Fairfax increases wind energy purchase

Earlier this month, my home county announced some significant steps to be eco-friendly. Can't help wondering - if things are difficult to do in Washington, you can do it in Fairfax or Arlington or Montgomery.

In lighter vein

Bumped across this Monty Python skit in Youtube. Below is an excerpt of what the commentator say. I like the remark on Marx. Brilliant!

Nietzsche receives a yellow card after claiming that "Confucius has no free will"; "Name go in book" says Confucius. The Germans dispute the call; "Hegel is arguing that the reality is merely an a priori adjunct of non-naturalistic ethics, Kant via the categorical imperative is holding that ontologically it exists only in the imagination, and Marx is claiming it was offside." When viewing the replay it is clear that goal was offside and Marx was correct in his dissent.

Update: There is an entry in the wikipedia

Conversations on Electric Power

The British government released the Energy White Paper after some hiccups. The highlights are government’s strategy in the area of nuclear energy which almost echoes the discussion that’s pervading in US. Nuclear energy has its plate full of challenges, some of which I have attempted to capture in this blog. It is noteworthy why the white paper was delayed. It was because Greenpeace managed to force the government through court action into a “forced consultation” and public participation in such an important process. It is interesting that the courts have to mediate in such matters and remind governments whom exactly they are serving.

One of the statements that stuck out - “The government wants to boost energy efficiency and change lifestyles, to cut rising energy demand and carbon emissions.” Change lifestyles? I ask how? While change seems inevitable, we cannot think about change without considering the pain that comes along with it. And when change is forced upon by the governmental people react in two ways in a democracy. Either people support or they resist. In matters relating to how we will use electricity in future, in spite of all our best intentions, change is not easy. Whether it is getting used to living near a nuclear power plant or worrying about when it will be cheaper to switch on our dishwashers or do our laundry. Given the harshness of the truth that whatever we do we will disturb the general public, governments are treading on sensitive waters here and is evident that most governments are not daring to catch the bull by its horns to avoid a political suicide. The responsibility of changing our lives to align with the challenges of climate change is thus being vested on lone rangers and independent spirits who are doing it on their own. Ironically, while the British government was working on the white paper, BP canceled its green project citing delays in government commitments for financial incentives for green power.

It is not just about UK government. It is not in any one entity's capacity to bring in behavioral, cutural, or institutional changes without engaging the public. Just to digress a little bit here - everyone talks about how internet has changed our lives. I ask - do we realize how this was possible.

If Internet is a computing grid, it is similar in concept to the power grid. However, it is interesting to note why the power grid is an epitome of centralized power while the internet is free – as in no one person exercises ownership, everyone can plug an play, and add stuff to make it richer, better, and more useful. And the more I think about it I am reminded of the Cluetrain Manifesto. Internet brought in a cultural change because it was a free platform for amorphous development of ideas, rapid execution, and permission-less mindset all combined to propell this chaotic but phenomenal change.

The power grid has been just the opposite. Regulated utilities that have tried to control power, authority, and information as much as possible. As a consumer, I don’t have choices of services, forget service providers. I don’t even know how I am getting charged, so on and so forth. Working within a utility – there is a pervasive lets-not-do-anything mindset that shuns from rocking the boat. Status quo is the mantra as opposed to playing out new ideas. Human beings need stuff to play with and it is from playing and exploring that cool things come out. Cost effective green energy, realistic nuclear waste disposal programs, or innovative power project financing schemes have better chances of cropping up in an environment where more “consultation” and “trial and error” mindset is promoted. Then there are secondary effects. Platforms that provide intellectual freedom tend to attract smarter people and better human talent. Given the falling enrollment rates of students in power programs in Universities this may be another benefit serious enough not to overlook.

