CWEB.032/Aug.28.1998
ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND RENEWABLE ENERGY are big business in Washington state. How big? Efficiency and renewables firms produce close to $1 billion in annual revenues--comparable to the state's apple industry--according to a new study prepared for the Energy Division of the state Department of Community, Trade and Economic Development. "It's certainly not a Microsoft, but it's significant," a state energy official concluded of the magnitude of Washington's clean-energy industry.
Also in this issue, we take a look at the city of Seattle's new requirement for commissioning of new non-residential buildings. This is believed to be the first such regulation in the region for commissioning, whose purpose is to ensure that building systems operate as intended and whose benefits include energy savings.
In the industrial sector, variable-frequency drives on evaporator fans are a promising energy-efficient technology for the region's cold-storage industry. They are being promoted through an initiative funded by the Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance.
The Alliance, meanwhile, is winnowing the 45 market transformation proposals it received in an open solicitation. We cover the progress of the process, along with the Alliance board's decision to renew funding for this publication.
There's more, too, in this issue of Con.WEB, including a look at the Energy' 98 conference.
|
Comments? Advice? Send feedback to the editor. |
Energy efficiency and renewable energy represent a substantial industry in Washington, although not quite on the scale of such well-known Evergreen State enterprises as airplanes, computer software and tourism.
Washington's energy efficiency and renewable energy industry conservatively numbers 274 companies that collectively generate revenues approaching $1 billion a year and employ nearly 4,000 people, according to a new study prepared by ECONorthwest for the Energy Division of the Washington Department of Community, Trade and Economic Development. Most of those revenues and employment are attributable to the efficiency industry.
"It's certainly not a Microsoft, but it's significant," said CTED senior energy policy specialist Tony Usibelli.
Stan Price, executive director of the Northwest Energy Efficiency Council, a trade association for the efficiency industry, said he was "pleased at the [study's] general outcome that efficiency does represent such a revenue contributor to the economy of Washington state, and frankly well above what had been best-guessed estimates I had seen from various sources . . . A billion dollars is an impressive number."
For some perspective, Washington's energy efficiency/renewable industry is much smaller than tourism ($9.1 billion in 1997 revenues, and 124,000 jobs), aircraft and parts manufacturing (about 111,000 jobs currently) and lumber and wood products (35,000 jobs currently), according to state statistics.
Still, the efficiency/renewable industry's 1997 revenue of $923 million, as reported in the study, is nearly equivalent to the total value at the warehouse door of Washington's famed apple crop, which was estimated at $943 million for the 1996-97 season, according to figures from the Washington Apple Commission.
In addition to defining and describing the efficiency and renewable sectors of Washington's economy, the study outlines current challenges--declining utility funding and low wholesale electric prices--along with long-range opportunities--overseas markets for renewable energy and public-policy initiatives addressing global warming and electric industry restructuring. The study also delves into trends in electric markets generally, and energy efficiency and renewables specifically.
The study concludes with a partly sunny assessment: "While these trends [utility cutbacks and cheap power] present near-term challenges for firms in these industries, interviews with company leaders and other industry experts suggest that the long-term prospects are positive for energy efficiency and renewable energy . . . The majority of firms interviewed in this study felt that with supportive public policies, their companies had strong potential for future growth."
Price echoed this view. He described the magnitude of Washington's efficiency industry as "a testament to the commitment this region has made to efficiency over the last 15 years. That commitment . . . largely flows from the commitment made by utilities to efficiency, and that includes Bonneville [Power Administration]." Recently, Price noted, many utilities have cut back their efficiency spending, and Washington among other states has not established public-purposes funding for efficiency and renewables. "If in fact we're going to build on this base outlined in this report, we're certainly going to need conscious public-policy activity that maintains the region's commitment to efficiency."
