Transcript Our 50 States: [Name of Your State]

Conference on
Green Building, The Economy,
and Public Policy
Berkeley, California
December 2, 2009
Arthur H. Rosenfeld, Commissioner
California Energy Commission
(916) 654-4930
[email protected]
Does Anyone See A Problem With This
Picture?
2
California
10th Largest World Economy
$1.5 Trillion (2004-ppp)
Energy Consumption
~295,000 GWh (2006)
Peak Demand
~64,000 MW (2006)
Population-35 million; growth rate-1.5%/year,
Electricity growth for last decade 1.6%/yr
3
U.S. mid-range abatement curve – 2030
Cost
Real 2005 dollars per ton CO2e
90
Industri
al
process
improve
-ments
Commercial
buildings –
Combined
heat and
power
Fuel economy
packages – Light
trucks
60
Residentia
l
electronic
s
Residenti
al
buildings
– Lighting
30
Afforestati
on of
cropland
Coal power plants–
CCS rebuilds with
EOR
Residenti
Coal mining
Active forest
al
Distribut
– Methane
buildings management
ed
mgmt
– Shell
solar PV
retrofits
CommercialNuclea
Residentia
buildings – r newl water
Control
build
heaters
systems
Commerci
al
buildings –
HVAC
equipment
efficiency
Residentia
l buildings
– HVAC
equipment
efficiency
Abatement
cost
<$50/ton
Solar
CSP
0
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
-60
-90
-230
-220
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2.0
2.2
Onshore wind
–
Low
penetration
-30
-120
1.0
Commercial
electronics
Industry
–
Combine
d
heat and
Cellulosic
power
Manufacturin
biofuels
Existing
g – HFCs
power plant
mgmt
Residential
conversion
buildings –
efficiency
New shell
improvemen
improvemen
ts
Conservation
ts
tillage
Commercial
buildings –
CFL lighting
Commercial
buildings –
LED lighting
Commercial
buildings –
New shell
improveme
Fuel economy
packages – Cars nts
Source: McKinsey analysis
Natural gas
and
petroleum
systems
manageme
nt
2.4
2.6
Onshore wind
–
High
penetration
Biomass
power –
Cofiring
Coal power plants –
CCS new builds with
EOR
Onshore wind –
Medium penetration
Winter
cover crops
Reforestatio
n
Afforestation
of pastureland
2.8
3.0
3.2
Potential
Gigatons/yea
r
Industry
– CCS
new
builds on
carbonintensive
processe
s
Car hybridization
Coal-to-gas
shift –
dispatch of
existing plants
Coal power
plants –
CCS
rebuilds
Coal power
plants –
CCS new
builds
4
Energy Intensity (E/GDP) in the United States (1949 - 2005)
and France (1980 - 2003)
thousand Btu/$ (in $2000)
25.0
20.0
If intensity dropped at pre-1973 rate of 0.4%/year
12% of
GDP =
$1.7 Trillion
in 2005
15.0
Actual (E/GDP drops 2.1%/year)
10.0
France
5.0
7% of
GDP =
$1.0 Trillion
In 2005
0.0
1949 1953 1957 1961 1965 1969 1973 1977 1981 1985 1989 1993 1997 2001 2005
5
Per Capita Electricity Sales (not including self-generation)
(kWh/person) (2006 to 2008 are forecast data)
14,000
12,000
United States
2005 Differences
= 5,300kWh/yr
= $165/capita
10,000
8,000
California
6,000
4,000
Per Capita Income in Constant 2000 $
1975
2005
% change
2008
2006
2004
94%
79%
2002
2000
1998
31,442
33,536
1996
1992
16,241
18,760
1990
1988
1986
1982
1980
1978
1976
1974
1972
1970
1968
1966
1964
1962
1960
0
1984
US GDP/capita
Cal GSP/capita
1994
2,000
6
Per Capita Electricity Sales (not including self-generation)
(kWh/person)
14,000
California w/out stds and
programs
12,000
United States
8,000
6,000
California
4,000
2,000
2002
2000
1998
1996
1994
1992
1990
1988
1986
1984
1982
1980
1978
1976
1974
1972
