Energy Usage Data: Make it Public, I Mean Really Public

About a month ago, the blog ecopolitology.org published a post that emphasized the need to democratize energy usage. I think their use of “democratize” is pretty interesting, as I wonder how they would characterize the current state energy information. Fascist? Oligarchic? Meritocratic? Nevertheless, I think the ideas are solid, and the need for smart meters in American homes and businesses is clear.

One point that I haven’t seen touched on anywhere on the Internet or in the press is the potential to make every building’s energy consumption public. Every building that has an electricity meter, gas meter, or even water meter, should have its consumption data be made available on the Internet. Imagine being able to find out what the energy usage was in a house you are considering buying, or an apartment you might move into. Or energy auditors being able to go door-to-door to show people real data on how much energy they can save. Europe has moved in this direction with a slightly different application than what I am proposing, where buildings must be issued energy performance certificates similar to the Energy Star scale of energy consumption. See the Wikipedia article about it. The certificates must be issued when a building is constructed, sold or rented. Just think of the market impact such a standard would have in the US.

How is this idea different from Google Power Meter?
The Google Power Meter (GPM) is an easy and cost-effective solution to for monitoring the building’s main electric meter and showing occupant exactly how much energy is being used, as it is being used. The difference from what I propose is that this information remains private, except perhaps for Google’s ubiquitous eyes. The GPM relies on either the utility companies footing the bill to install the necessary metering equipment, or the occupant purchasing it him/herself, which for the US-compatible The Energy Detective is about $200 for an entry-level system without installation. Furthermore, this is only for electricity (for now), and it captures data that the electricity company already collects and has tucked away in their own databases. Finally, for the GPM to be successful and impactful, it relies on a couple of key factors: a) electricity being expensive enough or peak demand charges to be steep enough to make it worth people modifying their behavior; b) people performing load isolation studies or to determine exactly how much each appliance, lamp, etc. makes up the house’s total load (imagine turning off other devices and then plugging in your stereo as you watch the meter); and, c) people actually changing their habits (turning lights off, unplugging vampire loads). Some of these are more likely than others, but in general you will probably only capture a small portion of the population that actually cares about how much electricity they use. While Google is probably right that this equipment could shave 15-20% off of the nation’s energy consumption if deployed in every home, there is still a lot more conserving that needs to be done. Appliances and lights are just part of issue. Even though an air conditioner may be monitored by the GPM, the meter won’t be able to tell you that, for example, your condenser unit is 15 years old and an energy hog. It will only tell you how much it consumes when it’s on, and encourage people to tweak their thermostats to reduce the relative energy consumption. We also need to encourage more efficient heating and cooling equipment and envelope improvements (insulation, caulking, weatherstripping). WE NEED ENERGY AUDITORS in addition to the GPM, and making energy data public is a great way to actually get energy auditors into American homes.

Benefits of Public Energy Information
1) With a full, public set of energy consumption data, we can quickly identify which buildings are the worst performers. This can kick the energy auditing business into high gear, and perhaps create a new type of energy service company that is targeted towards homes and small buildings.
2) Energy auditors would be able to identify likely prospects by determining energy intensity and comparing it to local and national averages. This would allow energy auditors to do targeted outside sales of those homes and buildings that need it most, instead of waiting for customers to call them or to market with the shotgun approach. Many homeowners probably think that they don’t need an energy audit, or that it’s not worth the money. Having the data in the hand of an expert can build the case for it.
3) Prospective buyers and renters can peruse data for specific properties to anticipate what utility costs would be. This provides a direct incentive for sellers and landlords to make sure their properties are as efficient as can be.
4) This will overcome the inertia in even the most proactive of us, in the same way the Power Meter does, by turning passive information into active information. This allows the information/issue/problem to come to us, whether it’s a device on the wall or an energy efficiency solicitation on the phone or at our door.

Privacy
Libertarians will surely have a field day with this one, as will many centrist individuals as well. But I beg to ask to the question: why is it so important that this information be kept private? What tenet of consumer privacy does making public the amount of gas and electricity used in a particular month violate? For many people, it might just be at odds with their fundamental beliefs in privacy, or perhaps they fear the potential to be singled out for shame or ridicule. As it were, we do something similar with voting records. The lists of those who voted in previous elections (but not who they voted for) are publicly available, and as far as I’ve seen it has not resulted in non-voters being ridiculed. Why should this be any different?
To assuage these concerns, maybe there can be an “opt out” option for homeowners. This would be more effective than a program that people have to opt into. I believe that non-owner-occupied residences and apartment buildings should not be allowed to opt out, nor should commercial buildings.

Outlook
I can venture to say that the utility companies, in Pennsylvania at least, have a vested interest in suppressing any programs that aims to reduce energy consumption on any large scale. However, I think the green economy and job creation opportunities from this idea are very real, so maybe there is sliver of a chance of this happening. It certainly would be a heck of a lot cheaper than installing 120 million Google Power Meters, and might have more impact.

I plan on attending a Leadership Pittsburgh event about Green Economy featuring the Executive Chairman of EQT Corporation so I can put him on this spot about this issue.