Let’s not lose sight of the ball here. While Hollywood stars are driving Priuses to the Oscar night, Tom Friedman is writing incessantly about going green in The New York Times, teenagers and college kids IMing each other about saving the planet with solar and wind, it is equally important that we allow honest conversations leading to actual implementation of these ideas in energy sector. Rather than throwing mud on government efforts, spin doctoring scientific assertions as established truths or work of fiction, and making a living by stalling every new idea in the name of “regulation” or “security” – we need to stop people-stereotyping that destroys honest debate. I would like to see more debates on nuclear waste. What should the number of years that we should plan for in Yucca mountain? 100 years, 10,000, or 1 million years. Should customers pay more for electricity? Is it artificially priced? Is it low or high? What are all the negative externalities? How do we price them? Should we allow decentralized power as alternatives to central generation? We need better arguments better rebuttals. I don’t want to see those “going green” being characterized as ultra-liberal tree-hugging hippies. Or, those people in suits championing nuclear or talking in favor of utilities or oil companies as self-absorbed money making machines; or, a cross between Wall Street and Washington conservative who don’t care about poor people. Or, snub one who seems to be all set to cause nuclear accidents, or plummet property prices of areas if I choose to live near a nuclear plant or oil refinery. At the end - the media needs to stop pretending that the next report or next solution that comes from a government or corporate release will solve all problems. And then beat the hell out of some words that were written or spoken.

Let’s go and do something meanigful. If it fails let's agree we will do something else. Let the collective process work and figure out. Who knows what the next magic bullet is. Nuclear or solar or tide or clean coal – or something completely different that we as individuals cannot comprehend now. Let an honest conversation begin.

Australia: Water shortages leading to higher electricity prices

The water crises in Australia is now affecting the electricity prices. Futures are up to the extent that prices of electricity are tipped to double in South Australia. See here.

Jonathan Coulton, an outcome of Web 2.0

Last Sunday, The New York Times Magazine ran an article about Jonathan Coulton. Coulton quit his day job as a programmer and now is a full-time singer/artist. Read the article how he has used the internet - myspace and blogs to create a community to launch his new career. The NYT writer poses:

"Will the internet change the type of person who becomes a musician or writer? It’s possible to see these online trends as Darwinian pressures that will inevitably produce a new breed — call it an Artist 2.0 — and mark the end of the artist as a sensitive, bohemian soul who shuns the spotlight. In “The Catcher in the Rye,” J. D. Salinger wrote about how reading a good book makes you want to call up the author and chat with him, which neatly predicted the modern online urge..."

Well, there is no doubt where things are heading. We are just scratching the surface of two-way communication and realization of collaborative creation and development. What does this mean for businesses? What does this mean for individuals with a record or a book plot in mind? Is this a trend and a sustainable template for similar success or just a fleeting fad? Do the old rules still apply - that some people will just be lucky? One thing that open sourcing from community to create music, art, or software keeps telling me is: there are generous people out there and they are willing to gift their time and talent to see others realize their success. Call it Maslow's self-actualization or anything, sourcing that side of human nature certainly reaps benefits beyond conventional belief. And internet is making it more possible each day.

Oh, I find his CodeMonkey pretty cool. Here.

Comment on confusedofcalcutta Uploading Text

I wrote a comment to JP’s post to which Stephen weighed in and expanded. As the web progresses this will be an ongoing conversation. Security vs. freedom. The embrace of new technology has a particular characteristic. It has been tied to the ease of its use - even when the technology is not perfect. The choice of Windows operating system over Unix is a good example. Ten years ago, I began my career porting power plant control software from Unix platforms to Windows. Why? A simple reason. Windows based system was easy to learn and use for power plant operators. This decision was a tough decision that most of us did not like. Another example is what David Weinberger in Everything is Miscellaneous talks about how Tim Berners-Lee’s brilliant decision to keep things simple with HTML catapulted internet’s growth to where it is now in just a few years. When we are in this riding tide of progress and development, we don’t want to see a red stop sign. We don’t want lawyers and security experts or for that matter anybody to caution us or forbid us. We hate security. Then comes some jerk who invents a computer virus, a freak who breaks in to a sensitive system, or a sociopath who post nasty messages and causes harm. We are alarmed. We start locking our doors and windows by creating accounts and passwords and installing anti-viruses. We start encrypting our data packets and suddenly the network that was running so fast now slows down as it spends more time encrypting and decrypting, thus carrying less real information than it used to do before during that given time. Stephen mentions about how creation of Department of Homeland Security is retrograde from our movement from Dept. of War to Dept. of Defense. Take for instance the long queues in airport security after 9/11. Many business travelers like me still hate it but I have gotten used to it. If you ask a random grandma in the airport, who does not run against a tight schedule, she’d probably tell that she is happy because she feels safer. I cant deny that in some corner of my mind I feel the same way. I think as in real life, in internet too, we will always confront diverse opinions on how much security and how much openness will be allowed. In Web 2.0, world views about what sort of conversations are harmful and needed to be restricted for “security” reasons. There will always be people who will differ in their positions. Conversations surrounding issues like change in military policy will take place for a while and settle to an equilibrium point like the way a page in wikipedia stops from changes until the point when something happens and disturbs the equilibrium. It is too farfetched (and utopian) to think that our real world will replicate the possibilities of Web 2.0 world entirely, albeit all of its good intentions. Nor will the Web 2.0 world squeeze and morph into another reflection of the real world. Both will change and are changing as we keep swinging from one to the other. Eventually we will find the temporary mean position. Needless to say, I am looking forward to this exciting journey.

