CWEB.010/October.24.1996
Special Update/November.1.1996The region's newest conservation entity, the Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance, has started along the path to transforming markets for energy-efficient products and services. Formerly known as the Northwest Energy Efficiency Partnership, the alliance was welcomed into existence Oct. 30 at the Lighting Design Lab in Seattle with congratulatory remarks from regional energy leaders. They lauded NEEA as an outstanding example of collaboration and leadership as well as a sign that energy efficiency is compatible with competition. One also noted challenges faced by the fledgling organization. Then the 18-member alliance board--representing utilities, governments, conservation advocates and the energy efficiency industry--went to work at its first formal meeting. The board elected officers, adopted bylaws and discussed a host of personnel, organizational, program and policy issues, in preparation for the start of fully funded operations in January. More details follow. |
THIS MONTH'S Con.WEB features a broad range of stories on Northwest energy conservation and renewables. You can learn about the formation of a landmark regional collaborative on market transformation, the slimming of conservation programs at Puget Sound utilities, a model example of energy-efficient building design, the successes of a Seattle community conservation project and the marketing to other utilities of a renowned solar water-heating program.
A couple of additional notes. First, Con.WEB will provide an updated report on the Oct. 30 christening of the Northwest Energy Efficiency Partnership in Seattle; look for it here by Nov. 1. Also, in last month's issue, we covered Washington Water Power's DSM distribution charge and extensively cited a report by The Results Center. We have since learned--regrettably--that The Results Center has closed, but copies of the report are still available by calling Ted Flanigan at (970) 927-3155.
As always, we hope you find value in Con.WEB. Please feel free to share your thoughts with us via [marko@newsdata.com] e-mail--or give us a traditional phone call at (206) 285-4848.
Opening the first official gathering of the Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance, Dick Watson of the Northwest Power Planning Council noted that the future of energy conservation in a competitive electric marketplace is very much uncertain. However, market transformation enjoys widespread support. "This meeting this morning [Oct. 30] is the culmination of a long and sometimes arduous process that began about six months ago," he said. "The willingness of all parties to compromise . . . to find a way to make this work, has brought us to where we are today."
Surveying the board, BPA deputy chief executive officer Jack Robertson said, "What a remarkable gathering this is around the table." He envisions NEEA as "one place where we can I hope create a neutral zone, where we can all collaborate on trying to take the value of the [Columbia] River . . . and figure out a way to make it more efficient and more productive and extend it into the 21st Century. Bonneville feels this is the core of how we want to deal with energy conservation in the future. We think it will produce excellent results . . . I think it's a very important practical and symbolic effort."
NEEA is a "great example" of the Northwest's national and even international leadership in energy efficiency, said Seattle City Light superintendent Gary Zarker. "I hope this is the start of something that will continue this tradition and make it even better."
To Rich Sonstelie, chief executive officer of Puget Sound Power & Light, NEEA represents "a group of people who refuse to accept the conventional wisdom . . . that energy efficiency and competitive markets are incompatible." At the same time, he listed four challenging aspects for the alliance's success: 1) Technological innovation (as exemplified by the Lighting Lab); 2) Political innovation: "Everything's moving on us, there's no predictability at all"; 3) Proving that conservation and efficiency can be cost-effective, as a sound investment "with a significant payoff" benefitting all customers and the region generally; and 4) "How do we draw our customers into this?" and not limit the process to a group of energy experts making decisions. "We've got a lot more work to do here going forward," Sonstelie concluded.
Selecting a Chairperson, Executive Committee
The first real test of the board's ability to forge consensus came in the vote for chairperson, shortly after the group formally adopted bylaws. After caucusing for nearly an hour, the three major board groups--public power, the investor-owned utilities and non-utility representatives--each put forth two people to serve on the six-person NEEA executive committee. One from each group was nominated as a candidate for chair: Jake Fey of Tacoma City Light, Dave Hauser of Montana Power and Stan Price of the Northwest Energy Efficiency Council. After two rounds of secret ballots, Hauser emerged as the consensus choice for chairman. Fey will serve as treasurer and vice-chairman, and Price will be secretary. The other executive committee members are Bonneville's Ken Keating, Portland General Electric's Carol Brown and NCAC's Nancy Hirsh. "How brave and how foolish you are," joked Watson to the new executive committee. "This is going to be . . . a great deal of work in the first few months."
The executive committee will, among other duties, take the lead in searching for and hiring an executive director for NEEA. Jim Baggs of Idaho Power called this "a very critical decision." Board members tossed out ideas for qualifications for this position, including experience in energy efficiency; a background in program, fiscal and organizational management; communications and technical skills; abilities to work with boards, spend money effectively, think creatively and get things done; and an understanding of market transformation as distinct from traditional utility DSM acquisition programs. And, Watson jokingly added, "The ability to leap tall buildings in a single bound." A job description and a methodology for selecting an executive director will be forthcoming.
Meanwhile, NWPPC conservation staffers Margie Gardner, Tom Eckman and Jeff Harris were designated as interim NEEA staff and will serve as the contact point for the alliance. Among their initial duties will be investigating options for an office location (or locations) for NEEA. Location issues raised by the board include taxes, travel distances, market distribution channels and opportunities to leverage resources. Hauser, meanwhile, raised the possibility of establishing a "virtual office."
As for any funding required for expenses before Jan. 1, Keating said Bonneville would front whatever money the NEEA board needed and apply it toward BPA's 1997 contribution. Other entities are welcome to do the same, Hauser said.
In addition to these personnel and organizational matters, the NEEA board will begin looking at specific market transformation activities at its Nov. 12 meeting in the Seattle area. It will talk about criteria for selecting projects to pursue and hear presentations on different ventures. Another board meeting has been scheduled for Dec. 3 in Portland. Some funding decisions could be forthcoming by year's end.
The board also heard from Watson and others about market transformation issues raised by regulatory agencies in the four states. A common theme is to keep NEEA a "lean, mean fighting machine," said Watson. "The commissions are really going to be watching that we don't create another bureaucracy." Another key issue: market transformation activities are expected to be thoroughly evaluated. As for specific state-by-state concerns identified by NEEA board members, Washington regulators expect cost-effective electric energy savings, Oregon regulators don't want a wholesale swap of market transformation activities for approved local conservation programs, and Montana regulators recognize NEEA's work must be evaluated in the aggregate.
