Smart grids, underpinned by smart meters, are designed to handle two-way flows of data and power.

Advocates say smart grids will pave the way for electricity customers to reap the full benefits of their capacity to also be small-scale generators (through technologies like cogeneration and solar PV) and from their ability to reduce power use at peak times.

Announced by Treasurer Wayne Swan in the May Budget, the project is currently the subject of a pre-deployment study that is due to be completed next month.

Marshall told a Melbourne seminar organised by the iGrid research collaboration that the project aimed to deliver “a truly commercial scale rollout – we don’t want this to be just another trial”.

Pilot projects carried out internationally and in Australia to date had suffered from being “partial” – for example, focusing only on smart meters, he said.

The Government expects to announce the winning bid early next year, Marshall said.

Race against the clock

Stuart White, director of the Institute of Sustainable Futures, told CE Daily work by the Australian Energy Regulator (AER) that will specify how much network providers in each state can spend made it crucial to get the message across quickly that smart grids can deliver huge cost savings through avoided expenditure on network expansion.

In NSW alone, the AER’s April determinations paved the way for up to $16.4 billion to be spent over the next five years on transmission and distribution networks.

The cost of the CPRS “is actually swamped, it’s dwarfed” by the potential spend on network expansion, said White, whose institute is spearheading the iGrid collaboration.

“There is a multimillion dollar bill on the pavement that is not being picked up” if Australia misses the chance to use smart grids and unleash their potential to take full advantage of energy efficiency and load-shifting efforts by consumers and small-scale, local-level generation, he said.

“It’s partly fragmentation,” White said.

“You’ve got a whole lot of activity around the CPRS and then you’ve got separate, relatively more obscure policy work and regulatory work around the network expenditure.

“Those two worlds do not seem to intersect … and that in itself is pretty scary.”

The timetable for the AER determinations – Queensland and South Australia are the next cabs off the rank – meant there was a chance “to start to get some of this right, to start to join some of these dots”, he said.

In the U.S., the Obama Administration has appointed a national coordinator to develop smart grid standards, while the UK low carbon transition plan released yesterday (see related article) says the Government will later this year publish a “high-level vision for a future smart grid and subsequently a plan for delivering this”.

Source:  www.cedaily.com.au

The State Government has ordered the Queensland Competition Authority to investigate a new system of power pricing that ramps up costs at peak times.

Such a scheme would likely mean higher prices in the mornings and early evenings.

Air-conditioners in summer and heaters in winter would be significantly more expensive to use at these times, but the price of power could be cheaper at other times.

The Government wants consumers to feel the financial pain of their consumption decisions in a bid to reduce the multibillion-dollar cost of expanding the network to cope with peak demand times.

In a letter to the QCA, Energy Minister Stephen Robertson said the existing tariff structures had been in place for 20 years and needed reviewing.

“Strong Queensland population growth over recent years has also seen peak electricity demand increase, requiring significant investment in transmission and distribution networks,” he said.

“This indicates a need for customers to see the impact of consumption decisions.”

Opposition energy spokesman Jeff Seeney said he hoped the move was not a “stalking horse” for an unjustified price gouge and discount prices should be offered at off-peak times.

“Demand-side management can be a very desirable thing if it is done right,” he said. “But it can be just another power price rise in disguise if it’s done wrong.”

The directive was issued to the QCA on the same day the Government announced a ban on all air-conditioners with an efficiency rating below four stars from September 1. About 40 per cent of units now on the market will be illegal to sell under the new rules.

The QCA has been ordered to review whether the current tariff levels promote competition and allow real electricity costs to be fully recovered from southeast Queensland consumers.

Alternative pricing structures promoting demand-side management, such as “inclining block” and “time of use” tariffs, must also be considered.

Similar tariff schemes already exist for hot water services and pool pumps but the Government wants a system to take in all power use.

A final report, which will also have to cater for the Commonwealth’s Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme, has been ordered by August 31 with the new tariff structure to be introduced mid next year.

Source: Courier Mail –   http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,25709399-952,00.html

Invited to present at council’s General Meeting, members of the Powerlines Action Group of Eumundi (PAGE) told councillors of the devastating impacts of high voltage powerlines planned for the region on, among other things, council’s vibrant, green and sustainable ambitions.

“Meeting future demand for power on the Sunshine Coast in a sustainable way is possibly the biggest issue for our community, our council and our time,” said PAGE coordinator Graham Smith.

“A Powerlink proposal locking the coast in to 20-plus years of dirty, coal-fired energy in an effort to meet peak demand, which only occurs about three to four days each year, is outrageous and will contradict any strategy our council rolls out to achieve a sustainable, low carbon economy.

“Yesterday, we therefore called on council to pass a resolution opposing the proposal in defence of our shared visions for cleaner, greener 21st century solutions to meeting our energy needs.

“In response, council rose to the challenge and unanimously agreed to move a resolution opposing the Powerlink proposal, which is scheduled to be ratified at council’s Ordinary Meeting on Thursday.

“We were also impressed that now was the time for council to embrace new technologies and issue an Expression of Interest (EOI) to engage industry specialising in demand management, energy efficiency and local generation with a view to ‘eliminating the need for Powerlink infrastructure’.

“And again, PAGE members were pleased that council agreed and vowed to issue an EOI with the aim of developing solutions contributing to the elimination of the need for the Powerlink project.”

Attending the meeting was Mayor Bob Abbot and Councillors Vivien Griffin, Jenny McKay, Keryn Jones, Lew Brennan, Tim Dwyer, Anna Grosskreutz, Chris Thompson, Ted Hungerford and Russell Green, plus a 30-strong public gallery.

