July 26, 2007
Small Wind Could Grow If Incentives Put On Par With Solar
The American Wind Energy Association (AWEA) recently released the results from their Small Wind Turbine Global Market Study, reporting that high up –front costs are preventing small wind systems from reaching their growth potential. The small wind industry has been experiencing annual growth in the range of 14-25% since 1985. AWEA says that Increased federal incentives could double the growth rate. While homeowners and businesses are installing solar photovoltaic (PV) at an increasing rate in the past few years, small wind is lagging.
With about 7,000 small wind systems sold last year, AWEA claims that correcting the disparity in federal incentives between solar and wind would fix the problem, and further encourage larger investments in small wind systems.
The market for small wind systems, systems with capacities less than 100kW, has not seen significant federal policy changes since 1985. While the costs of electricity produced by small wind turbines has declined nearly 40% to 10 cents/kWh, hardware costs have not changed much and still inflict a high upfront burden on the consumer.
Purchasing and installing a small wind system typically cost $3,000 - $5,000 per kW for grid-connected installation. Residential friendly systems (3-5 kW) will shave 60%-80% off the owner’s electric bill. AWEA reports current payback periods for the average wind system range from 6 to 30 years, depending upon a number of factors (wind resource quality, siting, permitting costs, prevailing energy costs, and turbine performance).
Compared to small wind, barriers in the solar PV market have been significantly lessened on the federal level. The Business Energy Tax Credit and the Residential Solar and Fuel Cell Tax Credit (with a $2,000 cap) enacted in 2005, both provide up to 30% tax credits to commercial and residential solar users. These incentive policies are credited in part to the 36% solar PV growth rate in 2006.
Adopting similar incentives for small wind would result in similar gains, according to AWEA. A study performed by Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory in 2004 estimated that a 30% federal investment tax credit with no cap would lower average payback period of small wind projects by 4.5 years. “The advent of a 30% federal Investment Tax Credit could lead to an estimated 40% annual growth for each year the credit is in place,” claims AWEA. Cap or no cap, a 30% incentive significantly helps homeowners reduce the initial costs.
Wind and solar are often complementary technologies, used at the same project site and would benefit even further from equity in incentives. AWEA reports that, "Over 80% of all grid-connected small wind systems 10kW of capacity and less include some PV component, indicating that two technologies share similar markets.” Wind and solar hybrid systems are currently being sold for around $7,000 per kW, with increasing popularity. Solar PV costs are projected to keep falling, and in order for small wind to keep pace and hybrid technology to be more attractive, federal incentives could prove effective.
AWEA’s study consisted of a survey distributed to manufacturers, individuals, organizations and companies. Respondents identified “Economics/cost to consumer”, “Restrictive zoning and permitting rules and/or costs, and “Lack of financial incentives” as the top 3 barriers to increased adoption of the technology.
More
2007 AWEA Small Wind Global Market Study
AWEA's web site on Small Wind
DSIRE's Section on Federal Renewable Energy Incentives
Evaluating state markets for residential wind systems - Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Study, 2004
July 24, 2007
New Connecting to the Grid Guide Released
The Interstate Renewable Energy Council (IREC) has issued the 5th edition of its Connecting to the Grid guide. The report and survey addresses new and lingering interconnection issues relevant to all distributed generation (DG) technologies. The guide hopes to assist state regulators and other government officials, as well as utility representatives, DG stakeholders and consumers interested in the development of state-level interconnection standards.
"Government and consumer interest in renewables and other forms of clean DG is accelerating dramatically," said Jane Weissman, executive director of IREC. "IREC feels it's critical to provide an up-to- date, concise and informed resource on interconnection issues for those who are writing the rules of the game, and for those who want a clearer understanding of gaining access to our electric grid."
The lack of uniform interconnection standards significantly complicates the interconnection process and historically has deterred the deployment of customer-sited DG. On the other hand, well-designed uniform interconnection standards facilitate the deployment of renewables and other forms of DG by specifying the technical and institutional requirements and terms by which utilities and DG system owners must abide. For example, New Jersey's standards for interconnection and net metering have shown that when barriers are removed and adequate financial incentives are available, solar installations explode. Approximately 3,000 photovoltaic (PV) systems have been installed in New Jersey since 2004, catapulting the state into second place nationally.