Following is a complete list of NEEA board members and their organizations: Jim Baggs, Idaho Power; Dave Hauser, Montana Power; Brian Hedman, PacifiCorp; Carol Brown, Portland General Electric; Mary Smith, Puget Sound Power & Light; Jon Powell, Washington Water Power; Ken Keating, Bonneville Power Administration; Mat Northway, Eugene Water & Electric Board; Gary Mahugh, Flathead Electric Cooperative; Larry Bryant, Kootenai Electric Cooperative; Bev Corwin, Seattle City Light; Jake Fey, Tacoma City Light; Todd Maddock, of the Northwest Power Planning Council, Idaho governor's representative; John Savage of the Oregon Office of Energy, Oregon governor's representative; John Hines of the Northwest Power Planning Council, Montana governor's representative; Elizabeth Klumpp of the Washington Department of Community, Trade & Economic Development, Washington governor's representative; Stan Price, Northwest Energy Efficiency Council; Nancy Hirsh, Northwest Conservation Act Coalition.
Ex-officio board members: Lynn Anderson, Idaho Public Utilities Commission; Lynn Plamondon, Oregon Public Utility Commission; Deborah Stephens, Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission; Will Rosquist, Montana Public Service Commission. --Mark Ohrenschall
Collaboration still happens in the midst of today's electric industry competitive ferment, as evidenced by the formation of a landmark regional alliance intended to transform markets for energy efficiency.
The Northwest Energy Efficiency Partnership will be christened Wednesday, Oct. 30 at the Lighting Design Lab in Seattle, with a brief ceremony followed by the group's first board meeting (look for a Con.WEB update report on the day's happenings by Nov. 1).
This milestone event comes just four months after the first official meeting of a chartering committee for what developed into NEEP. In this relatively brief time, Northwest utilities, governments, public-interest groups, trade allies and other stakeholders reached broad agreement on a formal structure to support market transformation--including the ever-contentious issue of funding. "This is the first thing that's rolled out of the Regional Review where somebody's put their money where their mouth is," noted Bev Corwin, acting energy management services director of Seattle City Light.
Those involved in putting NEEP together believe the process shows the widespread regional support for the idea--and the practice--of improving energy efficiency through transforming markets for products and services.
"The group was surprisingly cohesive," observed Margie Gardner of the Northwest Power Planning Council. "People understood the importance of doing things across service territories . . . I think it's a really positive step forward for the utilities to cooperate at this level this quickly and move on market transformation. It's an incredible achievement."
The energy industry's increasingly competitive environment is "perhaps a strange time to pull together a coalition like this," laughed Jim Baggs of Idaho Power. "I think [NEEP is] probably a recognition there will be some ongoing obligation and/or desire on the part of utilities to continue energy-efficiency related activities. I think the group also recognized that some of the most effective conservation and energy efficiency activities are market transformation types and the only real way to do those is on a larger scale and on a more regional basis." NEEP also provides a permanent structure, he noted, compared with the ad-hoc nature of previous market transformation ventures.
NEEP's formation represents a focus on customers, said John McLain of Portland General Electric. "From day one of this project, we've said it's the customers who have to win, and what do we have to do to make them win." This alliance "puts something in place that will survive the deregulation juggernaut that's coming down the road that will dramatically change how you implement social agendas like demand-side [management] and conservation." It is an "act of faith" among the stakeholders; they came together, in McLain's view, "because it's important to customers and the lifestyle of the Northwest."
Following are some of the key provisions of NEEP (based on documents released Sept. 30; NEEP participants didn't expect any substantive changes):
Mission: "The ultimate goal of the Partnership is to improve the efficiency of electricity use and reduce the cost of efficiency improvements through market transformation. Market transformation means effecting permanent changes in the markets for targeted, cost-effective energy efficiency products and services that will result in high and lasting market penetration. The Partnership is based on the belief that by transforming markets it is possible to achieve improvements in the efficiency of electricity use without the need for long-term utility incentives. Market transformation is viewed as a temporary intervention . . . Moreover, by achieving high levels of market penetration it is anticipated that competition and economies of scale can bring down costs to consumers."
Funding: NEEP will be financed by the region's six major investor-owned utilities and Bonneville Power Administration, to a maximum of $13.1 million in 1997 and $26.19 million in both 1998 and 1999. Actual spending will be determined by the NEEP board, and costs will be allocated based on each utility's funding share (see table below). The shares were determined by 1994 regional power sales, adjusted for IOU net revenues paid to Bonneville.
NEEP funding is uncertain for the year 2000 and beyond. "Additional funding beyond 1999 will depend on each party's review of funding sources and mechanisms in light of outcomes of the Comprehensive Review, electric utility industry competition, and other factors, including the organizational performance of the Partnership."
UTILITY | 1997 FUNDING (MILLIONS OF DOLLARS) | 1998 AND 1999 | FUNDING SHARE |
| Idaho Power | 0.85 | 1.70 | 6.5 percent |
| Montana Power | 0.18 | 0.37 | 1.4 percent |
| PacifiCorp | 1.49 | 2.97 | 11.3 percent |
| Portland General Electric | 1.20 | 2.40 | 9.2 percent |
| Puget Sound Power & Light | 1.36 | 2.71 | 10.3 percent |
| Washington Water Power | 0.52 | 1.04 | 4 percent |
| Investor-owned Utility Total | 5.6 | 11.19 | 42.7 percent |
| Bonneville Power Administration | 7.5 | 15.00 | 57.3 percent |
| Regional Total | 13.1 | 26.19 | 100 percent |
Organization and Governance: NEEP will be overseen by an 18-member board of directors whose responsibilities will include selection of projects for funding, approval of major contracts and evaluation of results.
Each of three groups will appoint six members to the board. Bonneville and five publicly owned utilities will be represented on the board, as will all six of the region's major IOUs. The third group will include representatives from state and local governments, public interest advocates and trade allies: the Northwest Conservation Act Coalition and the Northwest Energy Efficiency Council will have permanent board seats, while the remaining four members will be chosen by governors of the four Northwest states (at least one seat will be held by the Northwest Power Planning Council). In addition, four ex-officio (non-voting) board seats will be included for each of the four state regulatory agencies.
A six-member executive committee, comprised of two representatives from each of the three groups, will oversee NEEP administration, hire an executive director and conduct business between board meetings as authorized.
NEEP organizers expect the board to operate by consensus; if not, decisions will be made by a vote of at least a 60-percent majority, including at least two votes from each of the three groups. "Basically, it's almost guaranteeing nothing's going to happen unless you have a consensus," said McLain. "It really gives each group a veto power."
The person hired as executive director will be charged with carrying out the board's directives and managing day-to-day operations. He or she will hire, manage and coordinate a small administrative staff, technical/planning staff and project work groups.
Scope of Activities, Strategies:Among the types of activities envisioned for NEEP are market research, technology assessment, planning and brokering collaborations. Strategies proposed for NEEP include research, development and demonstration; targeted market interventions; development of supporting infrastructure; and dissemination of information.
Although NEEP's development has been marked by an unusually collaborative approach, the process has not lacked for debatable issues--including some that remain unresolved.