The residents group was also buoyed by a Queensland Government announcement yesterday regarding its Renewable Energy Plan requiring all state-owned energy companies to “… submit a renewable energy network benefit statement detailing where deployment of renewable energy or demand management projects could help avoid building or upgrading electricity networks”.

“We’re now looking forward to Powerlink reviewing the renewable energy network benefit statement relating to this project and the real benefits arising out of this plan,” Mr Smith said.

PAGE, also known as People Advocating Green Energy, is a volunteer group which formed 20 months ago in reply to Powerlink’s proposed 275kV, 70km Woolooga to Cooroy South (Eerwah Vale) Transmission Line and Substation Project, estimated to cost energy consumers $130 million and involve around 440 hectares of hinterland and rural land.

The project also plans to carve a new 8.5km, 60m-wide easement through private property, including 14 dedicated Land for Wildlife properties and precious koala, Richmond Birdwing Butterfly and other vulnerable species’ habitat, from Ridgewood to Eerwah Vale.

PAGE led the development of a viable non-network alternative to the destructive project, which includes significant ‘bankable’ demand management initiatives and scalable, local renewable solar-thermal generation with storage capacity, plus real employment opportunities for locals through the creation of green jobs.

Mr Smith said PAGE members were grateful for the opportunity to present alternatives to council.

“We are a group committed to promoting sustainable ways to meet the Sunshine Coast’s future energy needs, and to working constructively with governments to do so,” he said.

“Council has taken a decisive step towards realising its visions for a green and sustainable Sunshine Coast, and we’re delighted to not only share these ambitions but to also to contribute to finding a solution.”

Other discussion items and outcomes included:

• Powerlink’s proposal would deliver capacity to increase energy consumption by at least 7.5 times current consumption, over-engineering the solution and likely to cause stranded assets
• Proposal would also see an estimated rise of 59% GHG emissions (400,000t CO2-e by 2020) and at least 20 hectares of vegetation cleared in Noosa Biosphere
• Council agreed to continue consulting with Powerlink on their project, especially regarding the project need, population and energy growth projections, and also ensured a strong community voice on this issue by inviting and agreeing to consult with PAGE through council’s Energy Transition Project
• Council agreed to schedule meetings with the relevant Ministers to address the shared concerns over this project
• A clean energy solar-thermal alternative
• Lower impact alternative routes
• Energex’ statements: “…spending on poles and wires is unsustainable. Energy efficiency and demand management are the key”.

For information regarding PAGE’s presentation, email contact@saveeumundi.org and for more information on PAGE and the project visit www.saveemundi.org

The resolution unanimously adopted at the general committee of council is attached for your information.

Extract from council minutes of general meeting 22 June 2009.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

Moved: Councillor V Griffin
Seconded: Councillor L Brennan

That Council:

(a) endorses the Council officers’ submission (Appendix A – Submission on Woolooga to Cooroy Transmission Line and Cooroy South Substation Project
Environmental Impact Statement);

(b) continues to engage with Powerlink and Powerlines Action Group Eumundi (PAGE), through the energy transition working group as this project progresses;

(c) request a follow-up submission providing further information on population projections and Council’s Corporate plan objectives for reducing the region’s greenhouse gas emissions and advising that Council opposes Powerlink infrastructure proposal on the grounds that there are more sustainable initiatives in meeting the regions energy needs in the future;

(d) proceed with the calling for Expressions of Interest (EOI) from entities who may be able to contribute to eliminating the need for Powerlink infrastructure through the generation of power closer to the projected energy user locations in accordance with s489 of the Local Government Act 1993 and notes that the calling of the EOI will be in the public interest for the following reason:

• it will allow for a full review of future energy production options for Council to consider which are consistent with Council’s goal to be the most sustainable region in Australia;

(e) request the Minister for Energy to undertake a full cost benefit analysis of the Powerlink project, comparing the cost of the proposed distribution infrastructure, together with costs of power generation against the cost of sourcing renewable energy generated closer to user locations and potentially obviating the requirement for the proposed distribution infrastructure; and

(f) request the Chief Executive Officer to investigate the Federal and State demand reduction and renewable energy generation grants and incentives, and assess Council’s eligibility to apply.

Carried.

Ends.

In 2008, renewable energy accounted for about 6% (745MW) of Queensland’s total installed generation capacity, with more than half that derived from burning sugar-cane waste to generate electricity and useful heat (bagasse-fired cogeneration).

The renewable energy plan launched by Bligh yesterday, aims to ensure that Queensland positions itself as a “serious player” in the renewables sector, John Cole, head of the Office of Clean Energy, told CE Daily.

While the Rudd Government’s proposed Renewable Energy Target will provide a substantial incentive for new projects around Australia, its least-cost approach is likely to initially favour wind projects in southern states.

The Queensland plan is designed to assist solar and geothermal to come rapidly to the fore, while also fostering the development of wind projects in the state.

Regulatory reform package to be finalised this year

An initial component of the plan will be a “regulatory reform package” to remove or reduce impediments to new renewables projects and streamline planning processes.

This package will be delivered in 2009 based on options developed by a renewable energy regulatory taskforce, the plan says.

A key focus for the review will be scrutiny of the regulatory, technical and financial impediments that can hinder efforts to connect new projects to the electricity network.

The Government will also consider amending legislation governing the 71% of land in Queensland that is State-owned so that farmers with long-term leases can sub-lease to developers of wind farms and other renewable energy projects.