The energy efficiency and renewable industries benefit Washington in a number of ways, according to the study. "First, they are an important source of employment and income for a significant number of Washington residents, generating close to $1 billion in annual revenue and employing over 3,800 people. Furthermore, as these industries develop and expand, they will add new employment and revenue as markets grow within the Northwest, as well as throughout the United States and overseas. Finally, energy efficiency and renewable energy businesses add to the region's quality of life by employing technologies that can reduce some of the harmful effects of our society's reliance on fossil fuels."
Background . . . and Foreground
CTED has an interest in encouraging the state's clean-energy industry, according to Usibelli, but before commissioning this study the agency lacked anything other than "back-of-the-napkin calculations" on the scope of energy efficiency and renewable energy firms in Washington. "It was important to us to not only understand how big the industry was, but to get a good list of companies," he said. In addition,
 |
| Source: "The Next Generation of Energy: The Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Industries in Washington State." |
The information in the report has a number of potential applications, according to Usibelli. It could be used promotionally to expand business opportunities for Washington firms, and to help trade associations (such as the Northwest Energy Efficiency Council and the Washington State Solar Energy Industries Association) recruit new members.
Usibelli also believes the state can further establish itself as a friendly home for the clean-energy industry. The means could include encouraging energy efficiency and renewable energy businesses as economic development strategies in rural areas, providing state tax incentives and disseminating technical assistance and information.
"It's pretty clear we're going to move off fossil fuels; whether 20 years from now, or 50 years, there will be an energy transition," Usibelli said. "The efficiency and renewable industries are definitely the industries of the future. Can Washington position itself . . . to take advantage of it, or will it be California or Colorado or someplace else? We can do some things to make sure Washington gets a share of that pie."
Defining, Measuring Washington's Clean Energy Industry
The report takes a restrained approach on what constitutes the efficiency and renewable industries in Washington.
In efficiency, Usibelli noted, one could argue for the inclusion of builders who construct homes exceeding the stringent efficiency standards of Washington's residential energy code, or retail outlets that sell energy-efficient items ranging from light bulbs to furnaces.
"We did not take this expansive view of the industry," the study said, "and instead focused on firms which identified themselves or which other organizations identified as being in the energy efficiency business . . . This approach likely understates the magnitude of the industry in the Washington economy because many other firms engage in ancillary activities that also enhance the energy efficiency of the region's homes and workplaces." Indeed, said Usibelli, "I think our numbers are pretty conservative."
Among entities specifically excluded from the study's employment and revenue tally are electric and gas utilities, non-profit groups and governments.
In renewables, the study counts firms that design, sell, install and/or operate energy facilities using solar, wind, geothermal and biomass resources. Fuel cells and electric vehicles also are included, but not large-scale hydroelectric plants. The study does take into account companies that design and engineer small hydro projects of 30 megawatts or less capacity, "which are generally considered to pose fewer environmental risks than larger hydropower facilities."
ECONorthwest reported that it identified Washington efficiency and renewable firms through trade associations, publications, government agencies, Internet searches, company directories, Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) codes, and interviews with company officials and others involved in these industries. Revenue and employment assessments were developed from information gathered by state agencies.
An appendix to the report lists contact information for the identified Washington efficiency and renewable firms (revenue and employment data on individual companies is confidential). The appendix also includes a wealth of resources for the efficiency and renewable energy industries, in Washington as well as regionally and nationally.
Energy Efficiency
The study came up with 134 energy efficiency firms in Washington state. Total employment in this category is about 2,900 people. Estimated industry revenues for 1997 were nearly $780 million, and total wages paid amounted to about $128 million.
Within the efficiency category, more than one-third of the firms were identified as energy service companies and related engineering firms. These accounted for 55 percent of the total efficiency-sector revenues and 45 percent of total employment. Other types of firms categorized include electrical suppliers and contractors, lighting, controls, consultants and HVAC, along with "general."
Renewables
A total of 140 renewable energy firms were listed in Washington, although their revenue and employment figures were considerably smaller than the efficiency industry. These renewable-related companies had total 1997 revenues of some $147 million and employed about 900 people.
