GE's Smart Grid aims to cut home energy consumption to zero, promote world peace

Judging by the company's recent infatuation with energy-efficient LED lighting solutions, we're not at all surprised to see General Electric launching a daunting initiative that aims to cut homeowner energy consumption to zero by 2015. The so-called 'Smart Grid' is part of the Net Zero Home Project, which combines solar and wind energy (for on-site power generation) along with specialized appliances that can "communicate with utilities to participate in utility-run demand-response programs." In other words, these intelligent devices can turn themselves down or off when no one's around in order to shave peak-time consumption, and the in-your-face nature of always knowing exactly how much juice you're wasting should also encourage conservation. Of course, we have all ideas that a Smart Grid-certified home will run you quite a bit more than you're willing to pay, but hey, Ma Earth deserves it -- doesn't she?

[Via CNET]

[dlewis @ Jul 15th 2009 9:55AM]

Really ZERO?

What's coming out of the chimney then? lol

This will never happen, and the sooner the dumb liberals realize that the better off we will ALL be.

It does no good for the US to cause the people financial harm to do this, when china and india (The 2 largest polluters) do nothing except pollute more.

[Greg @ Jul 15th 2009 10:01AM]

Energy CONSUMPTION, not emissions.

[James B. @ Jul 15th 2009 10:07AM]

He's talking about what's burning in the fireplace, not exactly what's coming out of the chimney.

They're burning fuel (energy consumption).

[Conor @ Jul 15th 2009 10:07AM]

The inaction of others is no reason for inaction on your part.
As a European, it always amazes me to see the reactions of Americans on this. Quite alot still tend to see it as a Liberal thing. We all have to do our bit. GE deserve some praise for this.
Now the carmakers need to get emissions down quite a bit.

[holto @ Jul 15th 2009 3:16PM]

you're right. the chinese do completely ignore the climate crisis. we should too.

we should also revoke your right to protest, criticize your gov't, take away your right to fair trial, free speech, bear arms, etc.

that's the most 8th grade moronic comment i've seen in a bit.

the US became great by leading the way not falling in with the lot. if we're gonna talk the talk we need to walk the walk.

i was blessed with a daughter a year ago this week. i'd love for her to have clean air to breathe and still be able to see a polar bear here and there. oh yeah, and not be under water.

and what part of this article says it will do the american people harm? i would imagine the part about it being 2015 before it's viable would also contribute to the tech being cheaper as well. i would also thing that GE is simply saying people will have the option of a zero footprint home by that year based on technologies they are working on.

[mitt @ Jul 15th 2009 10:12AM]

This comment is prime evidence for putting lifeguards on the gene pool

[Eyhk @ Jul 15th 2009 10:13AM]

Of course, dlewis, why should we do good when everybody else isn't? It's completely absurd, I don't know where people get these ideas.

[Kerokeropi @ Jul 15th 2009 10:22AM]

as

[-pd- @ Jul 15th 2009 10:22AM]

We all have to do our little bit - and you (Conor) cite Americans as having a problem? How about China and Russia?
Of course, they've already told you to piss off, and rightly so.

The fascist hypocrisy is amazing...criticize George Bush for being in bed with mega corps and big oil, but it's perfectly kosher for GE, GM, unions, Time-Warner, Google and the whole damn financial sector to sleep with Obama? Americans had better get a grip and understand what is really happening here - this administration's deals with these corporations is going to affect every single life in this country far beyond a couple seasons of high gas prices ever did.

This IS NOT about climate change. This IS about control. Can I have six more Czars and an Amen?

[AutumnBringer @ Jul 15th 2009 11:41AM]

The only energy consumed by what you see coming out of that chimney is the energy the artist spent drawing it into place. It's an illustration, not a precise schematic they will base all their plans on.

[Loonie @ Jul 15th 2009 11:52AM]

This is mere speculation, but I'm guessing you're not a science major.

[Magallanes @ Jul 15th 2009 9:55AM]

Awesome picture.

The question is not to be self sufficient but is the cost to achieve it.
You knows, a electric car cost from x3 to x10 the price of a regular one, a solar panel project usually is around a 4 digit (or higher), and wind projects are useless for most places.

[Sevket Duran @ Jul 15th 2009 10:12AM]

That's why it is called "Net Zero Home Project". The net consumption "inside" home will be zero. But you will spend lots of energy to build solar panels, energy efficient & smart appliances and to dump the old appliances. But those contribute to "industrial energy consumption". We can even build these stuff in China and claim that USA does not consume any energy.

