Podcast: Decarbonizing with Energy Modeling

In this episode, we delve into the exciting world of energy modeling and its critical role in shaping a decarbonized future so join us as we unravel the complexities of decarbonization strategies and how they are informed by cutting-edge modeling approaches to gain a deeper understanding of the key challenges and opportunities in building a future powered by clean and renewable energy sources.

EPISODE NOTES

(0:50) - Modeling energy storage for a decarbonized future

Transcript

So, 75% of Americans, they're connected to electricity providers that wanna stop producing carbon in the next 30 years. The problem there being, they're not using the proper tools. They don't have the proper technology to plan for energy storage, which we think is the key for the green energy revolution. So, if you wanna jump into why this is the case and how they can fix it, buckle up, put your helmet on, because we're jumping into this one.

I'm Daniel, and I'm Farbod. And this is the NextByte Podcast. Every week, we explore interesting and impactful tech and engineering content from Wevolver.com and deliver it to you in bite sized episodes that are easy to understand, regardless of your background. 

Daniel: What's up, folks? Like we said, today we're talking all about energy storage, which is a cool little throwback to, let's say like two episodes ago when we were already talking about thermal batteries for sustainable energy storage. Now we're talking about energy storage as a whole and how it relates to the grid and how grids are planned. And this awesome team from Carnegie Mellon that kind of cracked the code on what tools are available now for people who are planning energy capacity and grid systems in general and where the gaps are and how that could potentially cause the wheels to fall off in terms of our future plans for sustainable energy.

Farbod: Well, this just shows you the range of the Next Byte Podcast, right? We have one episode where we talk about energy storage and we're getting into the nitty-gritty details of a technology that's going to be groundbreaking and now we're looking at it from a different angle. We're talking about engineering policy, like how do we take what's available and actually do something with it for society. So, there you go. Listen to them back-to-back and you got the whole picture. You're ready to go.

Daniel: And I will say this one feels more theoretical. It feels more high level, but I honestly think this one is going to move the needle more in terms of renewable energy in the future, as opposed to thermal batteries, which is just one of the potential options for energy storage. I don't want to like beat around the bush too much. We can just jump into it here. But.

Farbod: Let's do it.

Daniel: Essentially, this team has found a systemic problem in the way that all of capacity is modeled and how energy systems are planned. That completely excludes energy storage for renewable energy and could basically be the Achilles heel of how we develop renewable energy systems. Some background there, 75% of people in the United States use a utility company that's aiming to fully decarbonize within the next 30 years, whether that's regulatory pressure or that's something that they've decided to do on their own. Basically folks, it's not up to you on whether you want to be using coal to produce your electricity or collecting it from the sun and wind. 75% of you, at least in the United States, your utility company is going to make that choice for you and they've already made that choice. They're already planning to make that change. The challenge there being, when you're using renewable energy, we've talked about it on the past, again, two episodes ago, but also many other episodes in the past around how there's so much variability in the yield distribution of solar energy, of wind energy, when it's highly related to whether the sun's way up in the sky or low in the sky, or if there's a shadow cast across the solar panel, or if the weather changes and the wind stops, or if the weather changes and the wind really picks up. We need an energy storage system to allow us to smooth that curve out and then store the energy so that when people need electricity and the sun's not shining and we're in this awful position where peak energy demand is actually right at night as people get home from work and start turning on the lights in their home. And that's about where solar energy production starts to drop off. Essentially, the more and more we go to renewable energy, the more challenges we're going to have where we need reliable energy storage to be able to turn this big peaks and troughs of irregular renewable energy production into something that we can consistently rely on, even if it happens to be cloudy and rainy for five days straight and the solar energy production drops off.

Farbod: And energy storage, we've harped on it so much, just like you said at this point, but it seems like in terms of capacity expansion modeling, which by the way, I didn't know this. It's, it's the type of modeling they do to understand future energy demand and what kind of systems you need to have available to match and meet up with that demand and grow with it. So, that's what like power system designers essentially rely on. The energy storage factor has been mostly left out. I just completely ignored. And that is, I mean, not to be exaggerating this too much, but that's like, completely going to break the system because it is critical if we're going to rely on renewable sources. Like, when it comes to fossil fuels, we might be at the mercy of the ever-changing mood of politicians. But when it comes to renewables, we're having that with mother nature. So, we got to come up with a way to bridge that gap and make sure that we're actually able to support these 75% of Americans that are going to be going net carbon neutral by 2030 or in 30 years.