The funding allocation represents a compromise between the IOUs and Bonneville/public power. Earlier versions of the collaborative proposal had a funding split close to 50-50. But the IOUs reportedly were concerned that the BPA/public power share did not account for the fact that many public-power utilities rely on BPA for less than their full load. In the end the total funding pool shrank from $30 million to $26.1 million, and BPA/public-power's share rose to about 57 percent.
There also remains disagreement about potential sources of future funding for NEEP. The IOUs like the idea of a universal meters charge applied regionwide for market transformation funding--but, as Baggs noted, there is "little or no support among the publics" for this concept.
IOUs also remain skittish about regulatory approval of cost recovery for market transformation, which takes a non-traditional and long-term approach to energy savings. In fact, the IOUs have made cost recovery a condition of their initial funding commitments. "As are the other investor-owned utilities, we're not particularly interested in opportunities to spend a bunch of money which may or may not be recoverable," said Idaho Power's Baggs. However, he and others are confident regulators will look favorably upon market transformation endeavors.
Another issue for NEEP will be equity. Although organizers acknowledge that a direct correlation between individual utility funding and benefits accruing in its service territory is virtually impossible with market transformation, they expect a reasonably fair distribution. For example, Baggs noted that irrigation efficiencies are a big opportunity for market transformation east of the Cascades, but not west. On the other hand, ventures like the current LightSaver compact fluorescent program have overwhelmingly reached urban areas along the Interstate 5 corridor. "I don't anticipate there will be a problem," said Baggs. "We all recognize them and try and make funding decisions that manage to spread the program activities somewhat uniformly around the region."
Although NEEP is regional by its very nature, it does provide opportunities for local utilities to undertake market transformations locally and to apply the funding toward its regional total--"provided their participation is effective, coordinated, and consistent with the goals and program elements" adopted by the NEEP board. Utilities, though, won't have veto power over project selections, nor can they refuse to participate in a given venture.
"We believe there are some market transformation-type efforts which should and can occur at the local level," said Baggs. "We're interested in maintaining close ties with our individual customers, and it's the kind of thing that doesn't particularly happen through a large regional effort."
Finally, McLain anticipates there will be considerable debate within NEEP about what constitutes a transformed market and, therefore, when utility funding should stop. He called that "one of the hardest and most important things to do" in market transformation.--Mark Ohrenschall
Utility demand-side management and conservation programs are considerably leaner in the Puget Sound area than in years past. Presentations earlier this month at the Lighting Design Lab's annual utility programs update indicate only one utility, Seattle City Light, is still offering cash rebates and incentives. Other representatives at the Oct. 2 meeting offered loan and financing programs--and uncertainty.
The turnout for this year's utility program update was the smallest on record, according to Lighting Design Lab manager Diana Campbell. Several years ago, 100 interested trade allies, product vendors and contractors attended the meeting. Last year, 40 people attended the meeting; this month, only four of five of those attending were non-utility people.
For Puget Sound Power & Light, this has been "the year of the merger" as Puget Power works on its proposed alliance with Washington Energy, holding company for Washington Natural Gas. Puget's Mary Smith reported her utility has been preoccupied with trying to figure out how to merge two companies that are very different in the way they acquire energy and the way they are regulated. "So basically, nothing much has changed [for DSM] since last year at this time." Smith added, however, that the old rationale for acquiring conservation as a more cost-effective alternative to buying generation resources no longer holds true. "Nobody knows what the rules are going to be for building generation," so it's difficult to set an avoided cost target for DSM to meet.
Smith said Puget Power is pursuing a four-point approach to find ways to encourage and enhance efficiency programs. One is market transformation, through participation in the regional market transformation effort--now called the Northwest Energy Efficiency Partnership, or NEEP. Another is "marketplace adoption"--activities primarily aimed at distributors that encourage the marketplace. Third is providing customers with information on saving energy. And fourth is continued commitment to low-income programs--although spending on such programs should leave a utility "competitively neutral." Smith also said a final determination on who should fund these "public purpose" programs will ultimately have to be made elsewhere.
While Smith told the small crowd that Puget Power no longer offers rebates or cash incentives of any kind, Bev Corwin said these are still alive and well at Seattle City Light. The utility recently received "very strong support" from both Mayor Norm Rice and the Seattle City Council for DSM and conservation activity.
Corwin, acting director of energy management services, said there have been some decreases in funding and acquisition timelines, but "conservation is still considered the main new resource." About $20 million has been budgeted for incentives--primarily in the commercial/industrial sector--and the annual target has dropped from 9 average megawatts to 6 aMW.
Corwin said Seattle City Light also has a new business plan to go with the new era. The utility will spend more time with large customers and offer services such as consolidated billing and real-time usage information, which lead to sharpening interest in where electricity is going and serve as a "great entree to an energy audit," which in turn ties back to incentive programs.
Corwin also said DSM staffing levels have been reduced, so the utility will be working more closely with trade allies and energy services companies and may use contractors to perform energy audits. She said staff is also working more directly with customers and is now "better positioned" to serve as the go-between for customers and experts. As an example, she cited the utility's new air-compressor program, under which Seattle has hired an air-compressor expert who can work directly with customers needing technical expertise.
The city's commitment to low-income programs will not change, Corwin said--although she estimated only 200 to 300 single-family homes will be weatherized this year, compared to as many as 3,000 annually in past years. And the utility is also very involved in NEEP, Corwin added.
Tacoma City Light also is working with a smaller DSM staff, said Wally Croshaw. Tacoma's future direction includes an energy services group "to create happy, satisfied customers who will stick around" after deregulation. Like Seattle, Tacoma is looking for stronger partnerships with trade allies. "We need help from trade allies to identify the kinds of services people want and also to provide some of the services," he said. And while the utility now offers grants only to low-income customers, it offers "incentives" in the form of low-interest loans for DSM and conservation activities.
Tacoma is also a member of NEEP--as is the Bonneville Power Administration. Terry Esvelt, vice president for energy services, said the agency believes one of its responsibilities is to promote energy efficiency, and its involvement in the regional energy efficiency collaborative is an efficient way to do so. BPA funding for DSM and conservation activity has dropped from $200 million annually at one time to about $50 million annually now, Esvelt said. He stressed that BPA does not intend, through its energy services business line, to compete with its utility customers or trade allies for DSM business "Clearly we do not want to stand in the place of offering services to customers who could be served by the private sector," he said. Instead, BPA will focus on promoting energy efficiency in the federal sector.
The Federal Energy Management Program also is targeted at that market, said FEMP regional coordinator Curtis Framel. And while utilities are ramping down their conservation spending, FEMP is ramping up. But that translates to only about $20 million in funding, he said, so FEMP also is emphasizing partnerships, both with other federal agencies and the private sector.
Framel described a new offering called Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity contracts, or IDIQs, that will allow federal agencies to order performance-based energy services under the new contracts, which FEMP would sign with energy service companies and then negotiate directly with the selected ESCO for the specific services. "Whoever receives IDIQs will have golden opportunities for efficiency efforts," Framel said.