The Land Act 1994 currently requires that a lease be used only for the purpose for which it was issued.

Plan looks to state-owned utilities and developers

The plan notes that Government-owned energy corporations provide 55% of the State’s generating capacity but only about 28% of its renewable energy capacity.

It will require each of these corporations – Stanwell Energy, CS Energy, Tarong Energy, Ergon Energy, Energex and Powerlink – to annually submit a renewable energy network benefit statement detailing where deployment of renewable energy or demand management projects could help avoid building or upgrading electricity networks.

Cole said every megawatt of additional power demand deferred or avoided saved taxpayers about $3 million in electricity infrastructure development and noted the Government was likely to release an accompanying demand management strategy for the State by the end of the year.

In an effort to speed-up the deployment of clean energy technologies in major population growth hot spots, the plan also commits the Office of Clean Energy to working with developers and local governments to develop “clean energy plans” for all new master-planned communities, large-scale commercial developments and government infrastructure services.

Solar thermal park

The plan flags a pre-feasibility study into a large-scale concentrated solar thermal park, to be prepared with the assistance of the Clinton Foundation, with the first stage of the study to be completed this year.

Other components of the renewable energy plan include:

• encouraging the creation of consortia to deploy small-scale (5MW to 20MW) solar thermal plants throughout regional Queensland;
• investigating the construction of a large-scale demonstration geothermal project by 2014; and
• establishing pilot renewable energy priority zones.

By 2020, the State Government estimates wind could generate up to 750MW (up from 12MW in 2008), biomass 645MW (up from 415MW), 500MW of energy to heat water could come from solar (up from 144MW), geothermal could generate up to 250MW (up from zero), hydro could provide 200MW (up from 169MW) and solar PV could provide 40MW (up from 6MW).

The State Government also wants to leverage funding available through the $4.5 billion Clean Energy Initiative announced by Treasurer Wayne Swan in the this year’s Budget (see related article).

“The Office of Clean Energy will assist industry proponents form constructive partnerships to access this funding,” the plan says.

The renewable energy plan builds on existing measures including the solar hot water program (see related article), $50 million renewable energy fund and solar PV feed-in tariff scheme.

Source:  http://www.cedaily.com.au

“I don’t believe that we as an industry can continue to stand by and spend money at the rate we are doing to build poles and wires that are not being used all the time,” said McConnell, Energex’s business and industry relationship manager.

“We’ve got to do something to reduce kilowatt consumption and greenhouse gas emissions,” he said. “Energy efficiency and demand management are the key.”

McConnell said 65% of homes in south east Queensland now have air conditioning, resulting in a 30% increase in demand for electricity in the state in the last ten years.

He said the traditional approach to managing this growth was to expand and upgrade the network.

In 2008-09, Energex has invested about $830 million on upgrades just to handle peak demand for a few days of the year, with a further $340 million spent just to maintain the network.

“We’re spending about $3 million a day,” he said.

“That sort of expenditure is simply not sustainable.”

McConnell said customers in residential areas pay an average price of electricity, and “the mums and dads out there really don’t understand what demand means”.

“They expect to turn their lights on, they expect to have their plasma television, they expect to be able to turn their air conditioning on. They really are not aware of what electricity costs upstream,” he said.

‘Mutually beneficial’ approaches

McConnell said demand management and energy efficiency is clearly a more effective use of scarce capital, and Energex is trying to design programs that are mutually beneficial for customers and utilities.

The company is about to roll out a smart meter trial which will allow utilities to offer different price structures to customers.

“It puts the customer in charge of how they are using power, they can physically see something happening in the house with digital meters,” he said.

Following the successful introduction of remote cycling technology on electric hot water systems, Energex is trialling the technology on the air conditioners of 200 customers in Brisbane, enabling the company to remotely switch off the compressor in their air conditioners.

This has so far resulted in a 17% to 30% reduction in load in the area over a two-year period, he said.

Swimming pool pumps make a substantial contribution to summer peaks, and Energex is also about to start a trial with customers allowing it to remotely switch off their pumps at peak periods.

McConnell said Energex is actively supporting the shift to newer technologies like distributed energy, cogeneration and trigeneration, solar and wind, “but I think they’ve still got a way to go”.

‘Clear vision on energy efficiency still missing’

Meanwhile, Clean Energy Council policy manager Russell Marsh told the seminar that Australia needs a comprehensive strategy to make sense of the highly complicated and constantly changing mix of Federal and State energy efficiency measures.

Marsh said Australia has clear targets for renewable energy and greenhouse gas emissions reduction, but “no-one has a real sense of what we’re trying to achieve with energy efficiency and demand side response”.

“I would say that’s the one thing that’s missing.”

A comprehensive strategy would bring together existing energy efficiency measures and quantify the impact they’re going to have, argued Marsh.

He said Australia needs a vision of what it wants to achieve by 2030 through energy efficiency and demand side measures, so governments can put the necessary policy measures in place.

Source:  http://www.cedaily.com.au

Five specialists have spoken out against the impact assessment, including environmental scientist and director of ATP Environmental Adam Presnell, in a submission by the Powerlines Action Group of Eumundi (PAGE).

“I believe [the EIS] fails in every one of its specified tasks and should be withdrawn. The draft EIS needs to be redrafted and properly prepared so that it satisfies – at the very least – the legal, ethical and professional responsibilities of those who produced it” said Mr Presnell.

“One of its absurdities is the complete omission of any information relating to the impacts – vegetation clearing, track damage, noise and visual pollution – of off-easement access needed to get to the powerlines and pylons.”

