1 / 37

Conference on Green Building, Economy, and Public Policy

Join us at the Conference on Green Building, Economy, and Public Policy to discuss the challenges and opportunities in California's green building sector. Explore topics such as energy efficiency, renewable energy, and sustainable development. Don't miss this chance to contribute to a greener future!

joetta
Download Presentation

Conference on Green Building, Economy, and Public Policy

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Conference on Green Building, The Economy, and Public PolicyBerkeley, CaliforniaDecember 2, 2009 Arthur H. Rosenfeld, Commissioner California Energy Commission (916) 654-4930 ARosenfe@Energy.State.CA.US

  2. Does Anyone See A Problem With This Picture?

  3. 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

  4. U.S. mid-range abatement curve – 2030 Abatement cost <$50/ton Residential buildings – HVAC equipment efficiency Commercial buildings – HVAC equipment efficiency Cost Real 2005 dollars per ton CO2e Afforestation of cropland Coal power plants– CCS rebuilds with EOR 90 Industrial process improve-ments Residential buildings – Shell retrofits Coal mining – Methane mgmt Solar CSP Fuel economy packages – Light trucks Active forest management Distributed solar PV 60 Residential electronics Commercial buildings – Combined heat and power Commercial buildings – Control systems Nuclear new-build Residential water heaters 30 Residential buildings – Lighting 0 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.2 Potential Gigatons/year Onshore wind – Low penetration Industry – CCS new builds on carbon-intensive processes -30 Onshore wind – High penetration Industry – Combined heat and power Biomass power – Cofiring -60 Cellulosic biofuels Manufacturing – HFCs mgmt Car hybridi-zation Existing power plant conversion efficiency improvements Coal power plants – CCS new builds with EOR -90 Residential buildings – New shell improvements Onshore wind – Medium penetration Coal-to-gas shift – dispatch of existing plants Commercial electronics Conservation tillage Winter cover crops -120 Commercial buildings – CFL lighting Coal power plants – CCS rebuilds Reforestation -230 -220 Commercial buildings – LED lighting Commercial buildings – New shell improvements Afforestation of pastureland Coal power plants – CCS new builds Natural gas and petroleum systems management Fuel economy packages – Cars Source: McKinsey analysis

  5. Energy Intensity (E/GDP) in the United States (1949 - 2005) and France (1980 - 2003) 25.0 20.0 If intensity dropped at pre-1973 rate of 0.4%/year 12% of GDP = $1.7 Trillion in 2005 15.0 thousand Btu/$ (in $2000) Actual (E/GDP drops 2.1%/year) 10.0 7% of GDP = $1.0 Trillion In 2005 France 5.0 0.0 1949 1953 1957 1961 1965 1969 1973 1977 1981 1985 1989 1993 1997 2001 2005

  6. 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]

  7. New United States Refrigerator Use v. Time and Retail Prices 2,000 25 1,800 1,600 20 1,400 $ 1,270 Refrigerator 1,200 15 Size (cubic ft) Refrigerator volume (cubic feet) Average Annual Energy Use(kwh) or Price($) 1,000 800 10 600 Energy Use per Refrigerator (kWh/Year) 400 5 Refrigerator Price $ 462 in 1983 $ 200 0 0 1947 1952 1957 1962 1967 1972 1977 1982 1987 1992 1997 2002 ~ 100 gallons Gasoline/year ~ 1 Ton CO2/year Source: David Goldstein

  8. In the United States = 80 power plants of 500 MW each

  9. In the United States

  10. 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 2023without regulations. The projected growth does not include the residential energy use by cable boxes, DVD players, internet boxes, Blue Ray, game consoles etc.

  11. Technically Feasible Standards 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

  12. General Purpose Lighting – Proposed Regulations (cont.) Proposed Table K-8: Standards for State-regulated General Services Incandescent Lamps -Tier I Proposed Table K-9: Standards for State-regulated General Services Lamps -Tier II

  13. 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

  14. 0.50 $/kWh eq of efficiency investment 0.40 $/kWh of PV $/kWh eq including both efficiency and PV 0.30 $/kWh eq saved 0.20 0.10 0.00 Lakeland Livermore Wheat Ridge Premier Gardens Hathaway House Smith Passivhaus Armory Park del Sol

  15. 35,000 30,000 Premier Gardens Wheat Ridge Armory Park del Sol 25,000 Smith Passivhaus Lakeland Indifference 20,000 Indifference Indifference Annual kWh(eq) including heating load with natural gas converted at 10,000 Btu/kWh Indifference 15,000 10,000 5,000 0 0 10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000 50,000 60,000 70,000 80,000 Incremental Cost of Efficiency Measures and PVs in $ -5,000

  16. Published in Climatic Change 2009. • Global Cooling: Increasing World-wide Urban Albedos to Offset CO2 July 28, 2008 HashemAkbari and SurabiMenon Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, USA H_Akbari@lbl.gov Tel: 510-486-4287 Arthur Rosenfeld California Energy Commission, USA Arosenfe@energy.state.ca.us Tel: 916-654 4930 • A First Step In Geo-Engineering Which Saves Money and Has Known Positive Environmental Impacts

  17. 1000 ft2 of a white roof, replacing a dark roof, offset the emission of 10 tonnes of CO2

  18. 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

  19. Solar Reflective Surfaces Also Cool the Globe Source: IPCC 21

  20. White is ‘cool’ in Bermuda 22

  21. and in Santorini, Greece 23

  22. Cool Roof Technologies New Old flat, white pitched, cool & colored pitched, white 24

  23. Simulated Meteorology and Air-quality Impacts in LA 25

  24. Potential Savings in LA • Savings for Los Angeles • Direct, $100M/year • Indirect, $70M/year • Smog, $360M/year • Estimate of national savings: $5B/year 26

  25. California is a Summer Peaking Area

  26. 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.

  27. 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

  28. 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 Standard TOU 70 Critical Peak Price CPP Price Signal 10x per year Standard Rate 60 Extraordinary Curtailment Signal, < once per year 50 Price (cents/kWh) 40 30 20 10 0 Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday

  29. Average Residential Response to Critical Peak Pricing Should dynamic rates be offered to all customers? CPP Event 4.5 Control Group 91% Total 69% 22% 4.0 95% 3.5 TOU 65% 30% Fixed Incentive with Controllable Thermostat 3.0 1 93% 73% 20% CPP-F 2.5 kW 2.0 1 87% CPP-V 61% 26% 1.5 86% CPP with Controllable Thermostat Info Only 69% 17% 1.0 0.5 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 0.0 Noon 2:30 7:30 Midnight Definitely Probably • 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

  30. Automated Demand ResponseCommercial Customers *Source: Demand Response Research Center, Global Energy Partners

  31. 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

  32. 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).

  33. States with PACE Legislation 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) • California • Colorado • Florida • Hawaii • Illinois • Louisiana • Maryland • Nevada • New Mexico • New York • Ohio • Oklahoma • Oregon • Texas • Utah • Vermont • Virginia • Wisconsin

  34. The End For More Information: http://www.energy.ca.gov/commissioners/rosenfeld_docs/index.html or just Google “Art Rosenfeld” 37

More Related