And no, Esvelt assured, BPA's energy services line won't be among the ESCOs applying for the IDIQs.--Jude Noland
Portland General Electric sold about $80 million worth of energy conservation bonds earlier this month, following Oregon Public Utility Commission approval of the utility's proposal to refinance its conservation expenditures through a bond sale. The deal was made possible under a measure passed last year by the Oregon Legislature.
The Oct. 11 bond sale covers investments PGE made in conservation through Dec. 31, 1995 that had not been amortized by the date of the OPUC filing, according to PGE financial analyst Bill Dassenko. Lynn Plamondon, OPUC senior economic analyst, said expenditures covered by the bond sale include capitalized expenses for commercial/industrial efficiency programs, weatherization and showerhead replacement programs. The PUC disallowed some expenses, she said, such as portions of PGE's advertising costs and 1995 program expenditures.
PGE expected to sell the bonds to Asset Securitization Cooperative Corp. of San Franciso at 7.25 percent interest, but the utility was able to secure an interest rate of 6.91 percent. In return, Asset Securitization is guaranteed full bond pay off from PGE customers over the next 10 years. And PGE's customers are now paying 6.91 percent interest on the investment, rather than the 13.5 percent weighted average cost of capital Dassenko said PGE is authorized to collect in rates. Under the bond sale, customers pay only the cost of debt, rather than both the debt and equity in utility rate base.
In fact, PGE's commercial and industrial rates decreased 2.2 percent effective Oct. 11--although only part of that reduction can be attributed to the bond sale. At the same time the OPUC approved the bond sale--on Oct. 8--commissioners also approved a $17.5 million reduction in the utility's Share All Value Equitably (SAVE) conservation incentive program. Those reductions, however, were offset for PGE's residential customers by an increase in the Bonneville Power Administration's residential exchange rate; as a result, residential rates did not change, Plamondon said.
She believes the utility's conservation bond sale was prompted by PGE's concern that conservation expenditures could become stranded costs, but Dassenko offered a different view. "The primary driver is to reduce the cost to customers of the energy efficiency investments made on their behalf," he said. "We don't know that [conservation costs] would be a stranded investment in a deregulated environment. [They] were in rate base and approved by the PUC."--Jude Noland
A new high school planned near Portland won't open until at least 1999, but it already offers a textbook lesson in how to create energy-efficient buildings. Namely: incorporate efficiency from the earliest stages of design. Get everyone involved to support this goal and work cooperatively to achieve it. And, perhaps most importantly, give building designers a financial incentive--or at least not a disincentive--to spend more time devising energy-efficient solutions.
Oh, and remember to stretch your time horizon. Such a facility may (or may not) cost more to construct, but it will definitely save a small fortune in operating costs over the years and decades ahead.
This exemplary process is unfolding in North Clackamas School District No. 12, which is planning a new 1,800-student high school on a 49-acre site southeast of Portland. The project is in the midst of schematic design, with opening tentatively scheduled for fall 1999--assuming a local bond election is approved next March to finance the $26.5-million construction project.
The North Clackamas school project is notable for the degree of energy efficiency planned, an estimated 25 to 30 percent savings from Oregon's stringent commercial energy code. Designers are focusing considerable attention on efficiencies in the building envelope, such as extensive daylighting and natural ventilation.
But the project may be even more noteworthy for its integrated approach to energy-efficient design. "I think it could be a trend-setter . . . a new model that will be followed by many other clients and architects," said project architect Heinz Rudolf of BOORA Architects in Portland. "Here's a holistic kind of approach to remedy a lot of the problems that we have had in the past" in promoting energy-efficient building design.
BackgroundNorth Clackamas is a growing district that has opened three new schools since 1989. It wants to open the new high school by fall 1999. To do so, according to physical plant director Dave Church, it needs to complete schematic design and some pre-construction development tasks before the bond election next March. Assuming the bond passes, the district can then get right to work on the site and take advantage of three summers for construction. The school board approved $300,000 for this pre-construction phase for the high school as well as a planned new elementary school. BOORA was selected this spring to design the high school.
Meanwhile, Rocky Mountain Institute was scouting around for commercial-building projects to test the idea of linking architect and engineer fees with energy-efficient design. As RMI noted in its summer 1996 newsletter, ". . . exceptionally efficient buildings do tend to cost more to design, simply because of the extra time and attention required to make sure everything is properly integrated. And since designers are typically paid a fee based (often indirectly) on a percentage of the building's cost, they get no extra reward for working harder to make the building efficient, nor do they get a cut of the savings that result. In fact, if they succeed in reducing the building's net cost--a common outcome of green design--they could actually get paid less."
RMI contacted BOORA, and Rudolf thought he had a suitable demonstration candidate. North Clackamas subsequently agreed to pursue this approach.
"Our basic thing was, if we could make improvements to our school that would make it more energy efficient . . . without paying a premium above and beyond, we would be interested in taking a look at that, even if it meant the possibility of some innovative energy programs or designs," said Church. In an era of tight funding for education, the district above all wants to stretch its limited dollars. "Our interest is long-term cost savings," Church said. "If we can reduce our energy consumption over the long term, that will be beneficial to the district; keep our operating costs down, use resources for direct instruction for students, that sort of thing."
Also entering the picture was Portland General Electric and its commercial Earth Smart program to foster comprehensive resource efficiency.
Making Sense for Energy Efficiency
As RMI and many others have suggested (see Conservation Monitor, November and December, 1994), energy-efficient building design typically lacks economic sense for the designers. BOORA is among those architectural firms that strive for energy efficiency, and in fact has won awards for its work. Nevertheless, the firm doesn't prosper financially from energy-saving design. "For the most part, you do it because of reputation and you build the [added] hours within your fees," said Rudolf. "Sometimes those fees are meager [and] the construction costs are low, particularly in schools. It is a constant battle to do something to make it work within all these limitations."
With the North Clackamas project, RMI initially pushed to establish a performance-based system in which the designers would get a financial reward if the building's energy performance exceeded the target, or conversely, would pay a penalty if the performance fell short. This so-called "feebate" approach has been tried at least once, on an administration facility for the city of Oakland, CA. However, according to a report by John Busch and Rick Diamond of Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, the Oakland process drew serious reservations from design-build teams who bid on the project. They viewed the process as too prescriptive, questioned the accuracy of computer modeling used to determine compliance, lacked confidence in public-sector operations and maintenance practices, and focused much more on the potential penalty than the potential reward.