Community members had up to Friday 15 May to submit a response to the 1,900-page draft EIS released for Powerlink’s proposed 275kV Woolooga to Cooroy South (Eerwah Vale) Transmission Line and Substation Project, prepared by paid consultants Parsons Brinckerhoff (PB) Australia.

PAGE coordinator Graham Smith said the volunteer residents group had submitted a 180-page response, which included expert commentary highlighting fundamental flaws in the assessment and the assessment process. A summary of PAGE’s submission is included for further information.

“In sum, the draft EIS can be characterised as misleading, incorrect, inadequate and lacking in critical details,” said Mr Smith, senior project manager, chartered accountant and PAGE coordinator.

“It clearly lacks any independence in its analysis, conclusions or recommendations. Unfortunately, this is consistent with the woeful consultation and poorly detailed studies undertaken by Powerlink and their paid consultants.”

Dr Don Sands – a world-renowned and well-respected expert on the Richmond Birdwing Butterfly – has also been critical of the assessment.

In response to a recommendation to relocate the vulnerable butterfly’s only food plant – the Richmond Birdwing Butterfly Vine – away from the path of the high voltage powerlines, Dr Sands said ‘“the removal, as suggested in the draft EIS, will destroy the vines which will lead to the destruction of the colony”.

“I’m surprised that Powerlink is not more amenable to expert advice when it relates to environmental management,” he said.

Glenda Pickersgill, environmental consultant and president of the Save the Mary River Coordinating Group, has also voiced her concerns, saying “the draft EIS acknowledges the project will cause loss of habitat for threatened and migratory species, and will fragment populations of threatened species, yet it does not adequately assess the risks of their extinction.

“This is similar to our findings for the proposed Traveston Crossing Dam and Northern Pipeline Interconnector Stage Two.”

“It is to be hoped that the Queensland Coordinator-General and the Federal Government will provide a thorough, independent and realistic assessment in light of this flawed EIS, and will listen to the community’s alternatives instead of destroying more of our environment for infrastructure.”

Ethicist and strategic corporate, governance and sustainability advisor Dr John Cronin, who is also a member of PAGE, branded the document as “disgracefully misleading” and “designed to steamroll this unsustainable and destructive project through despite community and council opposition”.

“The impact assessment is full of inconsistencies, omissions, misleading and incorrect information,” Dr Cronin said.

“This project cannot be recommended with integrity, based on the inappropriate EIS process deployed, including poor community consultation and engagement practices. The process for Ministerial designation regarding this project is therefore flawed to a potentially devastating extent.”

PAGE, also known as People Advocating Green Energy, is a not-for-profit community organisation committed to promoting sustainable ways to meet the Sunshine Coast’s future energy needs, and to working constructively with the Queensland Government and its agencies to do so.

The group led the development of a viable non-network alternative, which includes significant ‘bankable’ demand management initiatives and scalable, local renewable solar-thermal generation with storage capacity, plus real employment opportunities for locals through the creation of green jobs.

PB announced that community members had until 29 May to submit supplementary or supporting information, provided that they submitted a response noting the kind of information to be supplied later by the original date (15 May).

To read PAGE’s submission or to learn more about proposed alternatives and the campaign to date, visit PAGE’s website at www.saveeumundi.org or email contact@saveeumundi.org

The detailed response can be downloaded by visiting PAGE’s website here: http://www.saveeumundi.org/2009/05/page-submission-to-draft-eis-documents/

Ends

Telecom powerhouse Cisco Systems has staked its claim on the Smart Grid, and, trite as it may sound, the world may never be the same.  I’ll outline what Cisco is proposing, consider the implications for the electricity industry as a whole, and conclude by identifying who stands to lose from Cisco’s plans.

From Generation to Home and Everything in Between

Cisco Systems, the San Jose-based networking and communications giant, today revealed that it intends to provide “an end-to-end, highly secure network infrastructure solution” for the Smart Grid and everything it touches.

Cisco’s strategy is to ensure that there is one, consistent, IP-based infrastructure for the electric power industry – a standards-based foundation that will ultimately be able to connect any device to any other anywhere at anytime. In other words, an Internet for electricity. Cisco will provide some of the hardware, most of the networking software, and a few of the applications that run on top. It will turn to partners for the rest. Since Cisco intends to build on open standards, both vendors and customers will be free to build their own applications, just as they do today over the Internet.

The Cisco Approach

Cisco’s constellation of Smart Grid solutions consists of four parts: T&D automation, security, smart meter and endpoint communication, and business and home energy management.

• Transmission & distribution automation. Cisco will deliver substation-hardened routers and switches, embed legacy protocol translation, and work with equipment manufacturers to achieve interoperability based on Internet protocols.
• Smart Grid security. Cisco will provide the architectural framework for security as well as other security solutions such as firewalls, IPS, VPN, identity, access control. Physical security will include video surveillance, alarms, and hardened network devices. The system will feature real-time monitoring, management, and correlation.
• Smart meter / endpoint communication. Cisco partners will handle the smart metering technology itself with Cisco providing the backhauling communication infrastructure. Cisco pledges interoperability on both the software and protocol (IP) level.
• Business & home energy management. Cisco will promote IP as the standard for business and home energy management and work with equipment manufacturers to ensure interoperability with this standard. The company plans to develop a home energy control appliance and manage these services in conjunction with its partners.

Why Go Public Now?

