
Northeast Blackout
Understanding the Latest Blackout

9.3.03 Thomas Casten, Chairman and CEO, Private
Power LLC
I have been on vacation, building
and researching bread ovens, during the week of the
worst yet power outage. (Sadly, more outages will
follow, as the wires are thoroughly congested.) This
has produced a unique insight and way to describe
the situation. I think history has repeated itself,
but you be the judge.
A history of bread ovens in the
Swiss/French border area notes that the church introduced
grain suitable for bread in about the 12th century.
The Carolingian kings owned the bread ovens, known
as banal ovens because of rules regulating their use.
Although anyone could use the communal oven
for a fee, the oven belonged to the lord, and he controlled
its use. He had the right to fine anyone who avoided
the use of his ovens, his mills, his presses, his
bulls, or his sawmills: these fines were called bans.
Footnote: The Bread Builders, 1999, page 115, Chelsea
Green Publishing Company, Daniel Wing and Alan Scott
The laws called "les
bans," were referred to as the banality laws. (Funny
how that word has evolved to mean commonplace or trivial.
Such bans on competition have certainly been common
in all of commerce, but their impact has not been trivial.)
Over the next five centuries, the oven ownership passed
from the kings to the municipalities, but the bans were
kept in place and oven use became even more onerous
for the people. Recall the dismal pace of economic progress
between the 12th and 17th centuries. A half of millennium
after the introduction of bread, people were finally
allowed to own their own ovens.
North America has just suffered the biggest
power blackout yet, because of modern banality laws.
Within 25 years of the commercialization of electric
power, the Wire Lords persuaded every State government
to enact bans on private wires. Those bans remain
in place and greatly discourage the construction of
distributed generation, near the loads. DG is often
made uneconomical by the confiscatory charges of the
Wire Lords for back-up power, moving surplus power
to neighbors, and for the privilege of connecting
to the grid. All electricity flows to the nearest
user in an interconnected grid, so increased local
generation would immediately reduce the flow of power
through the congested T&D system. Since losses are
related to the square of the current flow, even modest
introduction of DG would significantly reduce line
losses and reduce the strain on an increasingly congested
T&D system. If independent power generators had the
option of running their own wire across the road to
a nearby shopping center or hospital or other power
user, the wires companies would drop their DG killing
charges and seek to at least earn a fee for carrying
local power. The wires lords, left without banality
laws, would knock on DG developer's door and say,
"Let us reason together." Few new wires would cross
any roads, but the cost charged by the lords, without
banality laws, would be reasonable. As a result, the
power industry would stop building wasteful central
plants that throw away 66% of the fuel energy on average
as heat. Instead, the industry would move to localized
combined heat and power projects that recycle heat
and achieve 85% efficiency. This would mitigate a
long series of problems including economic competitiveness,
balance of payments, system vulnerability to weather
and terrorists, air pollution and emission of greenhouse
gasses. But instead we have banality laws.
Perhaps we could all learn from prior bans
on competition to understand the worldwide energy
mess. But the flat earth view of wires being a natural
monopoly is so widely held and so little challenged
that few see the obvious solution -- end the ban on
private wires. A Nobel Laureate, Richard Smaley, has
become concerned about energy waste as well. He asks
audiences to name and rank the top ten problems facing
the world, and finds energy is the problem that connects
to all of the others. What he does not realize is
how the banality laws prevent optimal solutions. The
DG community fights for fair and reasonable interconnection
charges and reduced backup charges without realizing
that their projects actually create huge benefits
to the rest of society and should be paid for the
locational value of the power, for the saved wires,
saved T&D losses, and saved cost and pollution.
As you read the daily journalistic analysis
of the blackout and see government officials lining
up for more investment in the obsolete central system's
wires, think about the impact on world problems if
it takes four hundred more years to end the ban on
private wires.
Copyright 2003 CyberTech, Inc.
Readers Comments
| Date |
Comment |
| Dennis Taylor
9.9.03 |
Were Mr. Casten
to spend as much time researching the early commercialization
of electricity as thoroughly as he has bread ovens,
he would recognize the canopy of wires that covered
cities. Of course there were no siting requirements
to deal with – or should we return to those days
of cat’s-cradle networks? As for the “confiscatory”
charges for backup power, does it cost the provider
less to install the wires and generation to meet
the backyard producer’s needs due to its own lack
of reliability? It is the number of kilowatt-hours
in the denominator that dictates the unit cost
of service. |
| **** **** 9.9.03 |
Patrick Doss-Smith
9.9.03 I have not done much research into either
the taxes on bread ovens or the early history
of the electric grid, though I've used homemade
bread ovens based on an 1830'S French design and
I've used the electrical grid as well. What I
can say for certain is that if the economy actually
existed to serve everday people, then Mr. Casten's
assertions would probably be quite accurate. However,
the problem in his argument is that he is talking
about corporations, who, like lords of old, most
often serve themselves first and the peasants
last, if at all. Our current concept of free market
has completely left out the idea of "fair market"
and frankly, I don't trust most corporations any
further than I can throw a bread oven. I'm sorry
Mr. Casten, I feel that you are correct that private
ownership of wires would be beneficial but the
risk of unethical behavior amongst the "corporate
lords" is far too great. |
| Jack Ellis 9.9.03 |
Mr. Casten makes
an interesting, very relevant argument about the
current state of the electric transmission and
distribution network. Through their dominance
of the wires business, utilities do exert an unhealthy
influence on competitive electricity technologies
in an attempt to protect their monopolies. Any
debate over the relative merits of central station
versus distributed generation technologies is
little more than an academic exercise at this
point precisely because the institutional and
economic barriers erected by utilities to limit
competition are so daunting. However those who
wish to replace utility service with some form
of self-generation should understand that standby
service will be costly in any form. They can either
pay a flat fee each month as they do for other
forms of insurance, or they can pay a steep use
fee each time they must switch to grid power just
as they would pay for ambulance service. The first
method will likely be cheaper because it provides
more revenue certainty to the standby service
provider, but the second method would be cheaper
for a customer that is confident about the reliability
of its self-generation facilities. Jack Ellis
|
| Ravinder Singh
9.9.03 |
Mr.Thomas you
have lightly explained the critical situation.
I am a WIPO awarded inventor and engineer of innovative
projects & technologies, I find no reason for
Jack and Dennis to react--. They don't seems to
be familiar with power sector. When we talk of
DG we don't mean 1to5 Kw equipments. Combined
cycle could have rating of over hundreds MW -
they are twice more efficient, cost less, are
less polluting and can be located closest to load
centres. Similarly CHP plants are availble from
25 KW to hundreds of MW depending on requirement
and are thrice more efficient. BUT THE CENTRAL
OBJECTIVE IS TO MAKE BEST USE OF ENERGY RELEASED
BY FUELS. And we must promote these viable technologies.
Mr. Dennis, The overhead lines are like freeways
which every one be entitled to use and usage charges
should be reasonable. ( telecom, pipelines , internet,
broadcast services etc. are share infrastructure-
Utilities must also learn to share the powerlines).
Since powerlines are similar, FERC may order useage
charges to be paid by DG, who may also order enhancement
of capacity of powerlines where ever required.
Objective should be to provide electricity econmically.---Ravinder
Singh, ravindersinghy77@yahoo.com |
|