Dynamic demand: best kept energy secret?
Six months ago the lights went out for many people across Britain.
And earlier this month energy experts warned that the UK could face major blackouts in less than 10 years unless policy is improved.
It's really only when we lose power that we think about the National Grid and how it manages to balance the energy coming in with the amount going out.
This is where dynamic demand comes in, and with a new trial by Npower about to begin - the invention is starting to gain momentum.
Dynamic demand uses the stored energy from our appliances that are on all the time, like our fridges and freezers, to talk to the Grid. It can effectively switch our appliances on and off, giving the Grid a break at peak times and avoiding costly and polluting energy surges.
So why haven't we heard more about it? Will it help us meet our 2020 EU renewable targets? Is it the answer to Britain's blackout concerns?
Do you work in the energy industry? Are you taking part in the Npower trial? Perhaps you've done some research on this? All comments, stories ideas welcome, thanks.
Email us
Our Twitter
Join our Facebook group
Listen to iPM
Technorati
Google
Ice Rocket
© MMIX~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~33~RS~)
CommentsSign in
You need to sign in to contribute to this page. If you're new to BBC Blogs, creating your membership is quick and easy.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Q: Why have we not heard about it?
A: Because it will not work.
Simple reason is that 60 million people are random. It is when un-random events occur that the grid has the most heartache. Like all the kettles in the breaks in popular television programs.
If the countries demand started reacting to the producers decisions they would find it impossible. It would become unstable if significant number of these devices existed. I agree, in fault, conditions there could be room for devices to disconnect. But that already exists in many switched mode devices. I have a charger that stops when the electricity supply is outside "normal" parameters and restarts when it is again stable for some time period. But as a method grid regulation, it is doomed.
So ignoring the fault conditions the main issue is scheduling and running power stations efficiently. Having them running on standby is a criminal waste. We have Dinorwig to cope with transient loads as it can start in seconds. But what we need is power stations to "know" in advance or better still to control the demand.
The whole issue has got worse due to the windmills. We are a country that experiences a steady procession of frontal systems. The wind is quite variable hour by hour. Putting windmills in this country is a huge waste of money. There are places in this world that experience constant daily winds. We should be putting them there along with the high usage energy factories like aluminium production. It is the linking of business and generation that is the key to solving the high waste and costs of electricity. The waste heat of generation must be tied to a business use. (Please note this does not include the stupidity of the home CHP boilers). Businesses like steel production were always very tightly tied to the generating companies.
But one way we could help is if homes "give" the Grid control of their needs. So we should be looking at high loads that are not time critical.
For example: night storage heaters. By telling the grid you needed 4 hours of electricity in the next 8 hours the grid could schedule in your times to fit in with the evening/night time load changes. It would be their decision when you got the power.
This is also a very good reason for electric cars. If you dialled in that the Grid "had" your car until the next morning at 6am, the grid could then use your car as a demand buffer to keep power stations online at full efficiency as the evening demand fell away. The car would tell the grid (mobile phone message/internet) how much charge it needed and the time limit. It would then be assigned into "lumps" of demand that could be switched on, and off, quickly with a simple broadcast messages.
The "control box" would then report back, how much it actually used and your bill would be reduced to reflect your help.
Complain about this comment
Jennifer - really looking forward to hearing next weeks programme as it's something I've always been fascinated about.
Radio 4 has actually played in important part since 1983 -welll more importantly the Droitwich, Westerglen and Burghead Long-wave transmitters.
In 1983 a new specialised service known as Radio Data Signalling (RDS) was introduced on long-wave
This project, funded by the Electricity Council, provided a low speed code signalling system to be superimposed on the carrier radiated from all Radio 4 long-wave transmitters.
The code, injected by London Control Room into the programme feeds to all the Radio 4 200 khz transmitters, was processed in such a manner that it could not be detected on domestic radio sets.
Special decoding receivers fitted by the Electricity Supply Industry to equipment in electricity sub-stations allowed remote switching to be carried out when the necessary code was transmitted.
Domestic electricity supplies could also be controlled by installing "intelligent white meters" fitted with these special receivers on consumers premises to switch "off-peak" heating on and off as required.
This enabled the supply authorities to shed or add load and thus control demand on the national grid system.
The R.D.S. could be used at the same time for the transmission of data for other purposes and the continuous operation of the 200 khz transmitters provided the facilities for this 24 hours per day requirement.
It's well documented here;-
http://www.bbceng.info/Operations/transmitter_ops/Reminiscences/Droitwich/droitwich_calling.htm
Complain about this comment
In April 2007 whilst studying at the Graduate School for the Environment for an MSc in Environmental Architecture I looked at Demand Management as it is also known as. Part of my study was incorporated into the Centre for Alternative technology Zero Carbon Britain Paper published in June 2007.