In her briefing to SGN, Cisco VP of Network Systems and Security Marie Hattar identified utilities as the primary customer for the company’s Smart Grid solutions. A widely reported example is Cisco’s involvement with Florida Power & Light’s ambitious “Energy Smart Miami” project (see SGN News Roundup for April 21). Those utilities want Cisco to lay out its future vision to inform their own long-range planning.

So What?

As the company that gave us the tools for keeping hundreds of millions of people online at once, Cisco has the experiences and the resources to repeat that success in the Smart Grid world. Indeed, Cisco is promoting their Smart Grid role with an Internet analogy.  “It’s like building an Internet in the electrical system,” says Hattar. “We’ve been clear leaders in Internet and will do the same for Smart Grid.”  In the long run, Hattar expects Cisco’s Smart Grid business to eclipse the company’s Internet services in number of access points, since more people are tied to the electric power network than to the Internet.

And let’s not forget that Cisco has also built very strong businesses in the telecomm and cable industries as well. It has lots of practice remaking networks.

Implications

The entrance of Cisco, with its broad and ambitious vision, entering the Smart Grid space has several far-reaching possibilities:

• The dial tone effect. Today, grid connectivity is a patchwork cobbled together with a bunch of proprietary technology, each system different from the next. Tomorrow, we will see a true end-to-end “Internet for electricity,” where any device can talk to any other device at any location.  Thanks to Cisco and the competitors that will follow it, it will be as reliable and familiar as the dial tone: You pick up the phone and there it is.
• Calming and energizing. Such consistency and reliability will have a calming effect on customers, and “revving up” effect on entrepreneurs and innovators. It’s like when Microsoft announced Windows 95 or Apple opened up the iPhone for applications. Customers could feel more secure that they would have a robust solution with lots of choice. And entrepreneurs could see that they would soon have a standard platform. By writing for that platform they could reach tens of millions of customers.
• The electricity economy. As a result, the future of the electricity industry may look more like telecomm 2.0 (think iPhone) and Web 2.0 —a networking foundation that carries applications and services. Once this possibility exists, the Smart Grid turns into the next vast infrastructure for delivering products and services and conducting commerce anywhere on the planet. It is that vision/possibility that has Google salivating.
• Misunderstood. Some people think Cisco wants to run the Smart Grid over the public Internet. That will rarely be the case. Instead, you will probably not send the signal over the same line that brings in your broadband Internet. Most utilities will probably use a separate (usually wireless) connection. Using Internet protocol (IP) doesn’t mean using the Internet itself.

Winners and Losers

Cisco is exceptionally skilled at working with and manipulating the standards process. In the cable world, Cisco worked with partners to help establish the DOCSIS standard for carrying data over cable lines.  The move greatly benefitted Cisco, while companies that waited too long to get onboard went out of business. The same thing could happen to manufacturers of smart meters, substation equipment, and intelligent electronic devices. Although Cisco’s announcement specifically includes plans for legacy protocol translation, it’s unwise to bank on Cisco maintaining those indefinitely.

The message for vendors is clear:  Engineer your equipment to work over IP or risk being shut out of Smart Grid communications.  Similarly, utilities need to plan for an IP-based infrastructure. Any company who does not follow Cisco’s lead in communications protocols is putting their financial health at risk.

In addition, the list of losers could also include the following:

• Acatel and Cisco’s other networking competitors who may get to the party too late.
• Utilities who may be disintermediated once it becomes easier to reach around them and go directly to energy customers.
• Small companies attempting to create the platform in the center, because they won’t be able to match Cisco’s speed and strength.

Source:  http://www.smartgridnews.com/artman/publish/companies/Cisco_Certifies_Smart_Grid_as_the_Next_Big_Thing-583.html

The smart network would send its data through the power network

Global electricity networks could become smart grids that can help us monitor and control our energy usage, if plans from net firm Cisco take off.

The giant US firm, whose technology helps underpin the net, is building a two-way link into electricity grids.

Smart grids would allow devices to communicate with utility firms to give an accurate view of energy use that could cut CO2 emissions by 211m tonnes.

Cisco believes the market could be worth up to $20bn a year.

The basic premise is to link different parts of the electrical grid – from a single home to the largest of power stations – using a customised network based on internet protocol (IP).

Cisco says the proposal would be a “once in a generation capital investment”.

With the rising cost of electrical power and concerns about how that power is generated – especially when it comes to fossil fuels – a number of other firms are also making a bid to modernise the electrical networks.

IBM launched a range of embedded software applications, although these communicate through the regular internet, rather than via the mains; General Electric and a number of new start-up firms are also making bids to capture a slice of the market.

Cisco says its system is different, because it would send the IP data down the power lines themselves, rather than using the internet.

Shocking news

Security is also a factor. In April the Wall Street Journal reported that hackers had penetrated the “US electrical grid and left behind software programs that could be used to disrupt the system”.

Speaking to the BBC, Neil Harris – Cisco Europe’s head of green IT – said it would be harder for hackers to penetrate the new network.

“It won’t make it invulnerable, but as the network is separate from the net it adds a new layer of resilience,” he said.

“We expect to see a rise in micro-generation, not just in Europe, but round the world, and the smart grid would be able to handle the bi-directional flow of data and electricity.”

The UK gov wants a smart meter in every home by 2020

However, the existing grid is not exactly empty. Stewart Larque, a spokesman for the UK’s National Grid, said it already monitored the main power network. The problem, he said, arose when it came to dealing with individual streets.

“We have a lot of detailed information on what’s happening on our network at any given time,” he told the BBC.