Black Swan re-visited

Few days ago, I mentioned about reading Nassim Taleb 's Black Swan. I began with the hope that it would be exciting. While it was worth reading once, I was hoping for a bit more. The 400 pages were a bit too long for the thesis of the book. For someone who has grown up with some exposure to oriental philosophy the importance of "luck" in life and the fact that one cannot predict future based on past are moot. To refresh the importance of luck in life (assuming it encopasses business life) I would rather watch Woody Allen's Crimes and Misdemeanors and Match Point.

Auditing Grid Performance Not Enough

Come summer and people in the utilities start panicking of power shortages and potential blackouts. Media begin to get energized around reports such as the one here. Old transformers, stressed grid, and the list goes on. One always hear diverse viewpoints - not the least of them is the assurance that things are not as bad they sound. Like it or not, a seemingly technical problem always sees its resolution through a PR gymnastic contest. The mantra is: As long as something bad does not happen, it is fine. I would like to pause here and ponder on this for a moment. What are we saying here? Isn't is almost like waking up in the morning and telling that as long as I am alive when I go bed, I am happy. Maybe in a philosophical or mystical sense, it is acceptable, but in real world, when we as engineers start looking at the world with these glasses, then we literally kiss goodbye to creativity, innovation, and ways to make our lives richer and better. How did we get such a mindset? More importantly, when have we made "not-as-bad-as-could-be" become equal to "as-good-as-it-can-get" in our utilities. One of the reasons this happens is when we choose mediocrity over excellence. It happens when we prefer status-quo over change. It happens when we don't do anything because no one else is doing. It happens when more people tell us what to do and control our destiny rather than giving us the choice and freedom to think and implement new ideas. And it happens when we forget who we are serving and why we are in the business. And I believe this is the crux of the problem. Some say utilities are being overly regulated and their performance measured in ways that are bordering ridiculous. Regulators believe if utilities do not handle themselves causing societal problems like the 2003 blackout, public policy makers have to intervene. Both have substance in the argument. Take the audits as an example. When there are too many people wearing the proverbial holsters and cop hat to dictate what they should be doing, the entire effort shifts to find ways to avoid them. Utilities do just enough to satisfy the regulators. This is plain and simple human nature. And more often than not, the ensuing list to keep regulators happy becomes long enough to be the "be-all" and "end-all" of all the projects that utilities can afford.

Result: Le's do just enough to satisfy the regulatory audits (NRC audits, NERC audits). By some "glue" let's make sure the grid does not fall apart in my watch.