From this study I am of the opinion that we will face regular peak hour cuts in the near future. I personally believe that we should introduce a variable price tarrif with the cost of the energy dependent on the time of day that it is being drawn. This as your blog rightly asserts would lead to a substantial demand reduction (10% overall reductions have been achieved in both the US and Western Australia where this has been already been implimented) at the precise time that the grid is under its greatest stress. The obstacle to this in the UK is the cost of replacing/ upgrading our meter stock. An EU directive states that we should be installing the intelligent (and more expensive) electric meter on a rolling basis. These meters offer a varibale tarrif, can be read remotely (average cost of a meter read in 2006 was £2.60) detect outages and fraudualent usage; they also enable the sale of micro generated electricity back onto the grid.
The Governemnt have ignored this directive and opted for a passive monitor that merely advises the consumer how much energy they are using.
It is possible that the EU could insist that that the UK Government comply with their directive and adopt the Smart/intelligent meter, effectively rescinding their March 2006 Energy Paper.
If this were to happen we could then impliment dynamic demand management. Until then we are fumbling with a 60's type economy 7 technology bluntly coping with a much more sophisticated and interactive electric market.
I would happy forward a copy of this document if you feel it maybe helpful for the debate.
Kevin Edwards
Complain about this comment
(4) Kevin - I agree that we do need remotely controlled meters for selling back generated electricity. For one simple reason: Without them it is impossible to maintain the network without being able to easily isolate all power generation sources. I know one case of a line man being electrocuted in California by back generation.
We also need a general pricing change. It is stupid to having a pricing scheme that reduces the more you use. However the opposite; an increasing rate, would encourage more meters and smaller households. So may be a neutral pricing scheme should be mandated. This would certainly simplify the users perspective of the costs. Do we pay less at the petrol station if we drive twice as far as our neighbour? No. So why does the gas and electricity charges change? If it is to cover the wire to the house: why is petrol cheaper if we have more petrol stations in an area?
However, variable rate meters will NOT help enough to reduce the inefficiency in the system caused by the peaks. Electricity is an "instant" energy source. It is there exactly when we want it. No normal price variability will make a significant change to our need patterns. Compulsory flexible working hours and on demand TV would make more of a difference to peoples demand peaks. "Your tea is in the fridge dear, we are waiting for 7.00pm for cheaper electricity" scenario will not happen. Nor will the running of washing machines during the night. Most houses are too small, and too tightly packed, for the noise disturbance.
If however the pricing difference was severe and it did cause a change of behaviour. The peoples response would be to fit timers to their equipment. So at, for example, a 7.00pm change point all the loads would be switched automatically and simultaneously. This would lead to huge discontinuities in the load and stresses on the system far beyond a kettle surge. During normal kettle surges the human element slightly smoothes out the demand curve.
Any small trials will always look good but the key test is how a large population reacts to a change over the long term and what technology emerges to counter the discontinuities.
Preserving random behaviour is good. Direct demand control is better.
I lived 7 years "off grid" using various generating systems and learnt on a small scale how to be efficient. One site I knew dumped all the kitchen cooking elements whenever a large electric motor was needed. This way they used a generator that was sized closer to the average load not the absolute peak.
I plan to go back off grid as soon as possible.
Complain about this comment
I saw an article about a gadget under development that would be fitted to appliances like fridges, freezers, hot water cylinders and things like that, where you could put up with it not getting power for a bit. So with a fridge, the thermostat would ask for power, but if the gadget heard that the grid was experiencing a peak at that time, it wouldn't allow it to turn on just then. I understood that was what Dynamic Demand meant.
This article said that in early trials, consumers could not tell whether their power demand had been deferred or not.
Some time ago, there was talk about load shedding, which was the same thing, which would have been implemented with a special consumer unit with essential and non essential circuits. So it's not a new idea.
Basically, you have to have more stuff the consumer pays for, to provide a benefit to the power companies in shaving the peaks off the load.
Complain about this comment
I always wonder just how long will people change their activity at the indication on the wall?
How long before people thing 'blow this for a game of soldiers' and just pay for the energy when they want to use it?
I use a timer system on my washing machine, it delays the start time by 3, 9 or 12 hours, so I work out when the cheaper rate is on and set the machine to come on in that time then hang the clean washing out when I get up in the morning. Even doing that I rarely use more than 20% of my electricity consumption between 12:00 and 07:00am most months.
I also try to switch off as many items as I can, like PCs, TVs, lights etc., when not in use and I have fitted energy efficient bulbs to as many of the most used lights as possible, but always try to switch them off when not needed as well.