1970
1968
1966
1964
1962
0
1960
kWh/person
10,000
Impact of Appliance Efficiency Regulations
In 2009, approximately 31% (17,896 GWh) of California’s energy savings are
achieved through appliance efficiency standards. This saves $2.5 billion in
electrical bills annually. [2009 Integrated Energy Policy Report]
8
2,000
1,800
25
~ 100 gallons Gasoline/year
~ 1 Ton CO2/year
1,600
20
1,400
1,200
Refrigerator
Size (cubic ft)
$ 1,270
15
1,000
800
600
400
200
10
Energy Use per Refrigerator
(kWh/Year)
Refrigerator Price
in 1983 $
0
$ 462 5
Refrigerator volume (cubic feet)
Average Annual Energy Use(kwh) or Price($)
New United States Refrigerator Use v. Time
and Retail Prices
0
1947 1952 1957 1962 1967 1972 1977 1982 1987 1992 1997 2002
Source: David Goldstein
9
Annual Energy Saved vs. Several Sources of Supply
In the United States
800
nuclear energy
700
Billion kWh/year
600
500
400
conventional hydro
300
Energy Saved
Refrigerator Stds 100 Million 1 KW
200
PV systems
= 80 power
100
plants of 500
MW each
renewables
0
10
In the United States
Value of Energy to be Saved (at 8.5 cents/kWh, retail price) vs.
Several Sources of Supply in 2005 (at 3 cents/kWh, wholesale price)
25
nuclear energy
Billion $ (US)/year in 2005
20
Energy Saved
Refrigerator Stds
15
10
100 Million 1 KW
PV systems
conventional hydro
5
renewables
0
11
Televisions Represent Significant Energy Use
The residential energy consumption due to televisions rapidly increased from 3-4% in
1990s to 8-10% in 2008. Television energy will grow up to 18% by 2023 without
regulations. The projected growth does not include the residential energy use by cable
boxes, DVD players, internet boxes, Blue Ray, game consoles etc.
California Energy Consumption from TVs
(Forecast with and without proposed standards)
20,000
18,000
16,000
With a Title 20 Standard
GWh/yr
14,000
12,000
10,000
no standard
8,000
6,000
Tier 1
Tier 2
4,000
2,000
0
1975
1979
1983
1987
1991
1995
1999
2003
2007
2011
2015
2019
2023
2027
Year
12
Technically Feasible Standards
TV Power Consumption Levels
32"
25"
37"
42"
50"
On Mode Power (W)
400
CEC Tier 1
(Effective 1/1/2011)
300
200
100
CEC Tier 2
(Effective 1/1/2013)
CEC Max Screen Area (1400 in2 or
~57.4 diagonal inches)
0
0
200
Energy Star 3.0 TVs (10/2/09)
400
600
800
1000
Screen Area (square inches)
1200
1400
1600
1800
2000
Each point may represent several TV models
*Consumers can expect to save between $ 50 - $ 250 over the life of their TV
*A 50 inch plasma can consume as little as 307 kWh/yr and as much as 903 kWh/yr
13
General Purpose Lighting – Proposed
Regulations (cont.)
Proposed Table K-8: Standards for State-regulated
General Services Incandescent Lamps -Tier I
Rated Lumens Range
Maximum rated
Wattage
Minimum Rated
Life Time
1490-2600 Lumens
1050-1489Lumens
750-1049 Lumens
310-749 Lumens
72 Watts
53 Watts
43 Watts
29 Watts
1,000 hours
1,000 hours
1,000 hours
1,000 hours
Proposed
California
Effective Date
Jan, 1, 2011
Jan 1, 2012
Jan 1, 2013
Jan 1, 2013
Proposed Table K-9: Standards for State-regulated
General Services Lamps -Tier II
Lumens Range
Maximum Lamp
Efficacy
All
45 lumens per watt
Minimum
Rated Life
Time
1,000 hours
Proposed
California
Effective Date
Jan, 1, 2018
• Source for following two Slides:
– Lester Lave and Maxine Savitz. Relative Costs for 95 new
production homes at Premier Gardens in Sacramento.