Although a performance incentive has not been established for the North Clackamas project, the parties did agree to work toward a facility whose energy savings would exceed Oregon's energy code by approximately 30 percent. And the design team will be paid for whatever extra time it takes to reach for that goal. "I think good design takes time," said Church. "I think they're stretching the limits of good design [and] I think they're being fairly compensated." Although the building designers don't have energy performance standards in their contract, they do have reputations at stake. "We are promising that this building is going to be a champion performer," said Rudolf. He believes the additional hours for energy-efficient design will be "not all that much" and North Clackamas will recover those costs in energy savings within a couple of years, "which would be very good, considering the buildings we are designing are [intended to last] for 100 years."
PGE's Huston Eubank, an architect by training, believes this "extremely unusual" approach to building design fosters innovative thinking on efficiency when it can do the most good: at the beginning. "That's really the message [from North Clackamas]: 'We realize the importance of the design process and we'll pay you enough to go in and do it right the first time.'"
Design Strategies
Halfway through the schematic design process, the proposed North Clackamas high school is evolving to make substantial use of age-old lighting and ventilation techniques--with considerable help from sophisticated computer-modeling technology.
The basic approach is to focus on the building design as a source of energy efficiency, particularly through extensive use of daylighting and natural ventilation strategies. This is expected to cost more for construction than standard large-building design, but the added expenses should be offset by smaller, simpler and less costly HVAC systems. "If those two trade off precisely [in cost], that's good," said Church. "Then if we get long-term energy savings, that's good." The district has previously sought energy efficiencies in its new buildings, he said, but primarily by focusing on equipment. "This is taking it a step further," into the design of the building envelope.
Daylighting and natural ventilation are described by Rudolf as "two very promising categories we think can reduce energy consumption." On the lighting side, he said, building designers are looking at large windows, clerestories and light shelves, v-shaped ceilings to reflect light, sloping skylights, lighting dispersal techniques and the placement of light fixtures to complement natural daylighting. The lighting work is being enhanced by Lightscape, a computer modeling software program PGE purchased for this project. Lightscape provides very detailed and realistic 3-D representations of various lighting strategies, according to Eubank.
As for ventilation, the design team is examining strategies that Rudolf called "greatly simplified from conventional HVAC systems." These, he said, include items like openings in walls and near windows, and chimney-like structures for air flow inside and out. For heating the school would take advantage of "sweaty little bodies," who, according to Eubank, would be "the engine that drives the air through the building." This concept of "passive ventilation" has historical precedents, including the original White House "It's a system that's been around for years," according to Eubank. "We're sort of rediscovering it." Mechanical back-up systems for heating and cooling would be included, Rudolf said. Designers are considering radiant ceiling planes that could provide water-source cooling or heating, naturally ventilated. "We're looking at those kinds of things right now to see which is the best and most promising," he said.
 |
A classroom scene... 110 K |
| A hallway in the planned high school 141 K |
 |
 |
Another virtual classroom 112 K |
| Photos courtesy of BOORA Architects | |
In addition to Lightscape, North Clackamas school designers are using a Windows version of DOE-2 energy modeling software. This provides detailed, accurate and visual projections of the school's energy use, broken into 60 thermal zones, according to project consultant Charley Eley. Although the total goal is to exceed Oregon code by 25 to 30 percent, the energy savings gained by design decisions--excluding plug loads, exterior lighting and other energy uses unaffected by the structures themselves--are likely to be in the range of 50 percent, he predicted. "I think this North Clackamas project is extremely energy efficient. Everything that's cost-effective is probably being used here."
And, not least, Eubank said PGE would provide resources to help with building commissioning after the North Clackamas high school is built, to ensure the facility is operating as intended.
Also, according to Rudolf, North Clackamas will buy equipment to monitor the building's ongoing energy performance. "For instance, we could have the best working building, but if somebody runs the kitchen air conditioning and heating 24 hours a day, we would not know that was happening."
Working Together
Central to the North Clackamas building design process is collaboration--a true sense of partnership among the school district, the architects and engineers, RMI, PGE, Eley and other participants. Their roles, expertise and beliefs are complementary to an exceptional degree.
"This is an example of integrated design, which is something in the U.S. [that's] not a common practice," said Eubank. "The typical practice here is for all of the engineers and architects to all go off their separate ways. They don't really recognize other members of the team. The goal [here] is to get as many elements of the building serving as many purposes as possible."
It also helps, as he noted, to have a school district for a client. Unlike many commercial developers, North Clackamas expects to own and operate the high school as far into the future as anyone can see, and thus can take a long-term perspective on building design and construction.
Eubank and the other participants hope the North Clackamas design approach eventually becomes more the rule than the exception. "I think that the pendulum is swinging back toward quality, and this kind of thinking [here] is the kind of thinking that produces quality buildings," he said. "You reward people for the results you want."--Mark Ohrenschall
A Seattle neighborhood is considerably more energy efficient these days, due to a unique community-based comprehensive resource conservation program sponsored by the city government. The Fremont neighborhood also is more cohesive and enjoys a better relationship with the Seattle bureaucracy. And its considerable environmental awareness has grown even more.
The city, meanwhile, has gained some energy savings, improved its rapport with citizens and generated ideas for delivering government services more collaboratively and cost-effectively.
These are among the results--energy and otherwise--of the Fremont Neighborhood Power Project, a combined effort involving Seattle City Light, five other city agencies, Bonneville Power Administration, (the late) Washington State Energy Office, Urban Resources Partnership and--as the name implies--the Fremont community north of downtown alongside Lake Union.
As conceived by City Light and its energy management services director, Marc Sullivan, FNPP was intended as an ambitious experiment in cooperative resource conservation (see Conservation Monitor, October 1994). FNPP set out in early 1995 to promote energy, water and solid-waste efficiencies in a specific urban neighborhood, through a public-agency joint venture with a heavy focus on community involvement.
On the energy end, at least, FNPP did a creditable job by the numbers. It saved 2.19 million kilowatt-hours, the vast majority through a small-business lighting efficiency program that offered rebates of up to 80 percent. Still, the total fell short of FNPP's overall energy-saving goal of 2.63 million KWh. Cost-effectiveness figures are unavailable for the whole project, but the small commercial component came in at 4.3 cents/KWh on a weighted levelized basis.
Other results are mixed. Savings for one water program exceeded numerical goals, while figures for the solid-waste ventures are either incomplete or short of the goals. Meanwhile, the number of students reached by conservation education nearly doubled projections.
But numbers don't tell the whole story. On the people side, FNPP appears to have been a big (although not unqualified) success. Most notably, FNPP has by all accounts improved the often-prickly relationship between Fremonsters and city government. It also enhanced the sense of Fremont community. At the same time, bureaucrats in different city agencies didn't always work harmoniously on the project.
Model Government Program
Despite its relatively modest conservation accomplishments, the Fremont Neighborhood Power Project has received wide acclaim as a model government program.