“We can see everything down to the substations, after that it’s down to the distribution companies.

“And there is only so far they can see. Sometimes they won’t know that there has been a small power cut until the users phone them to say there is a problem.”

Mr Harris says the new system could address that issue.

“One of the aims is more agility in distribution. The packets would carry information on the health of the network – just as they currently do on the internet – and you could use this data to spot operational issues or even a malicious attack,” he said.

Cisco says that the network would not just benefit the utility companies.

“Ultimately, this can help users see where their power is being used and from that you can see where it is being wasted and thus save on your electricity bills.”

Source:  http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/8056083.stm

Powerlines Action Group Eumundi (PAGE) is a community group formed to ensure that the wider community interests are served when considering how to provide energy for sustainable development on the Sunshine Coast.

With this in mind, PAGE wish to work constructively with the Queensland Government and its agencies to deal with the two key issues facing the Sunshine Coast with respect to provision of energy. These central issues are:

1.    Existing Short-term constraints within the Powerlink / Energex network
2.    Provision of energy in a manner that is consistent with sustainable and ethical development on the Sunshine Coast.

Since forming 19 months, PAGE – a group of volunteer residents – has worked tirelessly to investigate and deliver a viable, sustainable, renewable energy solution to powering the coast into the future ¬– one which is in line with the Queensland Government’s Toward Q2 vision for a greener Queensland and its associated targets, and respects the coast’s environmental integrity, including the former Noosa Shire’s UNESCO Biosphere status – a Queensland first.

We are proud of what we have been able to achieve, through community action, to bring civic and business leaders, and communities together in an effort to one day make clean, sustainable energies a reality in the power profile of the Sunshine Coast and Queensland.

This submission addresses the two central issues noted above in an effort restore community involvement in the decision-making process and to help realise policy visions today, not tomorrow, for the benefit of future generations.

This document also addresses fundamental deficiencies in the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) process and the substandard draft EIS produced. Core issues are addressed in an executive summary, with more detail and comments provided in the ensuing table, referenced for ease of use.

We trust you will act on our comments and demonstrate that genuine community input into this proposal is possible. We look forward to receiving the EIS in due course.

Yours faithfully,

Graham Smith,
Coordinator,
Powerlines Action Group Eumundi Inc.

Executive summary

The draft Environmental Impact Statement (dEIS) is a complex and lengthy document. In order to deliver a meaningful, community-centred reflection of impacted residents’ concerns, a substantial amount of time and effort was required, but not provided.

The main requirement of the dEIS was to provide an assessment of the environmental (economic, social, cultural and physical) impacts from the construction, operation, maintenance and decommissioning of the proposed transmission line (TL) and substation, and to duly consider alternatives to the proposal carried forward.

PAGE concludes that the document, as presented:
•    fails to comprehensively address the issues raised
•    fails to put forward credible Environmental Management Plans (EMPs)
•    is misleading in its presentation and content
•    is based upon inadequate survey data and analysis.

The dEIS cannot form the basis of a credible assessment of the environmental impact of the proposal, which is intended to responsibly meet the future energy requirements of the northern Sunshine Coast and Gympie regions.

There are several key issues that PAGE has identified within the dEIS that lead us to this conclusion. These issues are outlined below and explored in greater detail in the ensuing Community Issues Matrix.

Consultation

PAGE considers the consultation process to be flawed and have consistently pointed this out to both Powerlink (PL) and Parsons Brinckerhoff (PB) Australia during the past 18 months.

The dEIS displays lots of statistics about the volume of consultation, but no information regarding the quality or timeliness of the consultation. From a community perspective, the quality of consultation has been completely inadequate on a number of levels. They include:
•    Refusal to provide relevant and timely information when requested
•    Refusal to attend community organised public meetings
•    Issuing misleading information and attempting to portray PAGE as deceitful and dishonest
•    Treating this community with contempt, with no willingness to conduct an open and transparent consultation process
•    Inadequate time provided to formulate a comprehensive response to a 1900-page document that it has taken PL/PB 19 months to compile
•    The dEIS does not address satisfactorily or ignores the majority of issues raised in the PAGE submission on the draft terms of reference
•    Referral to the Commonwealth for consideration as a controlled action under the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Act 1999 run concurrently with draft EIS consultation, restricting the community’s capacity to respond effectively as part of both consultation processes.

The combination of these factors leads PAGE and its members to have little or no faith in consultation process undertaken to inform the dEIS process or its outcomes.

Project justification

Energy demand
The project is justified on the basis of projected peak energy demand growth in the northern Sunshine Coast and Gympie as a result of population growth and the increased usage of air conditioners. The figures within the dEIS and the most current peak demand figures provided by Energex do not support the Powerlink growth estimates of 4.1% pa. Recent population growth figures issued in November 2008 now forecast lower future increases than previously envisaged. The recent global recession will have a slowing effect on the demand for energy as economic growth slows or declines. None of these factors have been assessed in the project justification delivered to support the project. The conditions in which the project is operating have changed significantly in the last four years. The need for the project have clearly diminished, yet the dEIS is silent on this issue.

Energex planning (and best practice) acknowledges that when Demand Management (DM) strategies are implemented, deferment is possible. Explain why DM strategies are not being developed to help defer the proposed network augmentation.

Financial assessment
Powerlink revenue determination for the project in the 2007 Australian Energy Regulator approval amounted to an NPV of $64.4m. The single figure disclosed within the 1900-page dEIS puts the NPV at $110.6m cast doubt as to whether this is the lowest cost option as required by the Australian Energy Regulator, given the significant unexplained increase in Net Present Value (NPV).