[Magallanes @ Jul 15th 2009 10:24AM]

Equal to The Simpsons - Indian Outsourcing ?

[Nastro @ Jul 15th 2009 10:28AM]

Hey mitt...You made an absurd statement now prove it!!!


oh hey lookie here!!!!


“Spain’s experience (cited by President Obama as a model) reveals with high confidence, by two different methods, that the U.S. should expect a loss of at least 2.2 jobs on average, or about 9 jobs lost for every 4 created, to which we have to add those jobs that non-subsidized investments with the same resources would have created,” wrote Calzada in his report: Study of the Effects on Employment of Public Aid to Renewable Energy Sources.


http://www.juandemariana.org/pdf/090327-employment-public-aid-renewable.pdf

[Erb @ Jul 15th 2009 10:53AM]

I've always wanted swimming windmills!

[Mel @ Jul 15th 2009 1:07PM]

you are so right, what is the cost to achieve this? and the study you are citing shows a very interesting perspective on this. And since we are in america and the issue is a bit more complex it will be quite entertaining to boring to have all the politically polarized come out and pound their chest about their position. But unless you are really able to make an apple to apple comparison of energy cost from different sources, all subsidized by public money in their own way, all these arguments are futile. But this proposal is about monitoring and managing use of energy, not energy generation. Since it costs money to generate energy either way it might be best to embrace this initiative, get involved and make sure that it will not infringe on our daily lives and our privacy. At the end of the day everyone can make their own decision on implementing this based on return of investment and other factors.

[JK1150 @ Jul 15th 2009 10:03AM]

netzero is coming back?

[Lonecow @ Jul 15th 2009 10:04AM]

Reminds me of Majora's Mask.

[Platinum_Skeet @ Jul 15th 2009 10:19AM]

I was thinking google chrome for a second...

[Ed H @ Jul 15th 2009 10:05AM]

the point of this is to create a sustainable model. Once that model catches on and production increases and more people implement the plan, the cost will go down, as does any technology. Once the technology has become less expensive, and these industrializing countries, such as India and China , become wealthier, the technology can be implemented by the rest of the world. This is the plan at least, if we can do that there will be nothing coming out of the chimney, as all heating systems will be electric based.

[TechNewb @ Jul 15th 2009 10:05AM]

I'll take it!

[ilikespie @ Jul 15th 2009 10:06AM]

The real solution is to switch to nuclear energy, but people wont go that path (think chernobyl ), though nuclear can be done safely...its the people who build their homes near plants that complain (someone shoot these people)

(try weighing CO2 emissions vs energy consumption, then weigh nuclear waste vs energy consumption, there is a surprising difference)

[Ed H @ Jul 15th 2009 10:09AM]

Your theory is flawed though. If we produce a very low level of CO2 and increase the amount of green plant life on the planet, the CO2 will be converted into O2, and thus negated. If we produce nuclear waste forever, it just sits and piles up and we have the landfill problem of the late 1980's all over again, only worse.

Go clean or go home.

Nuclear is NOT clean.

[coolblue @ Jul 15th 2009 10:23AM]

@Ed H

However currently Nuclear is probably the cleanest per KW of any of the options we currently have. Wind, solar and hydro are all flawed when scaled up. For the UK to power itself through wind it would need to cover practically the entire countryside with turbines which are also extremely noisy. I do not call that particularly green. We certainly need to cut down on our consumption by a massive amount but even then the so called clean tech will not be able to produce enough power.

[kjb434 @ Jul 15th 2009 10:28AM]

Ed H,

You clearly don't know what you are talking about.

98% of the nuclear waste generated in the US could be recycled, but Jimmy Carter and environmental movement in the 70s banned RECYCLING of nuclear rods that have been used. Why, because it'll purposely generate more waste and make nuclear energy look bad.

France gets 75% of there power from nuclear energy. They recycle their waste. Their nuclear waste containment building is about 14,000sqft or about the size of a small convenience store. Our waste containment center would have to be about the size of a Wal-Mart if we recycled and had about 75% of the country using nuclear energy.