It received the 1996 American Society for Public Administration Award of Merit for Singular Exemplary Achievement. Project leaders are in great demand to speak about the unique aspects of FNPP and have hosted representatives from as far afield as Belize, Peru, New Zealand, Thailand and Italy. "From a utility perspective, this is an exciting and different way of dealing with customers," said Seattle City Light's Bev Corwin, acting energy management services director.
Seattle elected officials, too, have formally commended FNPP. "This kind of pooling of resources and personal energy brought together around environmental stewardship is very much a part of what comprehensive planning for Seattle is all about," said city councilwoman Margaret Pageler at a May 30 ceremony. She lauded the Fremont project for fostering multiresource conservation and a sense of community.
Mayor Norm Rice also endorsed FNPP. "This is a wonderful example of city agencies and a close-knit community working together to reduce energy consumption, achieve substantial savings and improve the quality of life in our neighborhoods," he said.
Perhaps the surest sign of the project's success is the fact it is being repeated in another neighborhood, Georgetown/Maple Hill, south of downtown. The focus is still resource conservation and community involvement, adapted to a different neighborhood and, at least for City Light, a different imperative. "I think for us what's important is it's become a new way for us to get closer to our customers," said Corwin. Initially, she observed, City Light people envisioned the Fremont approach as a means to systematically sweep up the remaining cost-effective energy savings in Seattle. Now, with electric industry restructuring, the emphasis has shifted to serving customers. "We need to be just a lot better at getting close to our customers, finding out what they really want," said Corwin. "I think this neighborhood project is a very good way for the city to tune in on what's going on in those communities and what they want and what they need."
FNPP in The Neighborhood
The Fremont Neighborhood Power Project integrated into the community in a number of ways, from involvement with neighborhood organizations to participation in local events to door-to-door canvassing of homes and businesses. Project leaders wanted to establish a true partnership between government and community. "They were suspicious at first, but they gave us our chance," said City Light residential project manager Mialee Jose. "We got involved and helped in any we could . . . trying to make their goals our goals. We had to broaden our concept of what customer service is."
Noted for its imaginative and vibrant arts scene, Fremont also has a reputation for environmental awareness. "I think sustainability was important to Fremont and once neighborhood power came, it got more people involved . . . gave it a greater participation, and something more recent," said commercial/industrial project manager Janice Boman.
FNPP officially started Jan. 21, 1995, with a kickoff event at the local Puget Consumers' Co-op store. Subsequent FNPP activities included free conservation classes, phone banks, packet mailings, school presentations, booth displays at popular Fremont events, community surveys, a garden tour, door-to-door canvassing, and waste-management consultations and joint energy/water audits for businesses.
In the residential sector, energy savings came to 374,334 KWh, less than half the targeted amount. FNPP did exceed its goals for apartment conservation and came close in new efficient apartments built, but was well short in home insulation, water-heater rebates and installation of compact fluorescent lights. As for water, only one leaky toilet was reported fixed through FNPP. And in solid waste, just one apartment started recycling; the goal was eight.
Nevertheless, FNPP's long-term conservation impacts on Fremont residents may be significant. More than 700 Fremonsters returned environmental action statements pledging to pursue assorted efficiencies, recycling activities and resource reductions at home, in the yard, shopping and in the neighborhood. The most frequently checked item was a request for the Do-it-Yourself Home Energy Audit Guide.
Small Business Success Story
From a resource conservation perspective, clearly the most successful element of FNPP was the small business program, dubbed $mart Business. It reached a group of customers that Sullivan earlier acknowledged had not been effectively served by existing City Light programs.
$mart Business took a saturation marketing approach, contacting all 345 identified eligible customers in the Fremont neighborhood. Of those, 233 customers received free audits, 185 customers heard sales presentations, and 137 customers ultimately participated in the program, which featured an 80-percent rebate for lighting efficiency upgrades. By far the most popular measures were assorted T-8 fluorescent lamp retrofits. The average participating customer is saving 11,400 KWh and $450 in electric bills annually, and has an average return on investment of less than 1.5 years.
Altogether, $mart Business saved 1.61 million kilowatt-hours--the goal was 1.35 million KWh--at a total cost of $435,777, including $347,957 in BPA-funded rebates. Weighted levelized cost amounted to 4.29 cents/KWh, which City Light officials acknowledge is high for the competitive era. However, Boman said many program participants signed up only because of the large incentives offered; otherwise, it wasn't worth their time. She also noted that serving small businesses provides economic benefits to the community and has political support in Seattle.
City Light will continue the 80-percent rebate for small businesses in Georgetown, according to Corwin, although it will run the program itself instead of using a contractor as it did in Fremont. This should lower the program cost.
As for larger commercial and industrial customers, FNPP conducted a number of audits in Fremont. But only one customer signed up for the city's Energy Savings Plan program, which resulted in savings of 185,000 KWh. On the water side, FNPP reported 13 commercial toilet retrofits saving a collective 1.2 million gallons annually. In addition, Fremont's half-dozen largest water users all have recently installed new filtration and water-retention systems "as a result of talking through what they can do in comparison to what the utility can do," reported Suzie Burke, treasurer of the Fremont Chamber of Commerce.
The Human Side
Two years ago, Burke and other Fremonsters candidly acknowledged the community's difficulties with Seattle government over the years. She specifically mentioned top-down planning dictates from the city.
Now, however, Burke's feelings are considerably more positive. "I think our interaction with City Light was probably our most successful interaction with a city bureaucracy any neighborhood has ever seen," she enthused. "Just extremely nice people, and they did everything they could do and then some . . . It was very, very well-done . . . very beneficial." She described the community's reaction as "very positive. I think they were delighted with the project, and this is not a real bureaucratic community. This is a community that likes to slam dunk and get something done, and [with FNPP] there was a lot of slam dunk and get something done." In addition to the various efficiencies, she noted, FNPP provided important information to Fremonsters such as how-to details on recycling and contacts for reporting street light outages.
For longtime Fremont activist Michael Gilbert, FNPP showed the potential for more efficient delivery of government services, conservation and otherwise, as well as bringing government closer to the people it serves. "It builds synergy and participation in the neighborhood," he said. "People have something to work with they can grasp, rather than 17 anonymous institutions or bureaucracies . . . It's in the category of the reinvention of government. This is a place where I felt like the city of Seattle is actually doing that."
Gilbert said he is closely watching to see whether the FNPP model expands. "Environmental issues, like so many issues, are ones that cut across bureaucratic boundaries, and we need models of government" adapting to that reality. "A neighborhood-focused model is focused on a place, and environment is about place. [FNPP] seems to be a particularly apt juxtaposition of bureaucratic strategies and what's good for the environment."
