SoCal wins $125 million for smart grid and energy storage

Two Southern California utilities were awarded more than $125 million in stimulus funds from the Department of Energy today to demonstrate “smart” electric grid systems and test energy storage projects.

Los Angeles Department of Water and Power received $60,280,000 and Southern California Edison Co. received $40,134,700 to test out and collect data on smart grid programs.

SoCal Edison was also given $24,978,264 for its Tehachapi Wind Energy Storage Project, using an 8-megawatt lithium ion battery technology.

In a statement, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger hailed the grants, saying they would "help modernize the state’s electricity infrastructure to make delivery methods more efficient," as well as save energy costs for consumers and create jobs.

Several Northern California projects in Alameda, Berkeley, Fremont and San Francisco also picked up energy storage grants, Secretary of Energy Steven Chu said in a statement today.

In all, California systems were awarded nearly $175 million, part of the $620 million from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act given to 32 projects across the country dealing with large-scale energy storage, smart meters, electricity distribution issues and a range of technologies.

A group of 16 awards totaling $435 million went to smart grid programs run through 50 utilities and companies in 21 states. Another 16 grants for $185 million were given to utility-scale energy storage projects, which could help integrate renewable energy options such as wind and solar into the mainstream electricity network.

The projects could create thousands of jobs, including for manufacturing workers, engineers, electricians, equipment installers, IT system designers, cyber-security specialists and analysts, Chu said.

-- Tiffany Hsu

Comments

[scheng1]

The timing is not exactly good. If both companies had the money earlier on, they would have create jobs and lower the unemployment rate.

[steve]

Lets use this money the right way this go around!

Steve

[Gordon Potik]

The Global Warming discussion and influence disappears when we have as a goal to remove the toxic influence in the three major environments that are Global in nature ... Air, Land, sea, rivers and lakes?

Sooooooooo, like the financial deregulation that lead to the bursting of the financial bubble thus leading to regulation, that to some seems extreme; we need to regulate the pollution of our air, land, seas, rivers, lakes and other consumables that effect our quality of life. Perhaps in this way Global Warming will slow down or disappear.

By the way, opponents to Cap and Trade along with proponents have not considered the impact on our economy our physical surroundings let alone our health as a result of Toxic Environment Syndrome TES. Go ahead and compare the costs. You can’t. There have been estimates that CAP and Trade may cost anywhere from less than $100 per family per year to as much as $3100 per family per year. Can you set a dollar value on time lost at work, jobs lost, and health consequences that were created by a toxic environment? Who can evaluate the costs with respect to the negative effects on students in the classrooms?

CAP and Trade costs are nothing in comparison to the costs due to illness, time off from work, increases in healthcare needs just to mention a few adversities.

[Gordon Potik]

The debate about Global Warming is totally irrelavant. The discussion should center around Toxic Environment Syndrome. Now known to be TES. Here is the summary ...We are basing this legislation on a concept that is arguably affecting our Earth … Global Warming. Even though we have seen a Noble Prize, and an Oscar about Global Warming, that does not mean we need CAP and Trade legislation to stop this impending dome day’s situation. Global warming for some is still a debatable item. In fact in an Editorial in the Los Angeles Time dated 8-26-09 we can read that the US Chamber of Commerce is seeking a “Scopes monkey trial for the 21st century” appointing a judge to hear evidence on the question of does global warming endangers Americans’ health. Since then we have seen numerous editorials about Global Warming and Cap and Trade legislation needed because of Global Warming.I believe the approach to fight against TES should be similar to the way we might handle our own home environment. That is to say … we would not want our kids to play in a filthy toxic back yard, drink dirty toxic water, breathe polluted toxic air, swim in toxic or dirty water, and plant a garden in toxic soil … would we? I think not. Hence we need appropriate legislation to prevent TES the pollution of our air, land and seas. This is similar in fact to our military that protects us on land, on seas, and in the air.

[h]

So Southern California Edison, a subsidiary of a publicly traded, for-profit company, gets 65 millions of taxpayer dollars to play around with things that can further expand its profit?

Lovely. Their lobbyists are probably slapping each other on the backs of their very expensive suits right now.

[Joe Lyou]

In addition to jobs, our region will benefit from the reduced demand for new and expanded power plants, as well as better air quality.