One of the biggest issues of the modern day is, without a doubt, energy. We are obsessed with how to use less and generate more of it, or at least take what we have and use it more efficiently. The Obama Administration has noticed this (of course), and expanded the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act to provide for the development of new electric grid technology, which holds the key to advanced energy management and pecuniary savings. Because it is such a large undertaking, the project also promises job creation and energy independence. But this sounds too good to be true, so what's the catch?
The downside to a giant grid is lack of security. The grid is obviously an interconnected web of networks that would be extremely vulnerable to attack from hackers and worms in the system, and because it would be such a central part of how the country runs itself, any attack could result in a massive loss of electrical services. Attack isn't the only downside to a large grid; this kind of project has never been done on such a large scale, and there are definitely unforeseen problems in putting so much energy into one place.
Even if all these disadvantages are disregarded for a moment, there is still the problem of how to run the grid itself. With so many different utilities, providers, and consumers scattered across it, the need for a consistent operating system is imperative. Which system should be used? Experts are still working on that one, and it's not as easy as it sounds. Even if a framework was agreed upon, it would almost immediately have to be updated because of the rapid pace at which technology in general changes. The grid would need to evolve itself constantly to keep pace with demand.
In order for this project to be worked out, the general public of consumers must be educated about what this change could mean for themselves. Many times we will just see the good of a situation and blind ourselves to the bad. "Oh, better energy management? Sign us up!" we might be tempted to say, but the truth is that this issue is about more than reducing our carbon footprint. We might end up paying more (in dollars) for the giant energy grid, but because no one wants to pay more for something they already have, the majority of people might not even bother to switch. And that's not even considering the omnipresent issue of a lack of a generalized framework and cybersecurity network in place yet.
Do you know how much information your energy provider has about you? The answer is a lot. Any hacker or worm good enough to crack into the (currently) weak security system in an energy grid could access your information easily and quickly, and because energy companies are extremely wary of sending out any information about security attacks, you might not even know until it's too late.
This is a rather serious post this week about the dangers of technology, but it's here to highlight the need to understand all sides of an issue before we commit to something on a grand scale. Lesson of the day: do your research.
The downside to a giant grid is lack of security. The grid is obviously an interconnected web of networks that would be extremely vulnerable to attack from hackers and worms in the system, and because it would be such a central part of how the country runs itself, any attack could result in a massive loss of electrical services. Attack isn't the only downside to a large grid; this kind of project has never been done on such a large scale, and there are definitely unforeseen problems in putting so much energy into one place.
Even if all these disadvantages are disregarded for a moment, there is still the problem of how to run the grid itself. With so many different utilities, providers, and consumers scattered across it, the need for a consistent operating system is imperative. Which system should be used? Experts are still working on that one, and it's not as easy as it sounds. Even if a framework was agreed upon, it would almost immediately have to be updated because of the rapid pace at which technology in general changes. The grid would need to evolve itself constantly to keep pace with demand.
In order for this project to be worked out, the general public of consumers must be educated about what this change could mean for themselves. Many times we will just see the good of a situation and blind ourselves to the bad. "Oh, better energy management? Sign us up!" we might be tempted to say, but the truth is that this issue is about more than reducing our carbon footprint. We might end up paying more (in dollars) for the giant energy grid, but because no one wants to pay more for something they already have, the majority of people might not even bother to switch. And that's not even considering the omnipresent issue of a lack of a generalized framework and cybersecurity network in place yet.
Do you know how much information your energy provider has about you? The answer is a lot. Any hacker or worm good enough to crack into the (currently) weak security system in an energy grid could access your information easily and quickly, and because energy companies are extremely wary of sending out any information about security attacks, you might not even know until it's too late.
This is a rather serious post this week about the dangers of technology, but it's here to highlight the need to understand all sides of an issue before we commit to something on a grand scale. Lesson of the day: do your research.