The Connecting to the Grid guide includes discussions of:
- Technical issues related to DG interconnection, such as safety, power quality, and national codes and standards;
- Legal and procedural issues, such as insurance requirements, standard form agreements and recent trends in state-policy development;
- Net-metering issues, such as the ownership of renewable-energy credits and the rapid evolution of state policy in the absence of federal guidance; and
- Electrical and building inspectors.
In addition, IREC's Connecting to the Grid guide includes a description of IREC's model interconnection standards for generators up to 10 megawatts (MW) and IREC's model net-metering rules for generators up to 2 MW in capacity. IREC's model rules promote what it believes are the best practices developed by states, government entities and other non-governmental organizations.
More
Connecting to the Grid - published by the Interstate Renewable Energy Council, July 2007
July 18, 2007
Nebraska Ethanol Plant Taps Cow Power Next Door
In Nebraska, cows are helping to produce ethanol. A 28,000-cow feedlot in Mead, Nebraska, is powering the neighboring Genesis Ethanol Plant, owned by E3 Biofuels LLC. The cows are providing 300,000 tons of manure per year, which is turned into methane via anaerobic digestion and accounts for 100% of the thermal energy needed to distill 25 million gallons of ethanol each year.
Additional operational efficiencies persist even after the production of ethanol is finished. Thin stillage, a by-product, is sent back to the digester to maintain temperature and provide more raw materials for biogas production. The other main by-product, wet distillers grain, is sent back to the feedlot and fed to the cows. The wet distillers grains comprise about 40% of the cattle’s diet. Normally, the distillers grains have to be dried in order to be transported and sold. The process of drying distillers grains typically represents one third of an ethanol plant’s thermal energy requirement.
E3 reports that the Genesis plant avoids $6.5 to $7.25 million in natural gas that would be required to fuel the boilers. There is also $2-$3 million in savings by not having to heat wet distillers grain in order to dry it for shipping. The plant also sells biodigester effluent, a high-quality fertilizer and by-product of the anaerobic digestion process, to local farmers.
The close proximity of the feedlot operation wasn't the only reason that brought E3 to Mead; the existence of slatted floors in the feedlot played a key role. It is rare, and expensive, for this flooring technology to be used in feedlots of this size. The slatted floors allow for the manure to be easily collected below the feedlot, cleaned, and pumped into the anaerobic digester. Inside the digester, bacteria breaks down the manure, resulting in bio-methane that is channeled to the ethanol plant.
Not well known is that the E3 Biofuels plant was a pilot project of the U.S Environmental Protection Agency's Environmentally Responsible Redevelopment and Reuse (ER3) initiative that works to site environmental projects on formerly contaminated properties. The ethanol facility is located on a portion of a Superfund clean-up site (former ammunition manufacturing facility) and a letter from the EPA helped facilitate a $70 million loan for the project.
The Genesis plant is certainly a boost to the Mead economy. The plant and the feedlot represent 90 jobs for the town of 564 people. Annually, the ethanol plant will require 8.5 million bushels of local farmers’ corn. However, unlike some cooperatively owned ethanol plants, the area farmers do not own this plant and do not benefit financially from the value-added aspect of the ethanol production.
We here at Democratic Energy like smaller, dispersed ethanol facilities and we'd prefer that the farmers had an ownership stake in this venture. While this particular plant is on smaller scale than many other proposed ethanol plants, E3 is not necessarily committed to smaller facilities. E3 would like to bring 15 more plants online in the next 5 years, each producing 50 to 100 million gallons of ethanol a year. This would require manure from feedlots of 60,000 to 120,000 cattle per plant. According to information from USDA, there were 55 feedlot operations in the U.S. in 2004 hosting more than 32,000 head of cattle.
We like that there appears to be a great deal of synergy between these two industrial facilities and are happy seeing the efficiency gains that are occurring but we hope that this type of ethanol plant arrangement could be done economically with smaller feedlots.
More
E3 Biofuels
West Hollywood Mandates Green Building Standards on Private Development
On July 16, 2007, the West Hollywood City Council voted unanimously to pass the Green Building Requirements and Incentives for Private Development Ordinance that applies a suite of energy conservation and renewable energy requirements to both residential and commercial development. Some provisions apply to new building projects while others apply to remodeling projects at existing buildings.