"People don't tend to think about much renewable activity in the state of Washington," said Usibelli, adding that the study provided evidence of "a much bigger industry than I would have thought."
The biggest single category within renewables is solar energy. "The sector consisting of solar thermal energy, photovoltaics, and related energy storage systems and power inverters contributed nearly half" of revenue and employment totals for the renewable industry, the study noted.--Mark Ohrenschall
More Information:
The practice of building commissioning will become standard practice for new commercial buildings in the city of Seattle.
In a regulatory rule believed to be the first of its kind in a Northwest energy code, the region's largest city will require commissioning of mechanical and electrical systems in new non-residential buildings as a condition for receiving final certificates of occupancy.
Commissioning is the process of ensuring building systems operate as intended, both individually and collectively. It is more commonly applied to new construction, but can be done for existing buildings.
Energy conservation is the primary motivation behind this new regulation, according to John Hogan of the Seattle Department of Construction and Land Use (DCLU). Hogan also noted that commissioning provides more comfortable indoor environments and improved operations of building systems, although the rule only addresses the energy aspect.
Hogan anticipates "relatively modest" energy savings resulting from the commissioning rule, because many new buildings already receive commissioning services. He did not have a specific projection for efficiency gains from the regulation, which he believes will mainly affect building professionals who are "catching up to the industry standards," he said.
Rick Casault, board president of the fledgling Building Commissioning Association--Northwest, believes the Seattle regulation will make its greatest impact on private development. "What we're going to see is perhaps more commissioning in the commercial sector, where we hadn't seen it so much of before," he said. "The government and institutional facilities have kind of jumped on the commissioning bandwagon pretty early. Commercial developers have been a little slower to recognize the value [of commissioning]." (See Con.WEB, March 28, 1997, for a story on building commissioning, including brief case studies from the private and public sectors.)
"Most of the people that I have directly worked with have come a long way the last four or five years in commissioning," said Javad Maadanian of Seattle City Light, which offers a commissioning program that emphasizes education of building owners and developers, and also pays for development of commissioning plans (but not commissioning itself). He noted that commissioning is standard practice at such Seattle institutions as the University of Washington and Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, and is becoming more common at other large entities. Cost remains an issue surrounding commissioning, particularly for smaller buildings, Maadanian said.
He described the city's commissioning requirement as "a step in the right direction. Developers and consulting firms . . . need to be educated about it." He doesn't believe the new role will change City Light's approach to commissioning.
Seattle's Commissioning Rule
The commissioning requirement is one of numerous revisions to Seattle's non-residential energy code unanimously approved by the City Council July 13 and signed by Mayor Paul Schell on July 16. These revisions--in the form of Seattle amendments to the 1997 Washington State Energy Code--took effect Aug. 15, although a 60-day grace period will allow developers to choose to comply with either the 1994 or 1997 code until Oct. 13. After that date, Hogan said, all buildings for which building-permit applications are received by the city will have to follow the 1997 regulations.
Seattle's new commissioning rule mandates--for so-called simple systems, warehouses and semi-heated spaces--testing of HVAC control systems "to ensure that control devices, components, equipment and systems are calibrated, adjusted and operate in accord with approved plans and specifications. Sequences of operation shall be functionally tested to ensure they operate in accord with approved plans and specifications. A complete report of test procedures and results shall be prepared and filed with the owner. Drawing notes shall require commissioning . . ." The "simple systems" generally cover small one- or two-story commercial buildings with single rooftop heating/cooling units, according to Hogan.
"All other HVAC control systems, and other automatically controlled systems for which energy consumption, performance, or mode of operation are regulated by this code" also require such testing, along with certain documentation, a preliminary commissioning report--including test results, with deficiencies identified and correction dates anticipated--and a final commissioning report. The preliminary report must be completed for a building to receive a final certificate of occupancy from the city government. Building owners are required to receive commissioning reports.