In addition to fostering goodwill between the city and Fremont, FNPP also, by many accounts, helped coalesce people in the community. "It became more of a social thing, people got together, they had meetings in people's houses," recalled George Heideman, who serves on the Chamber board and the Fremont Neighborhood Council. "The important thing is to get people in the community talking to each other, and [FNPP] worked in that respect . . . If communities can talk to each other, then they can work better with the city, and the city can work better with the county" and so on. "I think it's a true source of democracy . . . This probably was not intentional on the part of City Light, but I think this was what happened and it was very worthwhile . . . probably much more important than the little bit of energy that was conserved."
Although FNPP officially ended early this year, a standing committee of five Fremont residents was established to continue local conservation-related activities. "The community's commitment to carry on once the program ended kind of showed they believe in it . . . there's buy-in," said Steve Louie, coordinator of the city's Fremont Neighborhood Services Center.
While FNPP fostered closer relationships between Fremont and the city and among Fremonsters, it did not universally do the same among participating city agencies: City Light and the water, solid waste, neighborhoods, police and planning departments.
City Light clearly took the lead role, and in fact had the only dedicated staff for FNPP, according to Boman. Managing the team proved challenging, she acknowledged. City Light had the notion of FNPP as a "group think tank," but some city representatives thought there were too many meetings. She believes the team eventually came together in developing the project.
However, FNPP proved somewhat disappointing for the Seattle Water Department. "We didn't realize any significant water savings in the neighborhood," said program manager Shelley Lawson. Had the water department independently chosen a neighborhood for community conservation, it likely would have selected a neighborhood with more big green lawns and water-gulping businesses. "They're already doing everything right in Fremont," she said.
Lawson also believes the FNPP's basic approach was flawed. "If you want to step back and look at what services does a community need from the city, Fremont would say we need police for safety and engineering for traffic issues. Those are the two things the community really needed. What we were offering was conservation." It might be better to focus on those critical services, then move into conservation, she suggested.
Lawson thinks some city programs should be coordinated, such as the low-flow showerhead giveaway of 1992 (see Conservation Monitor, July 1992). But others, such as the community organizing aspect of FNPP, just don't apply to the water department. "That's what we finally concluded: Let's coordinate on a community-based project when it makes sense," she said.
Lawson added she did appreciate learning about other conservation programs within city government.
Final Thoughts
Energy conservation programs of the past, Boman said, generally have focused on sectors--industrial sector, commercial sector, residential sector. Few have focused on communities. And the key to community-based programs is discovering linkages, particularly in this era of dwindling utility DSM funding and staff. "You need to look at ways to leverage funds and deliver services," she said. This may mean relying more on volunteers, as FNPP staffers came to do during the project.
"Look around your community and look for linkages and groups of volunteers and court them," Boman said.
"We need new approaches to reach customers," said Jose.
"I think that's the way of the future," concluded Boman. --Mark Ohrenschall
Attachment:
In times past, Eugene Water & Electric Board staff freely shared information with other utilities about EWEB's renowned solar water-heating program. They're still happy to do so--but not for free. The program has value, they reason, and utilities should be willing to pay for that value.
So EWEB has created a menu of services for The Bright Way to Heat Water program and is offering them to utilities. Among the services extended are a license to use the program identity, specifications forms and documents, such as a program description and legal agreements with contractors. Other services include technical and administrative support, training and consultations.
Utilities purchasing Bright Way services can attach their own name to the program in their service territories, and can make some local modifications, such as for codes, according to EWEB energy management program supervisor Kathy Grey. Generally, though, uniformity is encouraged. "One of the things we want to maintain is a quality program, just like the Super Good Cents program," she said. "We want customers to have confidence, once they see the Bright Way graphic, they have a quality system put on their homes."
Already, neighboring Emerald PUD and the city of Ashland in southern Oregon have purchased program services, and Lane Electric Cooperative was close to contracting as of Oct. 21. In addition, the Oregon Municipal Energy and Conservation Agency (OMECA) signed up for a training session. "They did an excellent job in providing the training," said OMECA's Cathy Higgins.
And without much active marketing by EWEB to date, even a couple of utilities outside the Northwest have shown interest in The Bright Way to Heat Water, according to EWEB solar staffers. "That was kind of a surprise to us," Grey acknowledged.
EWEB has fielded plenty of inquiries on its solar water-heating program since it began in 1990, and utility staff has gladly obliged. Then came the emerging competitive era for the electric industry. "We realized we were getting a lot of requests to help people set up their solar water-heating programs," said Grey. "We said, 'Wait a minute; this new environment, we had something here. 'Our staff's technical expertise in the solar water-heating arena was of value. The time spent researching, developing specs, testing things out had some value."
She conceded it was hard to switch from giving away information to selling services, but she and other EWEB staff realized their expertise was important. "For somebody else to sit down and develop all [the program elements] from scratch would take quite a while."
Ashland officials agree, according to conservation manager Dick Wanderscheid. "They had been through the day-to-day wars getting a program up and operational, figuring out all the bugs, dealing with contractors. We felt we could get a lot of bang for the buck by buying their program." Of particular benefit to Ashland are the ready-made specifications for good, long-lasting solar systems, as well as the Bright Way trademark. "There might be some kind of advantages of piggybacking on that program, especially if other utilities buy it," he said. "The more people promoting it under that name, the easier it is for everyone to promote it."
Wanderscheid noted it has been "very unusual" for public-power utilities to sell services to their brethren, but he thinks EWEB is taking a "reasonable approach" with Bright Way. Ashland gained a quality program at a "fair price" and got it running quickly, offering rebates to participating customers. The new program hadn't led to any installations as of Oct. 22, but many Ashlanders had sought more information.
The base package for Bright Way--license, documents and forms--costs in the range of $2,000 to $2,500, plus 5 cents for each meter served by the purchasing utility, according to EWEB's Don Spiek. EWEB initally intends simply to recover its development costs, but at some point, he said, "We would like to have it produce some revenue . . . That helps us in some of our other solar endeavors here in the utility."
Despite Eugene's reputation for gray, soggy weather (University of Oregon athletic teams are called the Ducks, after all), solar water-heating actually works fairly well in the southern Willamette Valley. Residential solar systems in the area can supply anywhere from 35 percent to 75 percent of total annual water-heating loads, according to Spiek. Estimated annual energy savings range from 1,400 kilowatt-hours to 3,000 KWh.
Nearly 550 solar water-heating systems have been installed in EWEB service territory under Bright Way, he said. Primarily designed for residential customers, the program offers incentives of up to $700 for installation costs, along with a zero-interest loan of up to $2,500 (eligible systems typically retail from $2,400 to $3,400; they must be purchased from one of five licensed solar contractors). The exact amount of financial help varies depending on the size of the installed system. Oregonians who install solar water heating systems also are eligible for a state tax credit of up to $1,200, Spiek noted.
EWEB's program has grown every year, evidence of solar's popularity. "The interest is there" among EWEB customers, Spiek said. "They have said repeatedly they want to see that sort of program or service offered. We do have the local backing."