No details are provided in the dEIS on the composition of the costs for each of the options considered in arriving at the NPV. This does not provide the community with any comfort that a thorough and detailed analysis has been conducted and that options have been compared on a thorough and equitable basis making the financial analysis meaningless.

Alternatives
There is no detailed or serious analysis of non-network augmentation alternatives within the dEIS. Alternatives are dismissed summarily. The cursory analysis fails to compare like with like for the cost associated with delivering power to the end consumer; taking the Powerlink proposal as a firm delivery of 425MW at a cost of $110m and renewables costing $2m/MW. This clearly misleads given that the Powerlink proposal is only a transportation mechanism and takes no account of the cost of generation.

In addition, the dEIS has completely ignored or insufficiently considered some of the alternatives put forward through the community consultation process. PL-PB focused attention on the ‘ludicrous’ option of undergrounding along their pre-determined alignment, with predictably high NPV results. This was not what the community had in mind when they requested a serious consideration of alternatives.

Technology and new policy directions
The above energy demand takes no account of the significant shift in policy that will impact the energy sector. The dEIS does not forecast the likely impact of climate change policies, MRET, CPRS, smart grids, energy efficiency or the impacts of embedded generation or demand management.

This is a lazy and misleading analysis which selects two possible technologies that may have minimal impact on peak demand growth. There are many examples of load curtailment at peak times and technologies that will assist in managing down the peak such as smart meters, building design changes such as insulation and shading, efficient appliances, consumer education, “Ice Bear” air conditioner technology, spider controllers and a range of other options that PL and the paid consultants PB have neglected to assess.

To plan significant long term expenditure without a comprehensive assessment of the future energy landscape is negligent and irresponsible. The solution PL-PB are proposing is based on a future that exists in the past, not in the future.

Easement access issues

The proposal and the dEIS are not fit for purpose. This is particularly the case in the Southern section with the new easement proposed and in certain sections of the existing easement. The proposed easement to be used for construction, operation and maintenance is inaccessible due the topography. A professionally-planned easement would take access requirements into account in design. This proposal and the dEIS ignores this key aspect. The dEIS does not address the severe access issues either from an environmental, social, legal or financial perspective. The easement alignment planned does not accord with PLs stated objective of aligning with property boundaries rather than directly bisecting many properties resulting in significant additional impact on landowners and residents.

Undisclosed conflicts of interest

Parsons Brinkerhoff has a clear conflict of interest in this matter, which is not disclosed within the dEIS. PB, as consultants engaged by Powerlink, are paid to deliver an outcome supporting the proposal.  PB have determined that no disclosure is required relating to this clear conflict of interest. The lack of independence has been manifest in the dealings between the community and PB, with any direct contacts with the community have been carried out in the presence of Powerlink representatives and PB regularly defer to PL in responding to community questions. The frequent inadequate collection / analysis of data and the misleading presentation of the dEIS clearly brings into clear focus the lack of independence in the preparation of this dEIS.

Validity of the dEIS

PB having been paid significant fees for the preparation of dEIS have made a disclaimer statement rendering the document worthless for third parties such as community members, organisations and other interested third parties. A disclaimer states that “PB makes no representation, undertakes no duty and accepts no responsibility to any third party who may use or rely upon this document or the information”. This is unacceptable given that this document will form the basis of a decision impacting the lives of many hundreds of people and the environment within which they live and work.

Inadequate environmental impact assessments

The surveys undertaken were inadequate and present information in a misleading manner. Examples are:
•    PB have not undertaken the seasonal surveys for flora and fauna across the year
•    Surveys were minimal and inadequate, such as no invertebrate surveys conducted, no surveys for lung fish, Mary River turtle or Mary River Cod (ignoring aquatic impacts despite crossing 25 creek crossings and two wetlands) and only six hours of frog surveys were conducted
•    Species and mapping data are inconsistent
•    The management plan for the pararistolochia praevenosa (Richmond Birdwing Butterfly vine) proposed will result in the destruction of the most north-westerly colony of this species only feed plant and consequently the Richmond Birdwing Butterfly from the area
•    Surveys did not conform to best practice survey techniques
•    Cultural Heritage surveys have not been undertaken or have been undertaken by PLs employees where the finding can only have minimal credibility and no independence.

Inadequate environmental management plan

The dEIS fails to deliver credible and detailed environmental management strategies to mitigate the impacts of the proposal, as included the Environmental Management Plan, and intended to address issues ranging from cultural heritage to erosion and sediment control.

This absence of credible environmental management strategies illustrates the failure of the dEIS to meet its own stated objectives to:
•    provide evidence of practical and achievable plans
•    provide the Community with evidence of the Management of the project.

The lack of credible environmental management strategies is also a clear result of a major lack of critical detail – an issue which also significantly undermines the credibility of NPV rationalisation.

The dEIS states that these documents will not be released until after the Final EIS in the construction phase. This is totally unacceptable and, by withholding such details, an appropriate impact assessment of the proposed wholesale clearing of 48ha of Critical Habitat is impossible.

Visual impacts

The visual impacts have not been assessed consistently and the information has been presented in an unbalanced way. There are inconsistent assessments between the options analysed, such as option E and C3. The viewshed from current and planned scenic lookouts have been ignored, and the visual impacts close to dwellings have not been discussed adequately or have been ignored.

Impact on property values

There is minimal consideration of the impact on directly impacted property values, with a cursory dismissal of the real cost of having TL infrastructure sited on smaller rural lifestyle blocks predominant at the southern end of the proposed alignment.