If we could move away from the audit culture and engage is ways to engage in conversations that promote open distribution and sharing of information to continually serve to the customer's best interests; if utilities develop a price structure that puts the customer before shareholders, it is possible to work under a more powerful context of innovation and improvement. Utility industry has had its quirks. From big barons like Samuel Insull to Enron, we have gotten our regulators excited in a variety of ways. The truth of the matter is somewhere along the way the conversation within the utilities has shifted way too far from serving the customer to serving the shareholders without angering the regulators. Or may be, the conversation of serving the customer was never powerfully constituted as the inelastic demand behavior of consumers was a favorable field to fulfill the goals of corporate greed for a few. As is known, with the regulators, you don't get much credit from doing more than what's required - just like no one credits you if you are driving below the speed limit, but fines you if you are over. Simply measuring the cholesterol levels do not ensure a healthy heart. Similarly, periodic auditing is just the minimum. If it becomes burdensome, as is the case with smaller utilities, there will be hardly any resources left for the grids to improve. In such cases, government needs to let the market decide to fix the prices - an exhorbitantly high price of electricity will signal market condition and initiate a correction. Looking at the "because effect" of electricity, the consequences are too large to live with a grid that barely survives. While some may keep finding ways to prove that everything is fine, I wish it is possible for the rest to begin by addressing the perception (allowing those who believe - all is fine to be true). The perception is: grid infrastructure is old and needs to be made better. And it cannot be done by paying with the proverbial "minimum wage" mindset laid down by regulators. For as the PR pundit will tell, changing perceptions do change reality.

Bonus: JP's post hits right on this point.)

Sellaband Model

BBC covered the business model used by Sellaband to bring artists into market place. In my view, it is similar to kiva or microfinancing of recording artists who would find other ways (usual channels as of today) to fund their recording fees. So far four artists have been funded with this democratized framework. Back where I grew up in Calcutta, during the later half of the past century Durga Puja - the most important festival became a community festival organized by local communities once the costs became prohibitive for individual member to bear all by himself (Not many hers earned money then). People typically contribute as much as they can. When it comes to celebration - and enjoying those 3-4 days of festivity, the community celebrates together. What I have realized that when it comes to feeding our senses of enjoyment and happiness, communities can bind and overcome financial barriers. It will be quite interesting to see how far the Sellband model goes is challenging the existing models run by big recording companies. How will the publicity and advertising be handled. Kudos to BBC for doing that part. This is how a Sellaband artist sounds.

Projects as a network of promises?

I came across Andrew Hintonś excellent slides while reading David Weinbergerś blog. Left me wondering if this architecture will or is already pervading the way we manage projects. Imagine project management was managing a platform or arena for conversations among multiple players interconnected with a network of promises and commitments. There is no distinctive top-down hierarchy from a project manager to ¨worker bees¨. When a promise is broken, the network indicates that or even better - tags that. Smarter ones may trigger an automatic healing process and like a GPS device directs back the link by re-promising or re-distributing the networked chain of existing promises. Will this be more efficient than the conventional model?

I remember one of my business professors teaching that one of the goals of an information system in an organization is to ensure that it replicates the organizational hierarchy. In other words, the access to information should match who in the organization should be able to get what. Networks flattens the flow of information since the ¨intern¨ can access the same file in the corporate server as the CEO. We have been using administrative controls to manage that. But let s say, we work backwards and let the possibility of information networks dictate the way projects are staffed, organized, and managed. Will that work? Any thoughts?

On Ubuntu now

I am writing from my Dell laptop that is running Ubuntu Linux 7.04. Over the weekend, I could install it like a charm. It will be 10 years using RH Linux and emacs. I have already began to love the sudo apt-get in Ubuntu. Linux community has come a long way. While I celebrate with my old faithfuls - 10 years with Linux and Emacs, I take a moment to remember the Activex, the OLE, COM, DCOM, and other stuff that I had to learn and unlearn. I have even deleted them from my resume. Thatś the promise I get from opensource software that I may never have to do. It evolves but never dies. Never will drop out from my resume. Comforting - aha!

Blessings of an Aging Workforce

This post is opposite to what most people would say in the power industry. Aging workforce is a problem. A big problem in the industry. Knowledge is retiring and there aren´t enough younger replacements to take their positions. In most utilities, engineers and technicians are retiring just to get hired back as freelance consultants. Some utilities are responding more than the others. Companies like TVA have done some remarkable efforts. There are several organizations that have made ¨aging workforce” a buzz word. I take an alternate view on this issues. I do want to caution readers that I am in no way diminishing the seriousness of this problem in saying what I am going to say.