• Report of Panel on Energy Efficiency in the United
States. National Academies Press. (November 2009)
WWW.NAS.EDU
15
0.50
$/kWh eq of efficiency investment
$/kWh eq saved
0.40
$/kWh of PV
$/kWh eq including both efficiency and PV
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.00
Annual kWh(eq) including heating load with natural gas
converted at 10,000 Btu/kWh
35,000
30,000
Premier Gardens
Wheat Ridge
Armory Park del Sol
Smith Passivhaus
Lakeland
Indifference
Indifference
Indifference
Indifference
25,000
20,000
15,000
10,000
5,000
0
0
-5,000
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
70,000
Incremental Cost of Efficiency Measures and PVs in $
80,000
•
Published in Climatic Change 2009.
• Global Cooling: Increasing World-wide Urban
Albedos to Offset CO2
July 28, 2008
Hashem Akbari and Surabi Menon
Lawrence Berkeley National
Laboratory, USA
[email protected]
Tel: 510-486-4287
•
Arthur Rosenfeld
California Energy Commission, USA
[email protected]
Tel: 916-654 4930
A First Step In Geo-Engineering Which Saves Money
and Has Known Positive Environmental Impacts
18
1000 ft2 of a white roof, replacing a
dark roof, offset the emission of
10 tonnes of CO2
19
CO2 Equivalency of Cool Roofs
•
•
•
•
•
•
White Roofs alone offset 24 GT CO2
Worth > €600 Billion
To Convert 24 GT CO2 one time into a rate
Assume 20 Year Period
Results in 1.2 GT CO2/year
Average World Car Emits 4 tCO2/year
• So rate is 300 Million Cars Off the Road for 20
years.
20
Solar Reflective Surfaces Also
Cool the Globe
Source: IPCC
21 21
White is ‘cool’ in Bermuda
22
and in Santorini, Greece
23
Cool Roof Technologies
Old
New
flat, white
pitched, cool & colored
pitched, white
24
Simulated Meteorology and Air-quality
Impacts in LA
25
Potential Savings in LA
• Savings for Los
Angeles
– Direct, $100M/year
– Indirect, $70M/year
– Smog, $360M/year
• Estimate of national savings:
$5B/year
26
California is a Summer Peaking Area
California Daily Peak Loads -- 2006
70,000
Residential Air Conditioning
60,000
Commercial Air Conditioning
50,000
MW
40,000
30,000
20,000
10,000
0
Jan-06
Mar-06
May-06
Jul-06
Sep-06
Nov-06
27
California peak electricity demand is growing

In 2000, 72% population lived along
coast.
 By 2040, nearly 40% of population will
live inland.
 Need for more peaking plants or
demand response measures to meet
the higher summer peaks.
28
Three Necessary Components for Demand
Response and Utility Modernization
• Advanced Metering Infrastructure
– Digital meters with communication
• Dynamic Tariffs
– Enable customers to be able to respond to hourly prices
– The structure of these tariffs is critically important as customers are hoping to reduce
total energy costs
• Automated Response Technology at customer
locations
– Enable residential and small commercial customers to respond to price automatically
– Larger customers with energy management systems linked to pricing signals over the
internet or through other communication channels
•
And, when coupled with energy efficiency programs and policies the result can be reduction
in total consumption as well as peak period consumption
29
Critical Peak Pricing (CPP)
with additional curtailment option
Potential Annual Customer Savings:
10 afternoons x 4 hours x 1kw = 40 kWh at 70 cents/kWh = ~$30/year
80
?
