Last week’s SMa,r,t article (https://smmirror.com/2024/07/sm-art-column-food-water-and-energy-part-1-of-3/) addressed the city’s seismic risk from an inevitable major earthquake disrupting the three essential elements of survival: food, water, and energy. Specifically, we looked at the water supply risk from the San Andreas fault, which could rupture two large, long-distance canals that provide about 25% of the city’s water needs. An energy outage has a similar risk profile, but the good news is that there is more that can be done to protect the city if we start planning now.
Many power sources
Unlike vulnerable imported water, renewable sources of electrical energy (wind, solar, hydroelectric, tidal, geothermal) are already widely distributed in the Los Angeles Basin, as are non-renewable sources of power (coal, oil, natural gas, nuclear). The closest and largest renewable daytime sources of electricity are the thousands of existing rooftop photovoltaic and hot water solar collectors spread throughout the city. These solar collectors provide reliable daytime electricity regardless of oil, gas, or SCE billing prices. Fossil fuel costs fluctuate widely, as do the city’s water rates, which have doubled in five years, and can be seen every day at the gas station.
While the cost of electricity for homes and businesses does not fluctuate as dramatically as the market-driven fluctuations in gasoline for motor vehicles, fossil fuels inevitably rise because human extraction is depleting them faster than new economic sources can be found. Coal mines are running out, oil can only be found deeper underwater or in hotter deserts (or further into the Arctic) than can be economically extracted, and uranium for atomic energy can only be found in certain limited locations. And, as expected, these rising non-renewable energy costs disproportionately affect the poorest members of society.
Thus, as the world’s population’s energy needs increase, non-renewable energy sources, with their numerous benefits and risks, will first be squeezed, then extracted more efficiently, but eventually run out when the cost of extraction exceeds the value of that energy. There are now indications that peak oil has been reached, after which oil production will decline, but its cost will naturally continue to rise. With the cost per kilowatt of renewable electricity sources falling more rapidly than the cost of gas, oil, and nuclear power, the overwhelming price pressures on fossil fuels will only increase.
There is another big difference between renewable and non-renewable energy: the former are generally “cleaner” than the latter. For example, the US is experiencing a surge in natural gas production through hydraulic fracturing, which has taken a permanent toll on hundreds of polluted local water systems. Offshore oil platforms have exploded (Deepwater Horizon), polluting miles of ocean. Burning coal blankets downwind states with acid rain and mercury, with measurable negative effects on human and animal health. Finally, nuclear power plants explode periodically (Three Mile Island, Chernobyl, Fukushima, etc.) and the storage of spent fuel is essentially a perpetual problem.
Of course, renewable energy is not pollution-free; mining for rare metals needed for solar collectors and batteries disrupts ecosystems and exploits workers, just like other extractive activities, and giant wind turbines kill thousands of migratory birds. But overall, renewable energy sources are cleaner (have fewer secondary effects) than non-renewable sources. Widespread use of clean, renewable power sources would also make homes more earthquake-resistant and extend the lifespan of individual residents (due to reduced pollution).
The variability of most renewable energy sources
But a big difference between renewable and non-renewable energy is that renewable energy is usually subject to interruptions, both scheduled and unscheduled. The sun doesn’t shine all day, the tides go up and down twice a day, the wind doesn’t blow constantly, and the rain needed for hydroelectric power (and food) varies with the seasons. So over millennia, humans have developed hundreds of clever ways to ensure a steady supply from fluctuating sources. We have refrigerators to store food until the next time we go to the grocery store. We build barns and silos to get through the winter when food doesn’t grow. We build reservoirs, dams and aqueducts to stabilize the seasonal fluctuations of water. Finally, we use batteries to later use electricity generated previously from various sources. Some sources are fluctuating (e.g. solar, wind), while others are more stable (e.g. natural gas, oil).
The grid is not ready.
So while renewable energy sources are cheaper and cleaner than fossil fuels, and potentially more stable in the event of an earthquake, the power grid is extremely vulnerable. For example, currently, typical rooftop solar power systems are not designed or required to operate continuously if the SCE does not power the system; for a variety of safety engineering reasons, they automatically shut down as soon as the SCE loses power. And, as mentioned above, the San Andreas fault system crosses the vulnerable power lines that connect us to the vast solar collectors and windmills in the desert to the east and north. So, despite the abundance of clean power sources nearby and far away, they may not be accessible in a seismic emergency.
Finally, even if skyscrapers or other tall buildings could come up with a way to generate enough electricity for local demand from solar collectors or the like, the advantage would be lost as soon as a shading skyscraper was built next to them. Unfortunately, at present, there are no city provisions to protect neighbors’ solar rights, the most important step toward a sustainable and resilient city. Who would pay the high costs of building or retrofitting a solar collector system on their own building if a neighbor could always shade their system with a taller building, making it unproductive? Thus, by not developing solar access provisions, the city is giving up the most direct path to a regular supply of daytime electricity that would last as long as the sun is shining. The power of unrestricted skyscraper shading reduces the incentive for the entire city to switch to local solar power. With our skyscraper construction plans, our city is giving up its best chance to become energy self-sufficient and able to withstand the next inevitable earthquake.
Next week’s article will discuss other challenges the city faces on its path to energy independence and survival.
Mario Fonda Bonardi AIA
Smart Santa Monica Architects for a Responsible Tomorrow
Thayne Roberts, Architect, Mario Fonda Bonaldi AIA, Robert H. Taylor AIA, Architect, Dan Jansenson, Architect, Building and Fire Safety Committee, Samuel Tolkin Architects, Planning Commissioner, Michael Jolly, AIR-CRE Marie Standing; Jack Hillebrand AIA
For previous articles, visit www.santamonicaarch.wordpress.com/writing
