We’ve been hearing and reading (and talking) about load control and demand response quite a bit over the past several years. Hardly a day goes by that DR doesn’t make the headlines in one context or another. And then there’s the technology – oh, so much technology! There must be at least a gazillion ways to curtail demand out there these days, give or take a few. But here’s what worries me: Even with all of the energy efficiency measures and technology available, why do we still not seem too serious about doing something substantive about demand, and why does it seem like we aren’t willing to spend and/or sacrifice anything to get it under control? So far, I haven’t observed a deep commitment to demand reduction on a national scale, and I can’t help but wonder why that is the case.

The fact is, DR is still an evolving business, and I’m not sure that anyone has found precisely the right balance between the pluses and minuses yet. Despite there being several of what I’d call serious DR suppliers, none of them seems to be setting the world on fire. Is it just that DR is not the panacea that some people claim it is, or is this yet another one of those things that hasn’t been properly explained to the marketplace? Personally, I’m betting on the latter, and here’s why...

Way back in 2007-2008 – before the recession became the #1 topic of discussion – we saw a lot of commentary about load growth, transmission congestion and the direct and indirect environmental impacts of future demand – all of which are as valid now as they were then – but these days we don’t hear much about those issues. Why is that? Well, I believe that there is a very good reason. Notably, as the economy sagged, so did load growth. So naturally, being the ‘farsighted’ kind of folks that we are, we immediately developed a case of amnesia. We conveniently forgot about all of those down sides to meeting demand using conventional methods and quietly moved on to other pertinent issues of the day. (See, there are actually some positives out of this financial malaise!)

While the old adage ‘ignorance is bliss’ may be applicable here, don’t think for a minute that the current situation will last. Be assured that along with economic recovery will come a return to load growth – you can depend on it. That is, as business ramps back up and energy use starts to rise again, energy demand will inevitably increase right along with it. And, when – not if – it does, those pesky problems with generation shortfalls, transmission congestion and environmental issues will be right back in our collective faces. Yep, déjà vu all over again! The question is, what are we going to do about it? Let’s quickly review our options…

One thing we can do is build more generation. We still have lots of coal, which is the bulwark feedstock for a sizeable portion of existing power production. Nah, too dirty, you say. Okay, how about shale gas? The jury may still be out on that one, but early assessments of the pollution potential don’t look so good, and it will definitely take some time (that we don’t have) to sort it all out. Fuel oil? (More foreign oil!) Natural gas? (Hey, can you predict gas futures?) And then there’s the renewables angle. Wind? Solar? Maybe as supplementary resources, but because of intermittency, there still has to be a base load capacity that will fill in the blanks when the wind doesn’t blow and the sun doesn’t shine, which as we all know, occasionally happen. Nuclear? Well, I’ll let you figure out the chances of that happening in the near-term for yourselves.

But let’s just assume for now that we figure out this pricey and exceedingly complex generation debacle, whatever the selection or mix turns out to be. What about those transmission lines that are at capacity and already straining to even handle present-day loads on a hot day? Now that we’ve all had some time to think about it, are we suddenly okay with siting and building new transmission lines – in YOUR backyard? How about in the Adirondack Mountains? Or, perhaps through the Mohave Desert? How about across Martha’s Vineyard? Are those or similar alternatives somehow more palatable now than they were only a few years ago? I’m gonna go out on a limb here and assume that the answer isn’t ‘no’ – but more likely, hell no! Understandably, almost no one wants to volunteer their personal property or put aside their protective instincts concerning the Great Outdoors, merely for the privilege of keeping the lights on, right?

Okay, that’s admittedly a tongue-in-cheek question, but in fact, that’s pretty much what it comes down to when you really think about it on the basis of the cold, hard facts – which by the way, are even colder without power! Obviously, we don’t want to stop the economic recovery, but we also don’t want our lights to dim or go out. So what to do?

Here’s the good news: We already have several effective ways to deal with this problem. Categorically it’s referred to as Energy Efficiency. Regardless of how you choose to engage in energy efficiency or which company you select to carry out your EE strategy, the net result is saving energy. And in the process of doing that we also get the additional benefits of fewer plants required (regardless of the fuel being used); fewer transmission lines needed to transport the power; and diminished negative impact on the environment.

At the end of the day, meeting future demand is OUR collective responsibility, and fortunately, we have measures we can employ that don’t involve breaking ground on new generation plants, building new transmission or polluting our environment. Whether you call it Energy Efficiency, Load Management, Demand Response or something else, as the famous Nike slogan says, let’s Just Do It! – Ed.