RELATIVITY MADE EASY

RELATIVITY MADE EASY: Iconic "Renaissance man" and father of late night television Steve Allen used to don a fedora and read the angriest of the Letters to the Editor culled from various New York City newspapers, adding that "the names have been changed to avoid a punch in the nose."

It was one of the first things we thought of when we read a certain paragraph regarding the always annoying topic of "smart meters" in the LTE section of Sunday's local newspaper

We'll follow suit, calling the writer "Einstein." He wrote:

"Here’s a novel suggestion from a customer/owner of KIUC. Instead of spending tens of millions of dollars or more for smart meters, let’s spend that money to purchase a new, modern grid for our island."

Although it was April 1 it was apparently meant seriously.

For those who don't get it, smart meters are the central element of "a new modern grid," aka- the "smart grid." Whatever people may think about safety or "violations of privacy," by definition, this is what smart meters are and do.

We shouldn't really pick on poor Einstein but his letter does show the schizophrenia that exists over the modernization of the electrical grid as typified by the opposition to these devices.

The fact is that, alleged issues of health, privacy and the rest aside, those who want to see Kaua`i participate or even lead the way in alternative, non-carbon, non-fossil fuel energy had better just give it up if the smart grid- and so smart meters- is not part of our energy future.

People can forget about lower electric bills too because we will always be dependent on expensive fossil (and other carbon-generating) fuels for energy generation without the smart grid.

Let's see if we can make this as simple as possible.

Anyone who spends more than thirty seconds thinking about alternative sources of energy will realize that the most abundant and least environmentally disruptive sources here in the islands- solar and wind- are what they call "intermittent." The sun doesn't shine at night and is severely diminished when there are clouds or even rain storms. And the wind doesn't always blow.

It cannot be counted on unless we want to be without electricity at different times. And few will disagree that they want enough electricity to make sure it's there when they flip the switch.

That is why there are limits on how much of this alternative, "free" energy the system can use- because the other side of the equation is how much electricity people want or need.

That's where the "smart grid"- and so smart meters- comes in.

We've finally reached the technological sophistication to allow a computerized system to maximize the amount of intermittent electricity that the grid can handle. With the increasing sophistication of storage mediums, while we may not fully eliminate the burning of fossil and other carbon-waste fuels including bio-fuels, we can reduce them significantly.

But in order to do that, the computer needs to know up-to-the-second supply and demand for electricity.

And yes, that means that we need to know what the demand is from each user, which is where the smart meter comes in.

The other side of this is that if we don't install smart meters for just about every user, we will be limited in the amount of alternative sources we can integrate into the system. That's why there is no more "net metering" available for those who install photovoltaic systems, forcing them to sell back their excess electricity at lower prices than they pay when they take back from the grid, as happens when their intermittent source is not generating anything and they need electricity.

People make a big deal about the money we are spending on these smart meters . But the $11 million that is being spent on them is chump change because without smart meters to integrate all the various "supplies" with known, specific up-to-the-minute demands, it will mean is that we will need to build a new generation facility to meet future demand.

That means not only higher bills due to rate increases related to the investment in the new facility (whether it is "privatized" or not) as happened with the Kapaia plant, but a higher "energy adjustment" on your bill representing the ever increasing cost of a barrel of oil.

Those who go back a decade or so will remember local talk of building a new power plant. It wasn’t a matter of whether to build one but a matter of where and what kind we needed to keep up with future demand- regardless of any controls over our rate of growth or conservation measures.

Only with the advent of viable alternative technologies- not just dreams of the future but actual realities- did talk of building that new power plant cease.

But unless we can figure out a way to integrate all of the various sources of energy- solar, hydro, wind, perhaps waves and, most importantly, storage mediums like batteries, heat-retaining devices and others that are on the horizon- with the demand of the end users, we might as well forget a future of lower bills and higher use of non-carbon, alternative electrical sources.

A smart meter is simply that device that measures demand on a continual basis. Without them we guarantee a future of burning fossil or bio fuels and limited "clean" energy.

People can understand what science shows to be an innocuous use of RF signals, especially as compared with cell and cordless phones as well as countless other devices we use every day. Or they can rely on what they "read on the internet" and make a decision based on that.

Either way even if you "believe" whatever it is you believe about smart meters you'd better ask yourself if that is worth a future where the dream of non-fossil, non-carbon, alternative energy has gone to die.

STRIKE THREE?