Although this technically applies to all non-residential spaces constructed within Seattle's municipal jurisdiction, "Practically it won't include very much of industrial," Hogan noted. "It's more the commercial/institutional type of building." For example, a new blast furnace at a steel plant wouldn't require commissioning, but new office space for the plant would.
The city of Seattle's role is limited to making sure the preliminary commissioning report is completed; city officials won't be involved in the actual commissioning process. Hogan acknowledged some concerns among members of a code advisory group that building officials would actually 
inspect how systems are working, potentially creating another hurdle for occupancy. "We tried to set it up so that wouldn't be the case," he said.
Indeed, according to a discussion point in a draft version of the code revisions, "The proposed language does not mandate how commissioning is to be accomplished, nor by whom. The owner . . . [and] their design and construction professionals determine the method of commissioning appropriate to the specific project."
This is how the process should work, Casault believes. "Aside from the fact [the city is] now requiring it, there's no requirement for the city's review of the commissioning process. All the new code requires is that the commissioning be specified. It doesn't say how, and it doesn't require a review of the technical merits of that specification. It does . . . require the owner to get a copy of the commissioning report. It's focusing it back on the owner, where the impetus for commissioning has developed. It's the owner's interest that are involved here in commissioning, and so let's hand that tool to the owner."
Jeff Harris of the Northwest Power Planning Council and the Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance described Seattle's commissioning requirement as unique among energy codes in the region. "It's a good first step," he said, although, "It's still possible for somebody to pay for that [commissioning report] document and not actually do anything about it. It at least puts it in the owner's spotlight; it's now something they should be getting."
Reaction
The commissioning requirement unanimously passed muster with an energy committee of DCLU's Construction Code Advisory Board, and with the City Council and Schell, a former developer.
How it plays in the building world, though, is not quite as certain.
Casault said he has spoken with a few architects and engineers about the commissioning rule, and they support it. "Both groups . . . feel much better knowing that their system is going to be commissioned, so they don't get blamed for stuff that isn't their doing. What is it that really tarnishes a firm's reputation for good design? It's a building that doesn't work very well. Regardless of how it gets to the condition of working well, that now enhances the stature of the [involved] firms."
Harris believes the commissioning requirement is "likely to be fairly controversial in the field" among contractors, engineers and architects. It might be viewed as "just another encumbrance on the process," or it could be seen as providing substantial value to building owners.
At an April forum sponsored by the Northwest Energy Efficiency Council on Seattle's proposed energy code revisions, one building-industry professional said he believes in the value of commissioning, but he wondered whether it should be required by law.
If Seattle's commissioning requirement works well, Harris said, a similar rule could be proposed for the next revisions to Washington's non-residential energy code. And if commissioning of new buildings is adopted as a statewide law, he said the Alliance could shift its focus on commissioning to existing buildings--"a much larger and less-tapped market."
The regional energy-saving potential for commercial building commissioning is significant, according to the Northwest Power Planning Council's draft 1996 conservation and power plan. Total achievable savings from commissioning new and existing buildings comes to 167 average megawatts by 2015, the Council forecast, at a levelized cost below 1.4 cents per kilowatt-hour.
In addition to the new building commissioning rule, other revisions to Seattle's non-residential energy code address part-load efficiency for fan and pump motors, automatic lighting controls and a number of other items. Hogan described the package of amendments as "pretty nominal. For all the changes . . . the focus has been to try and do some clarifications and fine-tuning for amendments that we already had."--Mark Ohrenschall
More information:
Return to Contents 
Marcus Wilcox and Rob Morton of Cascade Energy Engineering are confident their work will bear fruit--fresher and more efficiently refrigerated fruit.
Their Evaporator Fan Variable-Frequency Drive initiative, funded by the Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance for $1.66 million over three years, aims to make VFDs a standard technology for evaporator fans in Northwest refrigerated storage warehouses.
