Desired website: Google Environment

[jducoeur]

I was thinking this morning about my next car. I'm hoping that my good old Camry gives me a few more years, mostly because I have a specific car I want, that isn't available yet: an optional-plug-in Prius. That is, exactly the current Prius, but with a plug in *addition* to the gas engine, so that I can get the range of the gas engine when I need it, but can run off the plug for short-range commuting. (Yes, I know that you can retrofit this onto the car, but I generally feel more secure when it's built in from the factory. Toyota is working on it, but it sounds like it'll be a couple of years before it's ready for prime time.)

But that led me to wonder: how sure am I about the relative merits about the electric vs. gas? I mean, yes, there are oft-cited statistics like "120 MPG equivalent" when you plug the car in -- but surely that's a gross oversimplification. From an *environmental* perspective (I'm not talking about cost here), there are lots of confounding factors that have to be taken into account. For example, what is my electricity mainly based on? Wind vs. coal makes a dramatic difference in the environmental impact of my electricity, and finding out the actual percentages isn't simple. (Yes, I can tell the power company "I want green electricity", but that really is just influencing the mix, rather than giving me entirely greener-based power.)

Moreover, there's another oft-cited statistic, that half of all electricity is lost in transmission. I *assume* that the amount of loss is proportional to where I am, though -- that there's a big difference if I'm 1000 yards from the power plant, as opposed to ten miles away. (Physics types should please tell me if that assumption is incorrect.) But I haven't the slightest clue how long the wires are between me and the nearest power plant, much less how the other plants in the grid factor into that. Figuring out how much electricity is being lost getting to *me* is quite difficult even to approximate realistically, and I would expect that to make a significant difference in the actual environmental footprint of this theoretical plug-in car.

So I find myself wishing for a website that would allow me to give the location of my house, and which would produce a *realistic* estimate of what my electricity looks like environmentally. I have no idea what the business case for such a website would be (and heaven knows, I don't expect it to be simple to write), but with awareness of environmental issues on the rise it seems like it ought to have a market. If Google wants a next project for their "organize all the information in the world" push, that might be a worthwhile thing for them to tackle...

Comments

[talvinamarich.livejournal.com]

This is sufficiently remote in time and sufficiently obscure to share, now.

One of my close friends is an information security specialist. That's corporate-speak for "professional hacker", of course.

A few years back, I was chatting with him over IM and he was kvetching about the latest client he had been assigned to. He very carefully did not name the client, nor did he give any particular clue as to where they are geographically.

Put simply, he had been contracted to do an assessment on the control systems for a hydroelectric dam. At first, he thought he would have to travel to the site. To his horror, he learned that this would be a remote job. Done from his couch, like so many others.

"Why is this system connected to the Internet?"

"Oh, but everything is connected to the Net these days!"

"Yes, but...why is THIS system connected to the Internet?"

"But everything is connected to the Internet!"

So he was sitting there trying to write a polished, professional, detailed report that boiled down to, "WHY do you have the computers running a hydroelectric dam connected to the INTERNET? WHY?!"

I have never pressured him in any way to tell me whose dam it is. Partly because I know he would sooner take that info to his grave, but mostly because I am afraid he would say something like "TVA", and that would mean they are ALL that way and they are all STILL that way!

[umbran.livejournal.com]

If this was surprising, then he didn't understand the system in full, because there's a legitimate answer.

The systems at the dam must communicate with the systems controlling the rest of the power grid. They *cannot* successfully operate independently - there are things that can happen out in the rest of the grid that can damage the generators - power backwash is a stone bitch.

So, you're either using the internet, or you are maintaining an entirely separate network infrastructure across the entire country.

[talvinamarich.livejournal.com]

Which has now been compromised by foreign governments.

"Separate network infrastructure" sounds more and more attractive.

[umbran.livejournal.com]

Until you look at the price tag. And how Titanic-like a separate infrastructure would be.

No, it is better to lean how to secure and adapt, rather than try to armor plate.

[jducoeur]

I dunno -- I rather suspect that umbran is right here. The government's record on managing gigantic organizational projects is awfully weak. (Back when I was at Intermetrics in the early 90s, one of our largest contracts was doing IV&V on the rebuild of the air traffic control systems -- that turned out to be an unholy disaster, I gather.) The Internet succeeded, I suspect, in large part precisely because it was developed in a large decentralized way.

Could the government build a whole separate infrastructure? Yes. Could it build something that was as robust as the Internet, and more secure? Maybe, but I'm honestly a bit skeptical. I mean, it *is* possible to use the Internet reasonably securely -- it just requires a lot of knowledge, care and discipline. If they don't have that discipline, I'm dubious that any solution is going to be genuinely secure...

[cvirtue.livejournal.com]

Seen this?

"The US government has admitted the nation's power grid is vulnerable to cyber attack, following reports it has been infiltrated by foreign spies."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7990997.stm

[talvinamarich.livejournal.com]

Yep.

*sighs*

We never learn.