Democratic Energy notes that one of these nearly 20 green building requirements in the city's Ordinance 07-762 is a requirement to prepare the building for the installation of future photovoltaic systems. It requires the builder to install a conduit from an electricity room or panels to the roof, and document how solar power could be accommodated.
"The City has been a leading force in enacting policies to promote the environment. Passage of the Green Building Ordinance continues this legacy and represents a truly collaborative effort between the public and private sectors," noted West Hollywood Council member Abbe Land in their press release.
This new policy also outlines a point system used to regulate “all new commercial developments and residential developments with three or more units.” These developments must include a minimum of 60 points from the West Hollywood Green Building Point System Table (not yet published). Projects exceeding 90 points will enjoy one of the 8 listed incentives. The intent of the point system is that it will stress locally-available materials and promote the inclusion of green elements early in the project design. Also, it will provide the ability to adopt green elements throughout the design process.
The new ordinance is tied to existing green building certification standards. Projects receiving “a minimum rating of ‘Certified’ with the United States Green Building Council’s Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) shall be exempt from the point requirements of the West Hollywood Green Building Program.”
All projects scheduled for completion after October 1, 2007, must adhere to the provisions of Ordinance 07-762.
More
West Hollywood's Green Building Information
Full Text of West Hollywood's Green Building Ordinance 07-762– adopted July 16, 2007
July 10, 2007
Column: Emissions Cap is Key in Addressing Climate Issue
This column by David Morris and Peter Barnes argues for a three pronged strategy on climate protection. First, a comprehensive emission cap. Second, a carbon auction for suppliers of carbon fuels. And lastly, a universal and equal distribution of revenues from that sale. Three keys to an effective and equitable strategy to reduce global warming.
More
Emissions cap is key in addressing climate issue- - by David Morris and Peter Barnes, published in the Minneapolis Star Tribune, July 10, 2007
July 06, 2007
Illinois Takes A Step Toward Carbon Neutral Buildings by 2030
On June 28, 2007, the Illinois Senate and House approved a joint resolution that adopts a policy that calls for carbon-neutral state buildings by 2030. They are the first state to address this particular green building initiative, a derivative of the Architecture 2030 Challenge, through a legislature. New Mexico's Governor Bill Richardson adopted a similar but weaker policy by executive order in January of 2006.
The Illinois’ measure (SJR0027), proposes that all new and renovated State of Illinois “shall be designed to and achieve a minimum delivered fossil-fuel greenhouse gas (GHS) emitting energy consumption performance standard of one-half the U.S. average for that building type as defined by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in the EPA's Target Finder.”
The fossil fuel reduction standard for all new buildings shall be increased to:
60% in 2010
70% in 2015
80% in 2020
90% in 2025
Carbon-neutral by 2030 (meaning new buildings will use no fossil fuel GHG emitting energy to operate)
Democratic Energy notes that outside of the fact that the Ilinois initiative has no force of law behind it, the Illinois’ version does not include a provision outlined by Architecture 2030 that requires energy consumption to be reduced in other buildings to offset the emissions from the remaining energy use in the new building.
The Illinois resolution also does not clarify how purchasing renewable energy or certified renewable credits will factor into offsetting a new building's carbon footprint. Under Architecture 2030 standards, only 20% of the emissions can be mitigated through purchasing carbon offsets.
Founded by architect Edward Mazria, the Architecture 2030 challenge is committed to lessening the amount of energy consumed by buildings in America. Buildings account for 40 percent of all energy usage in the United States, the most of any sector. This initiative has gained most of its momentum through executive orders by mayor's in the cities of Seattle, Albuquerque, Chicago, and Miami.
While the primary goal of Architecture 2030 is to reduce the carbon footprint, the reported fiscal benefits may be the most persuasive reason cities and states are jumping on board. According to a study performed by Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, buildings employing green standards save between $50-$70 per square foot. The savings amount to 10 times the upfront premium of building greener.
More
Architecture 2030 Challenge
Full Text of Illinois Joint Resolution SJR0027
Green Building Studies including the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Study - US Green Building Council
July 02, 2007
Washington and Montana Laws Attempt to “Clean Up” Coal Power
Laws recently passed by the states of Washington and Montana are creating greenhouse gas emissions standards for new power plants. The two states are relying on different approaches but each has C02 reduction from future coal plants as the primary goal.