"This is a rich agricultural and fisheries area," Cascade's Morton noted, and thus "there are a lot of cold spaces out there." These immense indoor facilities store food items in varying states of cold prior to distribution. At a minimum, there are 515 documented refrigerated warehouses scattered throughout the Northwest, with a large number concentrated in the fruit-growing regions of Washington. These facilities house about 40 million square feet of refrigerated space--the spatial equivalent of 1,000 football fields--and use an estimated 73 megawatts of connected evaporator fan load.
"We've thought a lot about the market transformation issue," said Cascade's Morton, and in industrial refrigeration settings evaporator fan VFDs represent "one of the best if not the best opportunity."
It's anticipated the evaporator fan VFD initiative can save the region 18.3 average megawatts over 10 years, at a cost of about 1.2 cents per kilowatt-hour.
The VFD Technology
The VFD technology is relatively straightforward, as explained by Morton and Wilcox.
An evaporator is essentially the source of 'cold' in a refrigerated room. It consists of refrigeration coils and motor-operated fans that circulate cooled air. Under standard conditions, power is supplied to an evaporator's motor(s) at 60 hertz--or 60 cycles per second--and the motor, in turn, runs the fans at a constant speed.
In some cold storage warehouses, evaporator fans must operate continuously. This is the least energy-efficient form of temperature control. In some cases, however, storage facilities have installed computer control systems to use fan-cycling strategies. In these cases, evaporator fans must still operate at full speed--but perhaps for only 50 percent of the time--to maintain suitable storage temperatures. While this is more energy efficient than continuous fan operation, the cycling strategy still has drawbacks. Owing to certain export requirements and rules pertaining to temperature consistency, fan cycling usually can't begin for several months after a product has been placed in refrigerated storage.
A VFD, on the other hand, is an electronic device inserted between the power source and the evaporator motor. "It allows you to adjust between zero and 60 hertz," Wilcox explained. "It takes the AC power and turns it into DC, and then sends pulses to the motor to operate it at different speeds." Many refrigeration warehouses already have computer control systems, Wilcox observed, "and controls contractors [can] come in and modify the algorithms to include [fan] speed as an additional control parameter. The control system just watches space temperature or any other variable that's important, and ramps the fan speed up or down appropriately."
On a July tour of southeastern Washington cold-storage facilities that have installed evaporator fan VFDs, Wilcox showed the frequency drives themselves--ranging in size from a toaster oven to a modest file cabinet--and the computer controls. He also pointed to the evaporator fans whirring high above the floors of the massive refrigerated storage rooms, where the brittle cold is literally breathtaking on a hot summer day. And he greeted the facility operators who play an essential role in securing energy savings.
As with standard evaporator technology, it still takes a week or two to bring a refrigerated room down to the proper temperature with VFDs. But once the temperature
 |
| Testing VFD performance at a Columbia Colstor facility in Finley, WA, near the Tri-Cities. (Photo Courtesy Cascade Energy Engineering) |
"The irony of the whole thing," noted Wilcox, is that once the temperature of a room is stabilized, "sometimes the biggest contributor to heat in a refrigerated space is the fan motors themselves." Modifying fan speed can go a long way toward solving this conundrum.
VFDs and Fruit Storage
While the Alliance's evaporator initiative will attempt to make VFDs the industry standard in all types of refrigeration warehouses, fruit storage rooms present a natural first target. It's estimated that 70 percent of the Pacific Northwest's refrigerated warehouse connected evaporator fan load is located in fruit storage facilities. About 80 percent of these warehouses have already installed the computer control systems necessary to operate VFDs. And in addition to the tremendous opportunity for energy savings at these facilities, the non-energy benefits may also be substantial.
Early tests indicate that fruit quality may be enhanced by storage in rooms cooled with VFD-connected evaporators. One large regional apple storage facility recently converted all 53 of its rooms to evaporator fan VFDs. Prior to installation, the warehouse used a fan-cycling strategy. Under these conditions, apples averaged between 1.5 percent to 2 percent evaporated mass loss after storage. With VFDs, this loss was reduced to 1 to 1.5 percent. In other words, the warehouse preserved more product weight to sell at market. In addition to initial positive results in the field, engineering analysis also predicts less mass loss with VFDs.