Daniel: Well, and let's just say these US utility companies that are planning to do this. I'm assuming that this is a microcosm for the rest of the world. These US utility companies that are planning to do this. I've said it in a verbal plan. They've committed to it publicly. They don't have the software tools to help them plan for this feature. So, let's talk about how this team from Carnegie Mellon identified these gaps, how they can come to such a strong conclusion that these capacity expansion modeling tools don't have the ability to plan for energy storage. And also, some of the other nuances that they discovered in this capacity energy modeling CEM technology. But to me, it's a little bit disheartening or maybe discouraging at first to say like, man, I thought we were on this like super strong progress towards something that everyone can be excited about, more reliable green energy that doesn't damage the environment, et cetera. But the challenge there being these capacity expansion modeling tools aren't actually up to speed yet. So, at first, I was super disheartened. I was super discouraged, like, man, none of the software tools are ready for this. But I will say the fact that someone discovered this early enough and it was able to publish it and shares potential solutions to remediate this immediately. It actually makes me excited that someone's called this out. And, you know, again, we've had, I've had my rants on this in the past. I hate when someone like calls out a problem and doesn't bring a potential solution along with them. You know, this team from Carnegie Mellon did a great job of not only calling out the problem, but also coming with a very discrete set of solutions that people building these capacity expansion modeling tools. I'm sure there's folks at Carnegie Mellon doing that can help improve the way that we're attacking this problem.

Farbod: Yeah. I'm with you, man. I thought we were all on the same page in terms of what's actually needed to get us to that greener future, but it sucks when it seems like the tools that are actually going to make that happen are not on the same page. Yeah. So, you want to get into it?

Daniel: Yeah, let's do it.

Farbod: All right. So, these folks, this group is led by Ramteen Sioshansi from the engineering and public policy school in Carnegie Mellon University. They started off with the literature review. They were looking at all these CEM models. And again, model to model, they started realizing that even though they're starting to incorporate wind and solar and whatever, there were no plans for any method of energy storage. And that's what started leading them into the path of, okay, like, why is that the case? More interestingly for me, they also like, I think you kind of alluded to it, they started looking at the nuances of actually like, what are the things that we can do with this new method of planning that's going to be enabled by energy, clean energy. And they were like, well, there's all these underserved communities that have long been mistreated by the current energy policies. Not only can we do benefit to the general global environment, but we can also help our local communities if we're just a little bit smarter about how we're deploying these things.

Daniel: And not just help them economically, right? It obviously helps for jobs, etc. to provide a lot of investment saying, hey, maybe this low-income area, we can provide a lot of jobs for people who are unemployed by giving them the ability to work on a new energy storage system. That's one part of it. But he also looked at areas that are like energy deserts, right? Areas inside the United States where there isn't reliable electricity available. Also leveraging energy storage investments in those areas to make sure that not only do these people get economic investment, but they also get easy, reliable access to electricity where it doesn't currently exist.

Farbod: And to piggyback off of you, the lack of consistent energy also, as I understand it, means more expensive energy. So, the people that need it the most not only don't have consistent access to it, but when they do, it's actually quite a bit more pricey. 100%. And they bundled this in, this is something I didn't know, the inflation reduction act that just recently apparently passed bipartisan, which is awesome has a lot of money set aside, a lot of resources set aside for green energy investment, which is awesome, but it also has limits on energy expenditure for a lot of these underserved communities. So, he's like, look, not only is like kind of policy helping us out in this direction, which is rare, but there is technological potential here as well to make something good happen on two fronts.

Daniel: Yeah. Well, then, like I said, right, there's the first part of this secret sauce, this method that they went about attacking everything. And that was to call out the problem or first to discover the problem and then to call it out. But they had this hypothesis that maybe these capacity and expansion modeling tools aren't set up to properly prepare for this green energy revolution that's coming. They looked at a lot of the available tools online, tried to study their capabilities, they discovered what they thought was, hey, there's this gap around energy storage and just to be sure they went and studied all the literature, right? Researchers that are releasing saying, hey, we're at the forefront of developing these capacity expansion models. We're now including contingencies for wind power or for solar power, but again, none of them were talking about energy storage, which is the key to turning this solar power, this wind power into something that's consistent enough, industrialized enough, reliable enough for the average consumer to be able to use it to turn on the lights in their home. So first they discovered that problem, but then they also went about laying forward a path to directly address this by including this in Capacity Expansion Modeling tools, CEM tools. But I also liked that they found like very specific pieces of policy saying, hey, here's this other nuance that you could package in here. Here's the policy that describes where and when people could get economic benefits from a new energy storage. And then also how, you know, again, the specific piece of policy, the innovation reduction act provides specific subsidies for this or provides limits around this. So not only are we taking this really theoretical problem saying we don't have anything about energy storage, also getting into the brass tacks around, hey, here's where policy would make it really, really favorable for us to do something related to energy storage investment. And here's areas where maybe it doesn't make a lot of sense. And again, the policy is a big part that we usually don't see when we're talking about engineering research. I think it has to do something about the cross-functional team that worked on this as well as the interdisciplinary background that the principal investigator has.

Farbod: Yeah, and it's, I feel like, I hope you've done a good enough job of explaining how important these CEM models are, because they literally determine the power infrastructure for entire communities. So, you ideally want someone who's taking into account, obviously the nuances of technology, but also holistically what's available on the policy side and what are the shortcomings and how that community could benefit from everything that's available. And that's exactly what these folks have done. They haven't compromised on any front. If anything, they've leveraged all this knowledge is available to them to make this CEM platform, the CEM model as good as it can possibly be.

Daniel: Yeah, I agree, right. We've got these 75% of Americans who are connected to these electricity providers that want to make the switch these electricity providers, these utility companies, those are the ones that are always walking this tightrope between what's available from a technology standpoint, trying to maximize efficiency, reduce costs to the consumer, and then also dealing with the political winds that are trying to tip them off that tightrope around when subsidies are coming, when crackdowns are coming, et cetera. I appreciate that this cross-functional team from Carnegie Mellon tried to balance all those different things and point out the way that we can build a more nuanced CEM model that makes it more likely that these 75% of Americans actually get green energy in the next 30 years and it's something that's reliable at something that's lower cost to them. And it's obviously something that's better for the environment as well.

Farbod: Agreed, agreed. And I'm gonna point this out I kind of talked about in the beginning but I feel like we always or for the most part we talk about these specific technologies, right? Like you and I are engineers. We love just getting into the nitty-gritty details of any cool new piece of tech but it's like they're kind of these unsung heroes that bring engineering and policy together to make, like you said, impact that's probably even greater than some of these standalone technologies, right? Because they're bringing in the technology itself and public policy and really trying to consider how it's going to impact people's day-to-day lives over the next God knows how many years.

Daniel: No, I agree, man, right? We talk a lot about this specific solar development or this specific wind turbine development, and those are all interesting and impactful in their own right. But I think, like you said, we need to spend additional time focusing on the folks that take these huge technological trends and turn them into something that's useful, right? Something that, you know, we see this trend with a lot of development in solar, we see this trend with a lot of development in wind, but our biggest pet peeve, we talk about it a lot in this podcast is when somebody develops awesome technology like that, and then it sits on the shelf and collects dust because it's not able to make it out in the real world. This team from Carnegie Mellon is at the tip of that spear that's trying to make all of these green energy developments something that's feasible for utility companies to actually use in the real world. And it all starts with them being able to plan for these tools properly in their modeling tools, right? When they're planning for investment, they're planning for additional upgrades to their infrastructure, making sure that they're taking into account the fact that they need energy storage. Otherwise, the solar, the wind, et cetera, it's not gonna work.

Farbod: For sure, for sure, yeah. Want to do a recap?

Daniel: Yeah, let's hammer it down to a quick summary here. Basically, despite our global push for clean energy, our current energy storage plans could basically be setting us up for massive failure. So, the backstory here, 75% of Americans are connected to electricity providers that wanna stop producing carbon in the next 30 years. Since solar and wind power depend a lot on the weather, they vary a lot, they go up, they go down. Sometimes it's rainy, sometimes it's cloudy, sometimes the wind stops. We need good ways to store their energy so that we can use that energy later on the days and the times that they aren't producing that much. The problem is that this team from Carnegie Mellon discovered most software tools that utility companies are using don't actually account for the need to store energy. So, they talk about solar, they talk about wind, but they don't talk about the way that we need to store that energy for later use. So, these researchers mentioned how these tools lack the ability to help low-income communities get better access to energy as well. So, they not only caught out these big two parts of the problem. They called out potential solutions, right? So, they talk about how we need people improving these planning tools so we can have clean, affordable, and reliable electricity for everyone in the future. Otherwise, our clean energy plans could be headed to massive failure.

Farbod: Money, like always.

Daniel: Thanks, my guy.

Farbod: You killed it. The chemistry's just off the charts when we do it in person.

Daniel: Yeah.

Farbod: Should be the only way we do it.

Daniel: There we go. Yeah.

Farbod: All right, anything else to talk about or is this the end of the podcast?

Daniel: No, I just want to mention, right, we've said it in the past couple episodes, but, you know, the biggest way folks can help us, leave us a review if you haven't already, we would appreciate 5 stars. We feel like we deserve it. If not, let us know. The Next Byte at Wevolver.com, we promise to read every single email you send us. We also read our Instagram DMs, Twitter DMs, I guess that's X DMs now, not Twitter.

Farbod: Always Twitter to me.

Daniel: Reach out to us. Let us know what we need to improve. If you think that we're good. Take five seconds to leave us a 5-star review. We'd really appreciate it. And if you've already done all that, you're already a participating member of our community. You've already given us a 5-star review. We appreciate you for being a part of the journey and for being one of our MVPs helping us achieve all that we have so far. The best thing you can do is take this episode, share it with a friend. Podcasts don't grow virally like TikToks do. The only way that podcasts grow is one, by sharing it with other people and two, by having a review so we have a chance to climb a chart that someone might discover us. So, if you're a big part of this and you've been enjoying it, we appreciate you for being a part of the journey. Those are the best ways you can help us to continue because the people that we do it for and the people that we do it with, this community, they're the only reason we keep going. We're 142 Tuesdays in and we haven't missed one and it's because of all you guys.

Farbod: Remember, friends don't let friends miss an episode of the Next Byte Podcast.

Daniel: For damn sure.

Farbod: Yeah. Also, one of you DM'd us saying that you didn't like the intro song. And thanks to you, I lost the battle on holding onto the theme song. So, we're changing it. If you're wondering how important your feedback is, there you go.

Daniel: Yeah, Farbod and I have been in a constant tug of war on whether we should change the intro music. And we're both equal strength. So, the tug of war has been like stuck in, we've been stuck at a standstill for a while. And all it took was a feedback from a couple of people. I think it was Keith Schenck, we appreciate you or I appreciate you because you helped me win the argument. You helped me win the argument. Now we're gonna be changing the intro music. So, stay tuned. I think it's better. I think it's an upgrade and I think it better fits our vibe. I think our current intro music kind of feels like we're listening to breaking news on BBC.

Farbod: And on that note, thank you so much for listening. As always, we'll catch you in the next one.

Daniel: Peace.

As always, you can find these and other interesting & impactful engineering articles on Wevolver.com.

To learn more about this show, please visit our shows page. By following the page, you will get automatic updates by email when a new show is published. Be sure to give us a follow and review on Apple podcasts, Spotify, and most of your favorite podcast platforms!

--

The Next Byte: We're two engineers on a mission to simplify complex science & technology, making it easy to understand. In each episode of our show, we dive into world-changing tech (such as AI, robotics, 3D printing, IoT, & much more), all while keeping it entertaining & engaging along the way.