In respect of both traversed and non-traversed properties, there has been no attempt to assess or quantify the impact on property values as requested by PAGE. The studies referred to in the dEIS are out of date, are overseas studies and not relevant to our unique statutory and environmental circumstances, and neglect the real issue of potential property owners using their own version of prudent avoidance by refusing to purchase properties encumbered by TL easements. The significant impact of the proposed alignment can be seen from the fact that over 27% of the properties traversed have dwellings within 100m of the alignment.

Health concerns regarding electric and magnetic fields (EMF)

PL relies upon the Interim Guidelines On Limits Of Exposure To 50/60 Hz Electric And Magnetic Fields (1989) and ARPANSA in relation to the health effects of EMFs from transmission lines. This 20-year-old interim report states that “a major research effort to supplement our knowledge on the health consequences, if any, of long-term continuous exposure of humans to low-level 50/60 Hz fields is required”. This report is only just being reviewed by ARPANSA.

This 20-year-old interim report informs PLs flexible application of prudent avoidance in minimising EMF impact only if it doesn’t cost too much.

In view of ARPANSA reviewing their current outdated interim 1989 guidelines, on what basis can Powerlink conclude that the data used in the dEIS and provided to the public is reliable and accurate? The casual dismissal of a major community – the most prevalent issue according to PB’s own records – concern for the correlation between ill health effects and proximity to HVTL is unacceptable.

Social Impacts

The social impacts have again been ignored by the dEIS. There is no discussion of impacts on community well-being or cohesion.

One glaring omission is the exclusion of mental health impacts. There has been no baseline assessment of the presence of mental health issues such as anxiety and depressive symptoms among affected residents, some of whom have been subjected to multiple infrastructure proposals and protracted compulsory land acquisition processes.

This community is being forced to live with a PL process that, by completion, will have taken seven years – an extended period of stress for which no assistance has been planned, canvassed or delivered. There has been no baseline assessment of the mental health of people impacted by this proposal.

People’s future plans have been put on hold and the ability of people to carry on with their normal lives halted for this period. The assessment of social impacts has therefore been grossly insufficient.

Conclusion

The dismissive approach taken to the alternative technologies and sustainable strategies aimed at meeting the energy needs of the region is extremely disappointing, particularly as it counters major policy reforms of the Bligh Government, namely Towards Q2.

Not only does it counter the Towards Q2 target of protecting more land for conservation as it rips through hectares dedicated as Land for Wildlife, it also highlights that Powerlink, a Queensland Government agency, is not serious about introducing its own policies and measures to cut carbon omissions. The government’s Towards Q2 – Tomorrow’s Queensland green vision is made to appear as nothing more than that; a vision.

We would like to see all energy companies, from the generation point to the power point, take responsibility for enacting policy promises, including the government’s Toward Q2 vision for a greener Queensland and its Rural Futures policies and strategies aimed ensuring rural sustainability. These are shared visions strongly supported by our council and our community.

So, based on the innumerable flaws in the draft EIS, many highlighted in this document, this Project and the proposed alignment cannot be recommended to the Minister for designation and should be stopped now. This EIS fails to fulfil the ToR and lacks critical detail, providing the Minister with inferior, insufficient information on which to base a decision regarding the designation of land for community purposes.

This Project also cannot be recommended with integrity, based on the inappropriate EIS process deployed, including poor community consultation and engagement practices. The process for Ministerial designation regarding this Project is therefore flawed to a potentially devastating extent.

Copies of the full submission can be found here:

PAGE submission to draft EIS – Documents

PAGE has asked the Bligh Government for “a clear statement that the Sunshine Coast’s future energy needs be delivered via renewable energy and demand management providing the Bligh Government with a clear opportunity to show it is serious in tackling energy provision in an environmentally responsible manner – the last week of this election gives the Government the perfect opportunity to do this.”

Ever since the CEO of Powerlink wrote to Mr. Geoff Wilson, Minister for Mines and Energy suggesting that PAGE were “deceitful and dishonest”, PAGE have had disappointment after disappointment in their dealings with the Minister. No answers to the questions raised in our letter (dated 20 February 2008) to Mr. Wilson have been received. After 6 months of waiting the Minister finally afforded PAGE a meeting, at which PAGE were told to come up with an alternative within only 4 weeks. The other concerns of the community, raised in our meeting with the Minister regarding the consultation and environmental impact assessment have also been ignored.

With all the resources at the DME and Powerlink’s disposal, it was left for the small community group to come up with a proposal. This proposal was submitted but the reply from the Minister does little to inspire confidence that the Minister and his department are interested in delivering any solution other than Powerlink’s pre-determined power line proposal.

It is also disappointing to see ALP campaign rhetoric once again referring to Queensland as aspiring to be “the solar state” of Australia, yet we continue to see little willingness to progress towards achieving this goal, when there is a solar option on the table that could be further developed to meet their needs.
PAGE has been asking the government to look at alternatives to Powerlink business as usual proposal since August 2007 – 18 months later they are still dragging their heels when they have an active and engaged community wishing to help find solutions to the energy requirements of the Sunshine Coast, and where the Sunshine Coast Regional Council have a mandate for cleaner greener alternatives.

Queensland, despite the rhetoric, lags well behind other countries and is a long way behind New South Wales in implementing clean energy alternatives, demand management and feed-in tariffs.

For more information on the alternatives and the campaign to date visit PAGE’s website www.saveeumundi.org