Resistance
Despite the significant energy savings and potential for enhanced product quality using VFD technology, it's estimated that only about 25 Northwest cold storage facilities--or about 5 percent--have begun to use it. Cascade's Morton believes much of this is due to a common misperception that slowing fan speed will lead to inadequate cooling and negatively affect product quality.
Consequently, field demonstrations will be of integral importance to the success of the Alliance's initiative. Over the next two years, Cascade will conduct 30 field trials throughout the region--two-thirds of them in fruit storage facilities--designed to acquaint warehouse owners, contractors and system operators with VFDs, and allow engineers to amass further data on the technology's performance and its impact on product quality.
During these field trials, warehouse owners will have a VFD installed in one of their storage rooms, with costs reimbursed through the Alliance's initiative. Cascade's Wilcox estimates this charge to be about $4,000 to $6,000 per room, depending upon the number and size of evaporator fan motors. In exchange, the owners must agree to perform comparative tests on the quality of fruit stored in the VFD room versus the "control" room, operated under conventional fan conditions.
"The whole gist of our field trials and research . . . is to try to firm up those numbers," said Morton. "Our hope is that we can demonstrate a positive impact on fruit quality, in which case I think we have a very good chance of transforming that sector of the refrigerated warehouse market . . . If we can consistently show fruit quality improvements, people will do it."
In some areas, the energy savings alone will justify VFDs, added Wilcox. But in places where electricity is especially cheap, "If we don't get some serious subsidizing from fruit quality improvements, it may not be economically viable for customers."
Another one-third of the Alliance-sponsored field trials will take place at different types of refrigeration warehouses. Targeted facilities include grocery distribution warehouses, and on-site frozen and cooler storage facilities for producers of vegetables, dairy, meat, fish products and the like. "The VFD is a good technology for all those places," Morton said.
Field trials--12 are planned this year--will take place throughout the Northwest, Morton said. "We've researched the market, and we're trying to hit the bigger places. If we can sell them on it . . . I think the technology will tend to filter down from the big to the small."
In addition to these hands-on field trials, which are geared mostly toward warehouse owners and managers, Cascade will also conduct five detailed studies. Focusing on issues related to temperature distribution, air flow and product cooling rates, these are intended to allay the fears of facility owners as well as contractors, some of whom have erroneously concluded that lower fan speeds and air flows associated with VFDs result in unacceptable temperature differences within storage rooms.
Education
Disseminating the information collected during these studies to all parties involved in the industrial refrigeration industry--contractors, equipment vendors, operators and facilities owners alike--is critical in determining the fate of evaporator fan VFDs in the Northwest.
"We're educating the industry," said Cascade's Wilcox. To this end, the Alliance's program calls for the creation of two databases, and a substantive information campaign, including a newsletter, guidebook, Web site and technical conference speaking engagements.--Angela Becker-Dippmann and Mark Ohrenschall
More Information:
Pacific Northwest cold-storage facilities with variable frequency drives for evaporator fans are reaping benefits. Energy savings are reported to be substantial, and product quality is judged to be equal or even better.
At Columbia Colstor, which stores frozen-food products and offers a variety of freezing services at plants in central and eastern Washington, evaporator fan VFDs have become the norm. They cover 90 percent of the company's 1.25 million square feet of cold-storage space, according to Colstor corporate engineer Tim Luke. "Our standard is to use drives on evaporators," he said, instead of single-speed or two-speed motors.
"We like the energy savings and the ability to control fan speed and air flow and velocities," he said.
In addition to those advantages, Luke said Colstor has found that installing computer-controlled VFDs can be accomplished at a "fairly equal cost" to putting in two-speed fan motors, which require a motor control center. Eliminating that equipment saves money and space. Meanwhile, the VFD computer controls monitor and optimize the system's performance.