[coolblue @ Jul 15th 2009 10:54AM]

@Ed H,

And this is worse than covering an entire country in wind turbines and all the damage to the ecosystem that this would cause, not to mention the amount of energy and resources used to build that many turbines? Is is preferable to covering enormous amounts of land with solar panels and the damage this would also do to the ecosystem? Is it preferable to hydro electric which creates no end of problems for ecosystems and distribution of water? I am not saying that Nuclear is clean or even ideal, however our other options are next to useless. I have no doubt that in the future we will have new super solar panels which can produce the same amount of energy as a power plant for the same area covered but we are currently nowhere near that. Solar can supplement power stations and help reduce the number we need but it is currently in no state to replace them.

[GeekPI @ Jul 15th 2009 12:45PM]

The simplest and easiest solution is conservation tied with efficiency upgrades and onsite power generation. These are measure you can take now, have a solid personal financial gain and are not that difficult inplement. Many of them you can do yourself.

I'm working to make both my home and workplace to be net zero by the end of next year. So far, compared to two years ago, I've cut the energy consumption of both by 60% - which has dramatically decreased the utility bills, while increasing comfort and value of both. Each upgrade has a solid return on investment, and in total saves enough energy to power a typical residential block (now up to about 250 kWh daily saved).

Why we need to focus on reducing energy consumption of buildings & what to focus on to get the best return on investment:
http://geekpi.com/?p=370

What I'm doing to both save money, and energy:
http://geekpi.com/?p=479
http://www.jbdg.com/sustain.html

If you can simultaneously save money, increase property value and have the added benefit of reducing your impact on the environment, why not?

[Ken @ Jul 15th 2009 10:09AM]

Personally I would like to know where and when my appliances are using electricity.

I think the smart grid is a great idea. If this would encourage non peak use at cheaper rates then i think it is a benefit for the informed consumer.

I know from my own experience that the fuel economy monitor in my vehicle has impacted my driving habits. Having a monitor on electric usage will probably do the same.

[Photo Phil @ Jul 15th 2009 12:20PM]

Ken, while this device does not tell when, or what time of day your appliances use energy it does monitor how much energy they are using. It's called the P3 Kill A Watt Electricity Load Meter and Monitor, $20 on the web. It is a neat device, amazing what power every day items use/waste. I think there are other meters with more features, but this one is a reasonable price.

[Frank @ Jul 15th 2009 10:09AM]

Yeah, when hackers get in and shut everything down we will be usinh 0 electricity.

[Philip @ Jul 15th 2009 10:09AM]

ah the power nazi.. sure u can have the 8 cents a kilowatt price as long as you keep your AC at 78F

but if you turn your AC to 77F you now have to pay 23 cents a kilowatt

i am fully AGINSED the smart grid.. instead i support ISOLATED grids or personnel grids..

[kjb434 @ Jul 15th 2009 10:29AM]

That's why I'm against this. If I want my AC running at 72, I should be allowed to do that. I don't want our current Fascist President (PBO) controlling my life.

[polobunny @ Jul 15th 2009 10:37AM]

I am AGINSED butchering of a language. Please use it properly or don't use it at all.

[Philip @ Jul 15th 2009 10:45AM]

@ polobunny FF doesn't have it underlined so go fuck off u d-bag grammar nazi

[polobunny @ Jul 15th 2009 12:34PM]

Must be broken (might have manually added it to the dictionary yourself), because it's clearly underlined here.
Not that you should need any software to help you type properly the word "against".

I'm not exactly a grammar Nazi, but there's quite the difference between the small typographical error and not knowing how to write a word at all. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. Word probably exists in your dialect...

[Nastro @ Jul 15th 2009 10:11AM]

Hey libtards NBC, MSNBC, and CNBC are in business with Obama group via GE lobbyists & bailouts to concoct this utter BS you call Green Energy.

Wanna know how you are dealing with a Liberal Idiot? When they say that Obama or Big Govt or whatever will "CREATE GREEN ENERGY".

Nuff Said :)


Any EE grads around who are willing to explain to the art degree holders what utter crock the green movement is feeding the embolden ignorant masses?

[mitt @ Jul 15th 2009 10:22AM]

what does it matter to you? green energy is going to be one of the biggest growth industries for the next 20 years. normally people like you have no problem selling utter rubbish to people for a profit. Whats different this time?

[Magallanes @ Jul 15th 2009 10:22AM]

Republican troll?

at least is way better that FOX News = Global warming is a myth.

Anyways, doing nothing IS NOT A SOLUTION.

[kjb434 @ Jul 15th 2009 10:32AM]

Prove to me human induced global warming or now it is called climate change exist. If you do that, I'll be the biggest supporter of this crap.

