Smart Energy Communities

Sustainable Energy Lecture: Smart Energy Communities

Speaker: Brent Gilmour, Executive Director of QUEST (Quality Urban Energy Systems of Tomorrow)

Date: October 22, 2013

About the Speaker: 

Brent Gilmour has a background in planning, including specialized knowledge in the areas of integrated community energy, transportation and land-use planning, downtown revitalization, and public infrastructure investment. Mr. Gilmour has served as Vice President of Urban Solutions at the Canadian Urban Institute (CUI), Project Manager in charge of Education and Research at the Canadian Urban Institute, and Strategic Coordinator responsible for the establishment of the University of Toronto’s Sustainability Office (USO).  In addition to his leadership role at QUEST, Brent has remained active in the industry and with community engagement. He has served on several boards, including EcoSpark (formerly Citizens’ Environment Watch) where he is past chair and is the recent outgoing chair of Recent Graduates for Trinity College at the University of Toronto.

Brent holds a Master’s of Science in Planning from the University of Toronto, a Bachelor of Arts (Honours) from the University of Toronto and is an alumnus of Massey College.

About the Sustainable Energy Lecture Series: 

This presentation is part of an ongoing series of seminars on aspects of sustainable energy which are organized by the Carleton Research Unit in Innovation, Science and Environment (CRUISE) and the Carleton Sustainable Energy Research Centre (CSERC). The seminar series was established in 2010, and since then has covered diverse topics ranging from examinations of the sustainability of nuclear power to Aboriginal energy projects in Canada and their ability to catalyze action on climate change.

Smart Energy Communities

As the population of cities around the world continues to grow, the demand for smart energy solutions to handle this growth increases. In Canada, 60% of our greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions originate from communities. In addition, this movement toward cities has generated an infrastructure investment deficit that FCM estimates to be about $172 billion.

To address the challenges of urban growth, GHG emissions, and infrastructure investment deficit, it is important to curb the energy loss occurring in our present system. For example, this startling energy loss falls into three categories:

Consumption/end use – 5%

Production/distribution -25%

Generation/transmission – 70%.

Cheap and readily available energy to this point has resulted in a lack of consciousness of the value of energy resources. This indifference will have to change because of the pressures resulting from urban migration, increased immigration, potential for future fuel scarcity and climate change.

Smart Energy Communities (SECs) implement integrated community energy solutions by linking energy across land-use, buildings, transportation, water, waste management and related infrastructure.  SECs are characterized by improved conservation, better reliability and resiliency, cuts in energy costs, and reduced GHG emissions.

Among the cited examples of smart energy communities were:

Summerside, PEI – Excess power generated at night by a municipally-owned wind farm is saved in thermal storage by heating water or air to provide daytime radiant heat.

Vancouver, B.C. – Heat emitted by sewage is captured at the False Creek Energy Center where sewage is filtered, processed through a heat pump, and recirculated to heat a nearby neighbourhood. This is a good example of the efficiency of scale of shared infrastructure.

Guelph, ON – The Community Energy Initiative commits the City of Guelph to an extensive program encouraging maximum efficiency, recycling of heat generated in industrial processes, increased use of renewables, and increased co-ordination of electricity and gas networks to avoid duplication.

Bella Coola, BC – The run-of-river hydro power is optimized by a hydrogen energy system (electrolyser and fuel cell) to reduce diesel generation as the main power source for the community.

Hamilton, ON – Wastewater gas (methane) from the sewage treatment plant is injected into the natural gas distribution system.

Edmonton, AB – A community featuring 100% energy sustainability, carbon-neutral with a reduced ecological footprint.

Toronto, ON- Downtown buildings cooled by deep lake intake system from Lake Ontario.

Mr. Gilmour emphasized the promising opportunity available to municipalities to integrate energy supply and end-use activities into a municipal energy network amongst buildings, transportation and industry.

Summary of the Discussion:

Questions surrounding energy loss during generation and transmission were raised. The types of power and transmission configuration are significant factors, whether a large generator at a location distant from the municipality, or distributed generation within the community. While this is a valid concern, appropriate location of facilities could reduce energy losses. Public education and buy-in in relocating facilities is important.

Attendees commented that the technology exists to curb energy loss and create smart communities but wondered at what point we will realize that robust policy measures will be required to make this happen. Mr. Gilmour commented that “culture trumps strategy”, that is, that traditional ways of doing energy within a municipality always tend to be preferred over novel arrangements. Various factors could assist the process: regulatory reform, public education, economic reform, and integration of land use into traditional urban planning.

Questions were raised about how smart energy communities could be encouraged. Mr. Gilmour noted that this does not have to be a rigid process, and may be more successful if an approach is taken which is flexible, incremental and based on evolutionary growth.

The feasibility of net-zero communities was raised, with the point being made that a customized approach was necessary because individual community’s energy profiles could vary for several reasons.

The need for energy storage as a key component of an integrated energy network was raised. Problems with battery storage were cited, but hydrogen fuel cells may offer an exciting alternative to conventional storage practices.

Attendees asked whether government policy and regulation or market forces are the primary drivers of a move toward smart communities. There is considerable room for government to act at the federal, provincial, and municipal levels, for example, to establish standards for conservation and efficiency. For municipalities, energy efficiency and conservation make economic sense. Some institutional barriers such as the lack of communication between planners and provincial officials were discussed. Establishing meaningful relationships is a key factor, particularly in reaching principal actors in complex urban communities.

In response to a question about whether utilities and access to resources should determine community location, Mr. Gilmour observed that water and energy are symbiotic, and should be managed as such in order to achieve efficient and clean systems. Costs are not the only factor in creating smart energy communities, he noted. Quality of life, emissions, and flexibility of energy frameworks may be equally significant.

Mr. Gilmour concluded the session by noting the strengths of QUEST as a diverse and extended network involved in multiple projects.  He expressed concern about the fusion of the providers of energy services in municipalities and utilities to create monopolies.

Click here to view Mr. Gilmour’s presentation.

Written by Bastien Schrems and Ian Seabrook

Students in Masters of Sustainable Energy Policy