paradise, California. Solutions like these mean that people may not lose their homes to fire, that power can be restored in minutes or hours versus days or weeks, and that essential services can keep lights and heating and cooling systems on during emergencies.

The question is — why aren’t utilities racing to incorporate them?

We used to be a nation that invested in energy technology and while some utilities have begun testing and incorporating newer clean technologies — we’re not anywhere near a transition.

The conversation has been stuck at the estimated $1 trillion cost of building a modern smart grid across the country. But we’re already spending $150 billion per year right now from outages due to weather alone. And in 2017, PG&E faced up to $6 billion for damages from that year’s wildfires. At that price, across the country, we could be integrating synchrophaser sensors that can detect and react within seconds to problems along miles of power lines, (which San Diego Gas and Electric has begun doing), along with microgrids.

Microgrids would make the biggest difference in a natural disaster. A large connected grid means limitless vulnerabilities that can wipe out the entire system, and continuous power that’s hard to isolate and manage when there are trouble spots. Self-contained and resilient — if there’s a problem with a microgrid, it only affects the immediate area. In the case of a wildfire it can be entirely shutdown, remotely managed, and easily restarted once danger has passed. Their small, compact nature also means that select sections of the grid can be kept in operation even if everything else is off.

While major utilities in the state have yet to adopt them, California has notable microgrids in operation — several of which belong to the military and serve as teaching examples: Camp Pendleton, Fort Hunter Liggett and Borrego Springs. Even Alcatraz runs on a microgrid.

Historically, the United States has always made the shift to the next era of power generation — from wood and hydro, to coal, to oil and then nuclear — but that hasn’t been happening this time around as renewables and clean technologies have become viable. The current power grid is literally stuck in the 60’s — an analogue system that relies on centralized generation and endless miles of cables, poles and substations spread over long distances. One major disruption along the line and the whole thing can go down, and worse, as we’ve repeatedly now seen in California — it can contribute to the damage done.

The unfortunate short answer to why utilities have been slow to adopt these innovations is that “it’s complicated.” It involves changing behavior and re-orienting and aligning current disincentives built into the regulated utility system into incentives to invest and deploy. This is the nature of moving from central generation to the future of distributed generation. Utilities, regulators and politicians are unsure of how to control and make money from distributed generation.

As the fires in California have demonstrated, natural disasters as a result of drier land from lack of rainfall, increasingly dangerous storms and other climate change related problems are already here and will only get worse. The California Climate Assessment forecasts that by 2050 the area burned by fire in the state will increase by 77 percent and costs will go up by 24 percent.  — But the need for better technology is as simple as the reality that it will always be impossible to maintain tens of thousands of miles of cables and the natural world that grows around them to a level that ensures safety without incident.

Making the investment in modernizing our energy infrastructure means we’ll be prepared with a more resilient system for future natural disasters. Now that we know — there’s no excuse for inaction.

Jigar Shah is the founder of renewable energy company SunEdison.


Modern energy infrastructure could mitigate California’s wildfire crisis, by Jigar Shah, The Hill, January 12, 2019.