Aging workforce resulting in retiring may have a silver lining. In a Schumpeterish way, this may be utilities and power industryś moment (or period) of ¨creative destruction¨. It is no longer a secret that the electric grid is running on old infrastructure that needs to be retired and replaced by new; and more importantly, a mindset that is averse to ¨letś do business as usual¨ mindset. And there are good reasons for doing so. ¨Letś not fix if ain´t broke¨, ¨Show me the money,¨ ¨where is the ROI,¨ ¨lets not use technology just for technology's sake,¨ ¨I am not going first,¨ etc. are just some of what one hears whenever there is a talk about new upgrades let alone implementing a new technology. And all of them are right. They are justified or called for justification. End result, we have been successful in maintaining a 40 year old system with 40 year old procedures and according to most people in the industry taken the power grid to its Gladwellś Tipping Point of disaster. Ask any CEO of a utility – that is his nightmare.

Amidst all these push and pull, it is clear to everyone that more than ¨technology is available¨ and the ¨finances that are expected¨, it is about the people sitting in decision making positions. Hardly anyone seems to be really bothered why there has not been much of a change for the better. Why has it lagged behind? Why has innovation been so slow? Why are we so tunneled into ROI mindset? Personally, my train of such questions has led to me just one thing - people in the industry. Their willingness and drive to try out new things, of innovation, and creativity - I mean, lack there of all these. Like the HBS MBA students in McAfeeś class, some may argue it is all about the incentives. No incentives for innovation – why innovate? I would add – it is not just about not getting supported for doing something new and bringing into market – it also about not being punished (getting sued or butchered by the press) severely for doing so if it fails. Finally, it all comes back to one thing - people. Why kids take or don´t take up power engineering majors in colleges? What sort talent the industry hires? How are performance reviews done? How is performance measured? Do seniors help juniors grow? Does one get a rewarding career?

Currently, utilities and power companies, albeit their pervasive and ubiquitous presence in the market place cannot boast of a workforce that is looked upon as innovators. It is in fact quite the opposite. They are those who worship status quo. In this world, to get somebody to agree on something new to happen is almost challenging the impossible. This is in quite contrast to 25-30 years back when lots of cool products spun off from utilities. From basic numerical methods, sparse matrix algebra, optimization algorithms, compex control and automation systems, and large scale computation. So, when aged people are gone and new people come in, I view this as an opportunity. An opporutnity to creep in new ideas. To leverage the benefits of IT, communications, and collaboration. To actually see and implement IT to capture knowledge and easily retrieve when needed.

The power grid is a perfect example how as individuals we can exist in ourselves and yet exchange power whether we are in surplus or in deficit. Such sharing not only works in the physical network but also in our social networks. This needs a level of openess where using IT can be a core. We can certainly bring in rapid changes and innovation leading to new host of services. New avenues for better collaboration and information sharing among entities that fulfills some of the requisites to improved reliability and performance of an interconnected system.

To move into this new paradigm we will need everything. Making a ROI case for IT is not easy on its own merit. But instead of using it is as only way to justify improvement we can just take a chance. Imagine if the intial venture capitalist tried to value Google using ROI. In a nutshell, a change in mindset and attitude is required before anything can happen. And for that aging workforce may not be all that bad by adiosing the old and ringing in the new.

Revisiting London Tube Map

I was in Corcoran Art Gallery to see the exhibit on Modernism. What caught my eye was Beckś Map of London Underground. Amazing isn´t it? Seeing one of the first creations of the thought process that highlighted the ¨nodes¨ and the ¨connections.¨ Thinking in ¨topology¨ - beyond the physical ¨map¨ and ¨territory¨ paradigm. It may be that with what´s going around me has something to do with it- power system networks, IT networks, and social networks. A context created that forces me to view the world from node and connections point of view. Nonetheless, worth chewing on that thought how our present and future are connected to how Beck saw the underground. Many Thanks to Jayashri, Dilant, Kaushambi, and Shushma for tolerating me throughout and making it such a fun day.