The problem is that no scientist can prove it and the more they look the more it appears we have no control over it. It's controlled by a little thing called the sun. And it's influenced more by things like Volcanoes and colliding meteors.

[something clever @ Jul 15th 2009 10:34AM]

Man made global warming IS a myth.

All the scary models from a decade or so ago saying we'd be baking by now have been WRONG. The 'hockey stick' was proven to be a fraud. We've been in a cooling cycle for 8+ years. Ask yourself why they've changed the line from "Global Warming" to climate change?

Even the father of climate science has come out and said man made global warming is bull. So has the founder of the weather channel. And about 30,000 other scientists. The tide is turning against 'Man is changing the climate' as more evidence is coming in.

MMGW is a tool for environmental activists and crooked businesses to make money and gain power by scaring people with bad science.

Tip for the people who are still trying to push MMGW here: The time is coming to hop off that train. In a couple years you will taken as seriously as those who predicted another ice age in the 1970's. You're on the losing side of history - you just don't know it yet because you either aren't getting all the information, or you refuse to see it.

[Philip @ Jul 15th 2009 10:42AM]

@kjb434 actually human influence DOSE have a big impact on the earth
t what extent NOONE KNOWS but a fact is certain al gore if a moron and the hippies are too...

we should make a better effort to conserve and not be so destructive.. "love canal" anyone?

hell in the 1800's and early 1900's London was very very dark and foggy because of all the coal that ppl were burning to heat there homes.. and in the 1910's London banned coal fireplaces now its not so bad so we DO have an effect on stuff

and if we can eliminate our impact as much as possible then we CAN find out what the hell is really going on...

btw one last statement i HATE FOX NEWS BUT i enjoy Glenn Beck..

[Nastro @ Jul 15th 2009 10:13AM]

It failed/failing in europe :)


“Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.”

[Aaron @ Jul 15th 2009 10:14AM]

I don't get how consumption can be cut to ZERO. I think I'm missing something.

[Nastro @ Jul 15th 2009 10:22AM]

Logic and Rational thinking have no place in Liberal Ideology.....Just drink your cup of hope and change ok!!

[KK @ Jul 15th 2009 10:31AM]

I have the same problem. If energy consumption is zero, that means no energy is being used, at all, ever, from any source. Doesn't matter if it's green energy, grid tied or not, if the energy consumption target is zero, everything that uses energy would have to be switched off.

Doesn't eating food count as energy consumption? I'd rather not live in that home...

[GeekPI @ Jul 15th 2009 12:28PM]

The key word is *net* zero. Depending on the time of day and year, on-site systems (wind, solar, co-gen) will generate energy and feed the excess back into the grid. At other times, when demand is greater than on-site supply, the building would consume energy from the grid.

When energy consumption and production at the building's power meter are added up over the whole of the year, the the total number should be zero.

[dlewis @ Jul 15th 2009 10:23AM]

@Eyhk

Why should I waste my hard earned money on something that will make ZERO difference because the other 2 big polluters decided to do nothing?

Why should I also serve to fight and protect you people when you don't give damn?

@holto

I'm guessing your one of those liberals I'm talking about there with your little polar bear thing there.

You should open your eyes and ears, and don't believe everything you hear on MSNBC.

Your so pissed because your daughter isn't going to see the polar bears... Oh so sad... maybe go talk to china and india, instead of bitching on there.

One country with this "problem" can not make a difference, no matter how big that country is.

[kjb434 @ Jul 15th 2009 10:34AM]

Update on Polar Bears,

Canada and much of the rest of the world that has polar bears are increasing the hunting because the populations are getting to large.

Oh no, I can't say that. It would mean Al Gore is a liar. Of course he is. He's in this Global Warming hoax to make tons of money.

[polobunny @ Jul 15th 2009 10:47AM]

And guess what; if everybody had the same train of thought as you, nothing would ever change!
One country is better than zero. As two is better than one and so on. Doesn't take lot of scholarship to understand that.

Plus, if you're only doing something good to get recognition, you're stepping at a pretty low level. What happened to doing something good because it just felt right to you? Don't you strive for something better than what you currently have? Don't you wish to improve as a being?
While we're there, what's the point of your life? Live through it on our wonderful planet and leave it fscked for others?


Oh the wonderful joy of wishful thinking. But hey, one guy trying to put some sense into others is better than zero...