The most cost effective way to save energy is insulation. I intend to increase the loft insulation and get cavity wall insulation as well. This will be even more important for anyone using electricity as their heating fuel.
Unfortunately, despite what the Greens tell you, unplugging battery chargers and turning TVs off standby is only any good if enough people do it all together. The consumption of these units is too small, unless you have hundreds in your house, for you to notice much difference on your bills...
Oh, and I'm an accredited energy conservation engineer who trys to persuade industrial and commercial companies to save energy, to save money and reduce their CO2 emissions.
Complain about this comment
To all those getting up early for the sake of the washing machine, they only use a significant amount of power for about the first 15 minutes (when they're heating the water).
To Eddie Mair. Most Economy seven users now get their 'cheap' rate from 10.30pm to 12.30 am and then 2.30 am to 7.30 am. Not midnight to 7am.
Complain about this comment
Excuse-moi pour vivre en Ontario, Canada. Supposedly something called "smart-meters" were installed on my home late last year. However Hydro1 Ontario will not put their readings into effect until sometime in 2010! Seeing as how the population of Ontario is roughly one fifth of the UK, I might not have a problem with this; except for this: since one has been installed, why not use it right now? I just assume that bureaucracy knows neither borders nor common sense!
Complain about this comment
Just a quick point: There is NO software in a fridge.
They are capillary tube thermostats.
This means a fridge uses NO power while idle. (Save those stupid ones with blue LEDs)
If there was a monitor system in all the fridges in this country then they would have to use similar embedded technology to remote control TVs. Constantly.
So on one hand we are told false figures that TV remotes are ruining the world, but on the other side we are told we need intelligent fridges.
Please stop interviewing these stupid people. As for nPower I would not listen to them, as they are the ones that think windpower in the lee of Snowden is sensible. Next they will want to build an island around the sites to reduce the maintenance costs. There is a reason the old holiday towns of Wales were built there.
It is their fault our bills are going through the roof.
Complain about this comment
Excuse me but fridges do have software to control the temperature, defrost cycle etc etc. Electronically controlled fridges, which are now becoming the norm, have software to control the fridge temperature, defrost cycle etc etc., and so your comment is, as your first posting, totally inaccurate. Suggest you do your homework before you comment..!!!
Complain about this comment
Re "To Eddie Mair. Most Economy seven users now get their 'cheap' rate from 10.30pm to 12.30 am and then 2.30 am to 7.30 am. Not midnight to 7am."
This economy 7 user doesn't...
Have some suppliers gone over to this new timing system now? Or, are we talking about the BBC Radio 4 LW transmitted signal that switches meters from one rate to another here? If so, I think that was only implemented in some areas. Many people still have either a separate timeclock (Oh, and you, the customer, pay for the electricity to power that as well) or a meter with a timeclock built in.
There used to be a tariff that had two cheaper rate times, one at night and a boost in the afternoon, but I think that was aminly replaced by the economy 7 system.
Complain about this comment
(11) greened - So you could put a full XP machine in a fridge but that would be stupid.
You could even put a microcontroller that is capable of say basic network support. Again that is stupid.
Electronics does not mean computers or even microcontrollers.
Then there is the time scales of fridges. They work in minutes and hours. Their reaction times do not need to be fast. They are certainly a magnitude or 2 out in reaction speed to mains characteristics.
The complexity of a defrost cycle is not beyond a single tiny state diagram. It is not "Software" in any modern sense of the word. Just in the same way as a note saying "Unpack carefully" is not an instruction book. They are both words on paper.
The point still stands; why add all that complexity for a fridge that is idle most of its life. The method of savings will actually cost energy!
There are bigger fish to fry and far better ways to solve the problem. I also stand by the first post that as soon as significant numbers of household loads start reacting to the power availability, the system WILL become unstable. As I said, I have worked "off grid" for many years and fixed many system running on generators and huge UPS type systems. What would I know?
Complain about this comment
" It is stupid to having a pricing scheme that reduces the more you use." we don't have that, what we have is an initial small number of units at a high price as a sop to the idiots that didn't want a standing charge.
I doubt anyone uses close to the threshold number of units so in practice we all have a constant marginal price of an extra kWh irrespective of what we're using.
Complain about this comment
(1) cynicaleng - I used 46% of my last bill at the cheaper rate, and that is while I am stuck here. So that makes my price nearer the higher rate.
Yet next doors huge house and extended family pays mostly at the lower rate.
It is not a case of incremental changes. It is the case of small and economical by design seems to costs more.
I just think that the old standing charge should be paid more by the high users. I even might go as far as having an "energy allowance" just like a tax allowance if there was any practical way to implement it.
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS