Decarbonization. Decentralization. Digitization.
I didn’t think we needed to explicitly state “reliability” as a pillar because no-one expected a decline in quality with our next generation structures. But, given the increasing climate-based fluctuations, as well as the intermittent nature of current renewables, we likely need to adjust our 3-pronged approach to specifically include resilience.
I, perhaps incorrectly, thought that we had addressed base-load and resilience issues through better digital controls and more voluminous, decentralized generation. There is an increasingly unchallenged assumption that growth of intermittent renewables will eventually be paired with the cost-decline of batteries. And while I still believe that batteries will be the eventual/ critical complementary power source, there are many ways batteries will engage with the grid… + even the definition of a battery may change to include modular nuclear.
As stated in a past post, Energize is investing in the transition, not the outcome: “Rather than attempting to monetize a self-selected outcome (clean energy) we now focus our process on enabling the energy and industrial transition.” Energize remains focused on the software applications enabled by this transition.
Over the coming months I will be expanding my scope to better understand how and why we can better directly address resilience in supply. There are a number of jump-off points to revisit to see if the technology is ready for prime time:
– vehicle to grid (V2G) software (resi, fleets)
– next generation inverters and home / commercial control systems (and biz model)
– broader co-generation opportunities, including small modular nuclear reactors, modular batteries (readiness, policy)
All of these technologies still assume increased generation and distribution at the edge. I see smaller-scale generation’s ability to grow and iterate more quickly as a key component to the energy transition.
Who should we be speaking to making advancements in this space?