Colstor is "constantly evaluating" all aspects of its cold-storage facilities, Luke said, with an eye toward improvement. "Our methods have logically led us to conclude [evaporator fan VFD] is the kind of technology right now that is producing the best cold storage to operate," he said. (Editor's note: See Con.WEB, Aug. 28, 1997, for a story on Columbia Colstor's energy efficiencies.)
Duckwall-Pooley Fruit Co. in the Hood River Valley of Oregon first installed evaporator fan VFDs in 1994, working with Cascade Energy Engineering (which has also worked with the other firms listed in this article). "We were looking for some energy savings and we were also looking to lessen the moisture loss in the fruit by not running the fans full speed year-round," explained refrigeration supervisor Bob Baskins.
Duckwall-Pooley, which packs and ships pears and apples, now has evaporator fan VFDs in 19 storage rooms. This technology has contributed to total energy savings of nearly 35 percent for the company. And, he noted, "The fruit quality is as good as or better than it ever has been."
A similar observation comes from Dave Briggs of Naumes, Inc., which operates cold-storage facilities with evaporator fan VFDs in Oregon and California. "There's no question running the fans at lower speed cuts down air flow, which cuts down [fruit] dehydration, which I think is a positive factor . . . It gives you better quality [fruit]; you don't lose tonnage." He described the VFDs as "working splendidly."
Greater control of temperature and air flow in cold-storage spaces is an advantage, according to Randy Mork of Stadelman Fruit Co., which has evaporator fan VFDs at its plant in Milton-Freewater, OR, and its new facility in Zillah, WA. "Basically it gives us indefinite control of whatever we want to do with it as far as fan speed," he said.
This added control, and energy savings of 30 to 40 percent, also have been recorded at Henningsen Cold Storage in Gresham, OR. Engineering services manager Paul Henningsen believes evaporator fan VFD technology is becoming more prevalent in the cold-storage industry. "I would expect that to increase in the future, especially as the prices come down." Current prices run as much as $400 installed cost per motor horsepower.
In addition, technical problems with evaporator fan VFDs have led to a few instances of voltage spikes and motor burnouts, but facility operators report that proper engineering and installation can solve this predicament. Marcus Wilcox of Cascade Energy Engineering said he recommends a "well thought-out design that may include filtering and/or inverter-grade motors."
Columbia Colstor encountered some initial problems with VFDs that lacked power bypass capability. "We learned not to just put in a drive and hook up direct to the [electric] system," said Luke. "Make sure you have a bypass for maintenance [and] emergency problems." He has also found it important to keep VFD units cool, clean and dry. Colstor, he added, hasn't encountered any voltage spike or power quality troubles with VFDs.
"The real key is making sure you have a good team and good analysis," according to Luke. "The design-side group has to be experienced and knowledgeable."
For Colstor, the cost of putting in evaporator fans and associated controls (including VFDs) at a new cold-storage facility amounts to about 1 percent of the total project budget. But the importance is much larger, according to Luke. "We cannot afford to cut corners to save money," he said. "I'm more concerned about the quality, reliability, knowing exactly what we're getting and getting what we want and having it meet or exceed all our expectations. It's a small percentage of the cost, but an incredibly significant factor in the quality of your facility."--Mark Ohrenschall
Immersed in the marketplace of ideas for market transformation, the Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance is winnowing the 45 proposals it received in a general solicitation that closed in May.
Those 45 would-be market transformation projects were trimmed to 26 by the Alliance board at its July 30-31 meeting in Tacoma, although some of the 19 rejected proposals may resurface later in other forms. The board also heard presentations on the top eight proposals favored by Alliance staff.
Further consideration of the remaining 26 proposals is scheduled at upcoming Alliance board meetings Sept. 14-15 in Spokane and Oct. 29-30 in Portland.