In Washington, the bill SB6001, establishes a greenhouse gas performance standard for all new, long-term baseload electric power generation. Under the standard, all baseload generation for which utilities enter into long-term contracts must meet a greehouse gas emissions standard 1,100 pounds of less per megawatt-hour beginning in July 2008.
California started this trend in September of 2006, when they instituted a suite of laws on greenhouse gas emissions in the electricity sector. Included was a law “requiring that all new long-term commitments for baseload generation to serve California consumers be with power plants that have emissions no greater than a combined cycle gas turbine plant (1,100 pounds of CO2 per megawatt-hour).” The goal was to deter the use of coal-fired power plants, which have emissions greater than 1,100 pounds of CO2 per megawatt-hour.
In a different approach, on May 14, 2007, Montana adopted a CO2 emissions offset requirement for electric generating units in the state. HB 25 prohibits the state Public Utility Commission from approving electric generating units primarily fueled by coal unless a minimum of 50 percent of the CO2 produced by the facility is captured and sequestered. The law applies to electric generating units constructed after January 1, 2007 and appears to provide an exemption from the policy if implementation causes ratepayers to incur cost increases of more than 2.5 percent.
These legislative efforts are a timely response to resurgence of proposed coal-fired power plants across America. According to a May 2007 study by the Department of Energy, nationwide there are proposals in place for 151 new coal-fired power plants. Specifically, Washington has 2 proposals and Montana has 7 proposals for new coal-based power plants. Coal is of minimal importance in Washington but Montana generates over half of the state’s total electricity consumption from coal.
More
Montana HB0025 – enacted May 14, 2007:
Washington SB6001 - enacted May 3, 2007
Tracking New Coal-Fired Power Plants database- Department of Energy
New Rules Project section on Greenhouse Gas Emissions Performance Standard for Power Plants – California
Community Choice Plan Adopted in San Francisco
San Francisco's Mayor has approved a local power plan that could achieve a 51 percent renewable energy portfolio by 2017. The Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) plan creates an innovative new financial structure using municipal revenue bonds ("H Bonds") to make San Francisco energy independent and finance construction of a 360 megawatt solar power network and make investments in energy conservation efforts.
The "Solar Bonds" measure, passed by San Francisco voters in 2001, would be used to fund the construction of the new renewable energy infrastructure. An energy service provider will share construction costs and assume the financial risk; when the system is paid off, San Francisco will buy out the private energy partner.
The plan was drafted by Local Power and sponsored by Supervisors Tom Ammiano, Ross Mirkarimi and Chris Daly. Over the last several years there have been hundreds of hours of televised public hearings and negotiation between the Community Choice Energy Alliance, San Francisco Public Utilities Commission and the Mayor's office.
The CCA Plan creates a detailed business model and defines an ambitious portfolio of renewable energy and demand side technology rollouts to make every participating San Francisco resident and business 51 percent green powered by 2017, compared to the 20 percent green requirement for California utilities by the same year - all at rates that meet or beat Pacific Gas & Electric's electricity rates.
Dozens of California cities are pursuing similar Community Choice Plans for energy independence and sustainability, including Marin County communities, Oakland-Berkeley-Emeryville, San Luis Obispo, and others.
Local Power gives the following overview of CCA in California in their 2007 Implementation Plan report:
The California legislature responded to the Electric Crisis of 2001-2002 - with its soaring prices, rolling black-outs, and public concerns about energy market manipulation - by passing a number of new electric industry initiatives. Amongst these legislative initiatives was Community Choice Aggregation (Assembly Bill 11711) sponsored by then Assembly member Carole Migden and passed in September of 2002. This bill authorized communities to aggregate the electric purchasing power of its citizens and businesses so as to: “reduce transaction costs, provide consumer protections, and leverage the negotiation of contracts”.
A CCA will usually serve its citizens with retail electricity supply contracted from a wholesale supplier. The San Francisco CCA will ensure delivery of that electricity combined with electricity generated from renewable plants both in and out of the city, via PG&E’s transmission and distribution lines, and bill its customers through PG&E’s billing system. Therefore CCA is different from municipalization because PG&E retains ownership of, and maintains responsibility for, transmission, distribution and some customer service functions for CCA customers. PG&E will continue to read CCA customer meters and bill them for their use of PG&E’s transmission and distribution system and well as non-bypassable charges such as those related to the energy crisis, PG&E’s bankruptcy, some public goods program charges and nuclear power plant decommissioning.
More