A Muddy Fix

In order to establish a smart grid, there are a couple of limitations that must be overcome.

First of all, there are issues with intelligence. Where does the energy peak? What buildings use the most energy? How can we lower these problems using existing technology already available? Believe it or not, many of these questions are already being handled on a city by city basis due to some very helpful and progressive legislature.

Take, for example, New York City. Here, local laws 84-88 stipulate the benchmarking and metering of energy costs on a building level, while also providing a framework for mandatory reduction. These legal mandates not only force buildings to come to terms with their energy costs, but they also require long range improvements that have the potential of benefiting both building owner and the cumulative environment.

Benchmarking, as simple as it sounds, is the first step to creating a smart grid. Without truly understanding “where” and “how much”, we will never be able to incorporate some of the advanced measures necessary to really get the most out of our energy production and distribution network.

What types of measures do I mean?

Well, one of the most trialed issues in the world of smart grid is energy storage.

I have talked before about some of the issues with energy storage. Whether it is battery’s reliance on rare metals, or the loss of efficiency with gravitational hydraulics, grid level energy storage is really a troubling mess.

Just to refresh, grid level energy storage refers to the capacity for us to generate electricity at one time, and then store it for later use. Although conventional power plants such as oil and coal do not really have a need for grid level energy storage, more alternative energy production methods such as solar and nuclear would benefit greatly from a grid level solution.  It is not too hard to understand that there is a significant production gap at night for solar energy, at which point having energy ‘stored’ from the day’s sun would be immensely helpful.

Like all issues, however, humans are relentlessly probing at the solution.

One of the most recent developments has come from a team out of Drexel University’s College of Engineering.

The system is designed around using an electrochemical flow capacitor (EFC). Although at first, this may sound like an invention out of Back to the Future, it is actually a rather intuitive device.

An EFC uses small carbon particles suspended in an electrolyte liquid to create a mesh of particles that can hold an electric charge. This means that during the day, electricity can be pumped into the EFC and stored. Then, when it is needed at later hours, you can establish a new set of diodes and derive the charge emanating from the chemical difference within the EFC.

It can sort of be conceptualized as a big, muddy, gross looking battery.

However, unlike batteries the EFC is not limited by the rare metals necessary. The EFC is proportional only to the reservoir of charged electrolytes which is a relatively cheap medium to assemble.

Also attractive is that the EFC could be used in a far greater number of charge- recharge cycles in comparison to conventional batteries.

All said and done, EFCs may provide an economical solution to grid level energy storage necessary to establish to truly ‘smart’ grid.

However, whether or not there will ever be the public sentiment to fund a smart grid is another question entirely.

For more on EFCs, take a look at Dr. Volker Presser’s research group at Drexel and read about them in the Science Daily report found here: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/07/120711104809.htm

 

For all your energy thoughts and news check back to www.energygridiq.com today.