STRIKE THREE?: What's really unfortunate about the underhanded, secretive and sleazy way Kaua`i Island Utilities Co-op (KIUC) and their partners in corruption Free Flow Partners (FFP) have gone about hydroelectric development is that it will inevitably delay- if not kill- immanent development of the cheapest, most dependable of carbon-free energy systems.

Add to that the fact that, because of the unique position of Kaua`i as the world capitol of various endangered bird species, there will never be large scale wind farms on the island and even backyard windmills may eventually be banned, once the county catches on to the fact that our "probation" with the feds- as a result of a settlement federal suit- probably requires us to severely restrict, if not ban, them too without prohibitively costly "take permits."

And with home windmills gone that leaves roof-top solar as the last, best bet to reverse the "we sell you electricity" business model KIUC seems to be hell-bent on perpetuating as if it were an investor based utility.

But today any hope for making it easy to put photovoltaic systems on people's homes took a kick in the nuts when Governor Neil Abercrombie put HB 1520 on the "Intent to Veto" list.

In April, as the bill went to conference committee, we detailed a decade long fight, first with the solar installation firms and currently with the utility companies to pass a bill requiring on-bill financing for home solar electric systems.

And even though the bill was watered down further in committee- changing the wording from directing the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) to "consider implementing an on-bill financing program for residential electric utility customers" to "investigate an On-bill Financing Program (Program),"- and passed the legislature it appears on today's list.

Strangely it is one of a very few bills on the potential veto list for which a reason hasn't been given, as yet.

But a veto isn’t certain and you can call Abercrombie at 808-586-0034 or write him him using a handy-dandy form (http://hawaii.gov/gov/contact/contact-gov) and urge him to get the ball rolling on home solar generation with on-bill financing.

LET IT FLOW

LET IT FLOW: The palpable disappointment of many in the wake of the defeat of Pat Gegen and Ken Stokes in the recent Kaua`i Island Utilities Coop (KIUC) Board of Directors' election serves for some as another example of voter apathy and the elections-as-popularity-contest syndrome.

But what can we expect when those who walk the walk like Gegen and Stokes have to compete with those who simply talk the talk like the three reelected incumbents who have led us nowhere when it comes to the twin goals of switching to non-carbon renewable energy and lowering electric bills?

At the risk of sounding like a broken record (what's a record grandpa?) the real issue has never really been discussed by candidates, including incumbents supported by the progressive community like Ben Sullivan, Carol Bain and Jan TenBruggencate.

It's really the core of KIUC's governance that's at issue- their very business plan... one based on the concept of "we sell you electricity."

That remnant of the for profit Citizen’s Electric enterprise model persists today even though the "shareholders" have disappeared to be replaced by members.

That means that the infamous "fiduciary responsibility" that board members are constantly reminded of, is to the members and their best interest, not the growth of the "company" in order to accommodate a self-perpetuating vision of a "selling electricity" future.

Even in terms of non-carbon renewables the talk is of borrowing money from the federal government to use for something called "PACE" bonds which will enable the construction of large scale solar farms and the selling of "shares" when what the coop should be doing is facilitating ways to accommodate self-generation in people's homes through solar, wind and other emerging self-contained technologies.

Instead the coop has taken a stance supporting caps on direct "net metering" where excess power is fed into the grid and, upon demand, back to the user at the same rate both ways in favor of exorbitant "feed in tariffs" that make the buy back of the power created by home generators far more costly than it need be.

The bugaboo of "intermittency"- as in what do you do when the sun doesn't shine and the wind doesn’t blow"- is simply a red herring with other emerging technologies in storage and distribution- technologies to which KIUC seems so risk-averse that it will never happen until the rest of the world is way ahead of us... as they already are in places in Northern Europe like Germany and Sweden.

Instead of being THE leaders in a state that touts itself as a leader in solar and wind, the most potentially progressive of utility governance structures- our coop- is in fact bringing up the rear and foot dragging on the dual goals stated above.

Instead of discouraging home generation and forcing those who want to "invest" in solar or wind join large scale ventures, our coop should be offering zero percent loans to construct windmills and solar installations in people's yards and on their homes and allow members to pay them off monthly with a charge on their bills equitable to what they pay now.

The fact is that instead of encouraging self-sufficiency the board enters into power purchase agreements at prices tagged to inflated fossil fuel costs rather than the actual cost of the alternative generation itself.

Next election, ask your candidate how they view the business model and how they would serve the goals of lowering the amount we pay while encouraging carbon-free energy. And if their answers are more of the same, remember- that that's exactly what we'll get.