As “smart grid” becomes more familiar in the global lexicon, hardware and software vendors, utilities, and nations are all vying for attention. Consider, for example, this small sample of claims about the smart grid—a modernized, digital communications–enhanced electricity grid:
- In early September 2009, U.S. utility Xcel Energy proclaimed “SmartGridCity becomes first fully functioning smart city in the world.”
- At GridWeek in September in Washington, D.C., a presentation by a representative of Italian utility Enel included a slide claiming that “Enel network is the largest Smart Grid in the world.”
- In October, one of Australia’s largest electric utilities announced a pilot project that it claimed will “feature the world-first use of many smart grid technologies—from fourth generation wireless communications, to smart sensors in substations, to fully-connected home area networks in households.”
- On Oct. 27, U.S. President Barack Obama announced 100 awards for smart grid projects to be financed by American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 funds totaling $3.4 billion—the largest grid investment in U.S. history. That night, when MSNBC host Rachel Maddow asked Google Chairman and CEO Eric Schmidt how that investment compares with what countries we’re competing with are doing, Schmidt answered: “China, who is the competitor here, has decided to become the world’s leader in all the piece parts and all of the necessary hardware and supplies to do this globally. To that end, they are spending more than $100 billion on the same thing that today, the largest awards we have done in America, the private sector plus the government will invest $8 billion. You can see the gap.” (Some estimates put China’s number much higher.)
So, which country’s grid is the smartest? It depends on what you’re measuring—dollars spent, percentage of customers affected, number of customers affected, number of technologies interconnected, or measurable results (in terms of reliability of service, megawatt-hours reduced, or something else).
Smart Grid Rationales and Definitions Differ
Each nation has a slightly different set of reasons for pursuing smart grid (SG) technologies and programs and a slightly different definition of what constitutes a smart grid. That’s inevitable, given the multiple technologies and infrastructure goals that have found a home under the SG umbrella.
One illustration of this can be seen in two sets of slides from presenters at
GridWeek 2009, held last September in Washington, D.C. Table 1 consolidates the
Korean view of the global smart grid picture presented at that event.
1. One view of the different national and regional smart grid goals and strategies. Source: GridWeek 2009 Another way of thinking about the differences came from a
presentation by Dr. Rahul Tongia, who has affiliations with a Bangalore, India think tank and Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh. Table 2 summarizes his view of the drivers for smart metering and smart grids in developed and developing nations.
2. Reasons for developing a smart grid differ. Source: GridWeek 2009Tongia’s view of “Future (or even Subtle) Drivers” makes the contrasts even clearer, as summarized in Table 3.
3. Future (or even subtle) drivers of smart grid technologies. Source: GridWeek 2009Can’t We All Just Get Along?
Despite the definitional and goal differences, and the natural international rivalry, there are a few organizations and partnerships that are trying to facilitate the sharing of SG lessons for the mutual benefit of all pursing SG goals. The U.S.-based
GridWise Alliance is one. This group has a signed alliance with Smart Grid Australia and the Korea Smart Grid Association, and pending alliances with India, Brazil, and the European Union (which has its own EU-wide organization). Its membership also includes a raft of SG technology vendors plus research organizations, utilities, and other stakeholders in SG initiatives.
Another international collaborative force is the fact that many of the largest industry vendors and contractors have a global reach, which makes it in their interest to share best practices and develop international standards.
The tension between the desire to tout national (or corporate) achievements and supremacy in some aspect of SG development and to encourage/support/(control?) international cooperation—especially on such matter as interoperability standards—can be inferred from several of the GridWeek presentations even if you didn’t attend the actual event.
The countries with perhaps the most at stake are the Asian-Pacific nations (China, Japan, India, and Korea), by virtue of their economic growth plans. And Korea wasn’t shy about claiming the flag. One
slide title proclaimed “Korea, the Smart Grid Leader” and noted that the country is developing a global smart grid roadmap with Italy in the Major Economies Forum (MEF). (Note that this was in the session on collaboration.)
One of the most realistic assessments of the state of
smart grids globally came from Dr. Tongia, who noted that “there is no SKU”—you can’t buy an off-the-shelf solution because every utility faces different legacy, regulatory, business, and skills issues. His insight after seven years working on smart grids and smart metering: The “Smart grid (like IT) is a process, not a product.”
Tongia noted that there are “an enormous number of stakeholders” and no group can tackle the issue alone. “International collaboration would be ideal,” he noted.
“No one has all the answers. They’re either lying or trying to sell you something.” Tongia asserted on another slide. (He advocated something he called the Smart Grid Maturity Model for managing SG strategically and tactically and for charting a course. He claimed it has been used by “some sixty utilities.”)
The rest of this article presents, in alphabetical order, snapshots of where several of the most active countries stand and where they hope to land with SG project implementations. Bear in mind that proposed projects may not materialize—at least not within their originally projected timeframe. (By way of preview, and for easy Command-F search in Print view, they are: Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, European Union, Germany, India, Italy, Japan, Netherlands, South Korea, Sweden, United Kingdom, U.S.)
Email
Comments
Print
Reuse