Solar energy does have a market, believes Higgins. "There's certainly a segment of customers in all parts of the Northwest that would be motivated to get solar by the involvement of the utility as a technical expert and any sort of financial assistance." However, she added, "It is just a niche of customers. There's a lot of other energy service offerings" utilities are interested in that will reach more customers, such as duct repair and thermostat programs.
Still, Bright Way opens possibilities for utilities to provide a renewable energy option. "It makes it possible to continue this type of program, especially in a competitive environment," said Grey. "The smaller utilities may not have the resources or the time to develop a whole program. If you can provide them those services, then their customers are still happy."--Mark Ohrenschall
A survey of 41 randomly selected manufactured homes in Idaho found a significant number failed to meet the manufacturer setup standards. As a result, the energy efficiency of the homes built under the Northwest Energy Efficient Manufactured Home Program and located in 11 different utility services areas--wasn't as high as it could have been.
The survey was conducted by the Idaho Department of Water Resources' Energy Division. Energy conservation specialist Ted Minter said he wasn't surprised by the results, although he had hoped for better compliance.
Specific problems identified included sealing the marriage line that joins multisection manufactured homes; crossover connections; venting of dryer and other exhaust ducts; and sealing and repairing belly-board penetrations.
In addition, the survey found that 17 of the homesites, or 41 percent, had poor drainage. "We were surprised by the number of problems here," Minter said. Poor site drainage can reduce a home's energy efficiency by allowing off-site water to pool on the site, causing moisture problems and uneven settling of the ground under the home. "Total structural support for the house is needed for energy efficiency," Minter said.
Site preparation and drainage aren't covered in the NEEM program setup training IDWR conducts each year for manufactured home dealers and setup crews. And Minter said it's unclear who is responsible for such problems. The dealers could perform a site inspection, Minter said, but legislation may be needed to determine how to deal with the issue.
Minter also said that since the demise of the Manufactured Housing Acquisition Progam, or MAP, which NEEM replaced, only 35 percent of electrically heated manufactured homes made in Idaho are built to high energy efficiency standards, compared to 100 percent under the MAP program. "We have not transformed the market in this regard," Minter said.--Jude Noland
The city of Ashland has agreed to purchase solar and wind-generated electricity produced by local residents and businesses, under a recently approved city policy designed to encourage small-scale, grid-connected renewables.
Ashland will pay 1.25 times the highest residential retail block rate for surplus kilowatt-hours generated by local solar photovoltaic and wind-energy systems, up to 1,000 KWh per month. Any additional power generated will earn the city's prevailing wholesale power rate. Qualifying systems must be 100-kilowatt-capacity or smaller and meet technical standards for interconnection with Ashland's grid.
The new policy has its origins in the example set by a woman who moved to Ashland and built an off-grid solar- and wind-powered home, according to the city's regional affairs/conservation manager Dick Wanderscheid. She later served on a city conservation commission, which decided Ashland should develop a policy to purchase locally generated renewable power. The city council's Oct. 1 resolution declares Ashland's intent to "provide adequate incentives to encourage renewable generation while remaining on the city's electric grid."
Wanderscheid acknowledged the policy as largely symbolic, since it takes a significant investment in PV and/or wind to spin an electric meter backwards. But he said it could encourage people, for example, to add solar panels and remain on the grid, rather than buy batteries for power storage. The renewables-purchase policy also adds to Ashland's stature as an environmentally progressive utility (see Conservation Monitor, November 1992), which could have benefits in the competitive energy marketplace.--Mark Ohrenschall
The second Northwest Conference on Building Commissioning will take place Nov. 4 and 5 at the Hilton Hotel in Portland. It will cover the why, what, who, how and when of building commissioning, which is the process of ensuring a building performs according to the design intent and the owner's operational and business needs.
The gathering--which will include a conference, workshops and tours--is intended for building owners/developers, facility/energy managers, architects, engineers, utility technical staff and program managers, building operators, commissioning agents, HVAC and other equipment installers, lenders and insurers. Sponsoring the conference are Bonneville Power Administration, the Northwest Power Planning Council, Portland General Electric and PacifiCorp.
For more information, contact Nancy Benner or Debby Dodds at Portland Energy Conservation Inc.: phone, (503) 248-4636, ext. 205; fax, (503) 295-0820; e-mail, peci@teleport.com; mailing address, 921 SW Washington, Suite 840, Portland OR 97205.
October is Energy Awareness Month in Oregon, as declared by Gov. John Kitzhaber, and promotion of energy efficiency is a key element of the month's activities.
The Oregon Office of Energy, Oregon Oil Heat Commission, Northwest Natural Gas, Portland General Electric, Pacific Power, the city of Portland Energy Office and U.S. Bancorp have joined to promote energy awareness, focusing on home energy. The group has developed public-service announcements, published home energy tips in The Oregonian, distributed press packets on home weatherization, energy-saving appliances and energy-efficient new homes, printed energy information on grocery bags at Nature's and Safeway markets, and instituted a special program with Portland Public Schools to promote energy efficiency.
"During the past 12 months, we have seen weather extremes that have taxed our energy supplies and set new consumption records," said OOE administrator John Savage. "Energy and its efficient use continue to be crucial to our quality of life and economy."
In his proclamation for Energy Awareness Month, Kitzhaber described conservation as "the cheapest and most environmentally sound way to meet our growing demand for energy." Oregonians "have made notable progress toward energy efficiency," he noted, and they can "help protect Oregon's quality of life by becoming more energy efficient in their homes, at their workplaces and in how they travel."
Con.WEB is sponsored by Eugene Water & Electric Board, Clark Public Utilities, Seattle City Light, Tacoma City Light, Idaho Power, Montana Power, PacifiCorp, Portland General Electric, Puget Power and the Bonneville Power Administration. OFFICES: Mail-P.O. Box 900928, Seattle, WA 98109-9228. EXPRESS: 117 West Mercer, Seattle, WA 98119. TELEPHONE-(206) 285-4848. FAX-(206) 281-8035. E-MAIL-iod@newsdata.com. Con.WEB was created by the Energy NewsData Web team, including: Publisher-Cyrus Noë; Editor-Mark Ohrenschall; Associate Editor-Jude Noland; Contributing Editors-Pamela Russell and Ben Tansey; Webmaster-Whitney Dickinson; General Manager-Brooke Dickinson; Office Manager & HTML Coding-Denise Lee; Production Assistant-Michael Katayama; Administrative Assistant-Christina Smith; Graphic Design-Mike Katayama
[ IOD | Con.WEB Archives | NW EnerNet ]
Please contact lisaw@newsdata.com if you have questions or comments
about this website or call 206/285-4848.
Last modified: October 25, 1996
http://www.newsdata.com/enernet/conweb/conweb10.html
Copyright © 1996 Energy NewsData
Return to Contents