Meditations on solar max, Max Headroom and naughty little business case genies

Ralph Abbott is a hoot to talk to. I don’t know if you’ve ever encountered him at an industry conference. (He’ll be hanging out in the RW Beck booth chatting up passersby and handing out his business cards which proudly declare him the founder of Plexus Research.) If you do run into him, though, ask him about the three risks.

It’s like three wishes, only negative---from a potentially quite naughty little genie.

Not that Ralph is a negative guy. He’s certainly not. As noted, he’s a hoot. But, he does have three specific concerns about smart grid and communications. And they are quite valid.

His first concern: What about the sun, man?

I know. Seems like a hippie liberal issue, but it’s not, my friend. The sun impacts all. What he’s getting at is solar max. Solar max isn’t an ‘80s icon you don’t remember well because you’re still fondly recalling Max Headroom. No, in fact, solar max is short for solar maximum. It’s a measurement of solar variation. It’s about sun spots and, while it still sounds odd, that does impact things here on Earth like weather, surface magnetism and radiation.

What’s the bottomline here with solar max? Well, it impacts something much more directly than weather here: It can create odd havoc with communications. The scientific explanation involves refraction and ionized solar photons. But, the basics are: It gets all wiggy with radio frequency (RF).

Ralph noted that solar max is on a 17-year cycle with experts expecting it to peak between 2012 and 2014, which could cause issues with utilities’ RF use. Ralph’s question to the industry echoes more Dirty Harry than Max Headroom though: Are we feeling lucky?

In other words, are we just going to ignore solar max and hope it doesn’t cause massive issues, or does someone, somewhere have a plan?

I know. That’s only one risk and already you’re a bit concerned. Try to maintain your calmness.

His second concern: GPS.

Okay, not all of GPS. Not your Mr. T-speaking TomTom alight on your car dashboard that gets you to the Kenny Rogers concert without getting lost on Oklahoma’s unlit, unmanned and unsigned back highways. That’s not the GPS Ralph is concerned with. He’s more concerned with GPS satellite timing signals, which would keep all your smart grid equipment on the same reliable beat, you might say.

But, as Ralph pointed out, GPS can be easily jammed with about $200 worth of over-the-counter parts and an ability to get within 150 feet of the equipment. So, like his concerns over solar max, he has some questions, like: What’s the risk of GPS jamming to utility operations? What’s the threat level, really, and what counter measures are we taking?

Hopefully, you’re not panicked yet. We’re on to risk number three, and, luckily, this risk doesn’t really make us fear the minor jammer or the almighty sun. Instead, this final risk revolves entirely around the almighty dollar.

His third concern: The business case for AMI.

How many articles have we all read---and, also, have I written---on proving a business case for AMI? I’ll estimate it topping Super Bowl ticket receipts from last year. Seems like millions, doesn’t it? But, Ralph wants to know if they are really getting to the heart of one specific area: using demand response as the ‘sweet spot” to get to goal on operational savings.

See, demand response is rather an amorphous term. It’s here. It’s there. It can mean different things to different folks (rather like the term “smart grid,” really).

Let’s say you need to prove your AMI business case and you know a few savvy facts. You know that five percent of your consumers will change their power use according to demand response ideals if you just tell them all about it, if you just give them good info. They are really that darn motivated.

But, you also know that if those consumers had in-home gadgets that let them visually see the information in real-time, that number would jump to 15 percent. So, you pencil in that number in your AMI business case, cuz that’s a delightful number, really. Helps all those other numbers look better. But, are you figuring in costs of those in-home devices, or are you saying to yourself, “Self, those consumers are gonna be just fine going to Radio Shack or some other fine establishment and buying their own devices and installing those devices themselves.”

This leaves the pay out for that in-home device in the pocket of the consumer, which is lovely for that AMI business case but perhaps not so practical in the real world. Because will that person really be excited about taking time out of their day and going down to the Shack and picking up that purchase and then going home and installing that thingamajig? And who do they call if the thingamajig doesn’t light up with all the bells and whistles the consumer expects?

One response Ralph got when he asked around about that question to a few utilities, “I don’t know who they call, but it ain’t us.”

So, if it ain’t us, who is it? And is this a magical view of consumers where they are all tech savvy, gung-ho and willing to pay for demand response benefits up front? What if that magical view is woefully inaccurate? How will taking on consumer-side technology, questions, installations, problems and follow-ups impact the business case for AMI?

Those are Ralph’s meditations these days. You’ll be able to read more about them in an upcoming issue of POWERGRID International magazine. If you can’t wait until then, track him down at the nearest conference and ask him to expand on these risks. It may be the most interesting meeting you have at that conference.