70
CPP Price Signal
Price (cents/kWh)
60
Standard TOU
Critical Peak Price
Standard Rate
10x per year
Extraordinary
Curtailment
Signal, < once per
year
50
40
30
20
10
0
Sunday
Monday
Tuesday Wednesday Thursday
Friday
Saturday
31
Key Results from Residential Pilot
•12% average load reduction for CPP rate alone
•Up to 40% with rate + enabling tech
•Most participants preferred the pilot rates
Average Residential Response to Critical Peak
Should dynamic rates be
offered to all customers?
Pricing
4.5
4.0
3.5
kW
3.0
2.5
CPP
Event
Control
Group
Total
TOU
Fixed Incentive
with
Controllable
Thermostat
22% 91%
65%
30%
1
73%
CPP-F
2.0
69%
1
61%
CPP-V
95%
20% 93%
26%
87%
1.5
1.0
0.5
Info Only
CPP with
Controllable
Thermostat
17% 86%
0% 20%40%60%80%100%
0.0
Noon
69
%
2:30
7:30
Midnigh
t
Definitely
Probably
32
Automated Demand Response
Commercial Customers
*Source: Demand Response Research Center, Global Energy Partners
33
Federal Property Assessed Clean
Energy (PACE) Legislation
•
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA)
– Included some measures specifically intended to promote PACE programs
•
American Clean Energy and Security Act (ACES)
– Authorized federal government to provide guarantees or other indirect financial support to
PACE program bonds, potentially reducing the costs of capital to the program dramatically
•
H.R.3525
– Introduced by Rep. Mike Thompson in July 2009 (in House Committee on Ways and
Means)
– Allows issuance of federally tax-exempt bonds for PACE programs to finance the
following:
• Renewable energy (solar, wind, geothermal, marine and hydrokinetic renewable
energy, incremental hydropower, biomass and landfill gas)
• Energy conservation/efficiency (energy efficient retrofits of existing buildings
and/or efficient storage, distribution, or transmission, including smart grid
technologies)
• Water conservation/efficiency (reduce demand, improve efficiency of use, reduce
losses, improve land management practices that conserve water); does not include
water storage
• Zero emission vehicles (no tailpipe emissions, evaporative emissions, or onboard
emission-control systems that can deteriorate over time)
• A facility or project used for the manufacture of the above resources
Federal PACE Legislation (cont.)
• H.R.3836
– Introduced by Rep. Steve Israel in October 2009 (in House Committee on
Energy and Commerce)
– Purpose is to promote access to affordable financing and provide credit
support for accelerated and widespread deployment of:
• (1) clean energy technologies;
• (2) advanced or enabling energy infrastructure technologies; and
• (3) energy efficiency technologies in residential, commercial, and industrial applications,
including end-use efficiency in buildings.
– Clean energy technology:
• Technology related to the production, use, transmission, storage, control, or conservation
of energy that will contribute to a stabilization of atmospheric greenhouse gas
concentrations thorough reduction, avoidance, or sequestration of energy-related
emissions and for which, as determined by the Administrator, insufficient commercial
lending is available at affordable rates to allow for widespread deployment.
– “Credit support” is defined as:
• (A) direct loans, letters of credit, loan guarantees, and insurance products; and
• (B) the purchase or commitment to purchase, or the sale or commitment to sell, debt
instruments (including subordinated securities).
States with PACE Legislation
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
California
Colorado
Florida
Hawaii
Illinois
Louisiana
Maryland
Nevada
New Mexico
New York
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Wisconsin
AB 811 (2008), AB 474 (2009)
HB 08-1350 (2008)
Pre-existing authority to form PACE districts
Pre-existing authority to form PACE districts
SB 583 (2009)
SB 224 (2009)
HB 1567(2009)
SB 358 (2009)
SB 647 (2009)
S66004a (2009) [same as A40004A]
HB 1 (2009)
SB 668 (2009)
HB 2626 (2009)
HB 1937 (2009)
Pre-existing authority to form PACE districts
H 446 (2009)
SB 1212 (2009)
AB 255 (2009)
The End
For More Information:
http://www.energy.ca.gov/commissioners/rosenfeld_docs/index.html
or just Google “Art Rosenfeld”
37