In addition to working on the request for proposals, the Alliance board in Tacoma also approved renewed funding for Con.WEB.
Market Transformation RFP
The Alliance's RFP was open to any market transformation proposal, although it specifically favored ideas for the commercial and industrial sectors. And, indeed, 33 of the 45 proposals received by the mid-May deadline were categorized by the Alliance as commercial and/or industrial; five others were deemed multi-sector, five more residential, and two were considered municipal.
Alliance staff evaluated the submissions and put them into five categories: the top eight, second-tier proposals, a "wish list," potential incorporations into the Alliance's new construction project, and nos.
Before the board began formally considering the RFP proposals in Tacoma, Alliance staff provided some context for decision-making.
One was a look at the demographics of current projects. Geographically, 86 percent of committed funding has gone to regionwide ventures, according to Alliance staff; the remaining 14 percent is more targeted (such as scientific irrigation scheduling, microelectronics and evaporator fan variable-frequency drives).
From a sector perspective, 53 percent of project dollars approved to date focus on residential customers. Commercial-sector initiatives amount to 23 percent; industrial, 12 percent; infrastructure, 7 percent; and agricultural, 5 percent. Meanwhile, 71 percent of Alliance project funds are earmarked for commercialization initiatives, and another 16 percent fall under infrastructure. The rest is divided among pilots/demonstrations, product development/business plans and market analysis.
"My judgment is we haven't done badly," said executive director Margie Gardner. "It hasn't been completely one-sided for geographic equity or customer class. And we have targeted some big end uses" of electricity.
In addition, the staff presented an analysis of the Alliance's $65.5 million budget from 1997 through 2001 (this includes money allocated past the 1999 expiration of the Alliance's current charter). Of that $65.5 million, an estimated $56.2 million to $59 million is committed (the difference between those two estimates reflects potential budget extensions for some current projects). Most Alliance funding is forecast to go toward market transformation projects--$41.3 million. The rest: operations ($8.2 million), evaluations ($2.8 million), a contingency fund ($1 million), development/market research ($900,000) and communications ($732,000).
That leaves $6.4 million to $9.2 million remaining. An informal poll of board members in Tacoma found a slight majority leaning toward the higher number for RFP spending, although no specific funding decisions were made.
Thanks But No Thanks
After hearing summaries of the 17 proposals the staff recommended against funding, the Alliance board unanimously voted to turn down 14 of them. No final decisions were made on the other three. And, although one of the rejected proposals had targeted geothermal heat pumps, the Alliance board voted 13-1 to spend up to $50,000 researching and analyzing that particular market for a potential market transformation initiative.
The turned-down proposals focused on the following: residential lighting, office equipment, rural energy assistance, industrial/commercial software, industrial pay for performance, compressed air systems, refrigeration systems, manufactured housing, targeted market transformation options, daylighting/solar monitoring, geothermal heat pumps, compressed air in the mining and wood products industries, energy performance alarms and commercial refrigeration.
In addition, the board officially said no to five other RFP proposals of which three may be considered, separately, for the Alliance's new construction initiative.
The board also heard presentations on the top eight proposals favored by Alliance staff. No decisions were made, although board members informally ranked all eight in order of priority for staff to further develop.
[Editor's note: For specific information on the RFP contact the Alliance: address, 522 SW Fifth Ave., Suite 410, Portland, OR 97204; phone, 1-800-411-0834 or (503) 827-8416; fax, (503) 827-8437; email, nweea@nwalliance.org. And for information on current Alliance projects, including evaluations, visit the organization's Web site at http://www.nwalliance.org./projects/index.html.]
Con.WEB
The Alliance board voted 12-4 to renew funding for this publication, for which the Alliance has provided financial support since late 1996. The Alliance and Energy NewsData, publisher of Con.WEB, will negotiate a contract for continued monthly publication of this newsletter, and potentially other services.
Energy NewsData over the past year has published Con.WEB and also furnished a variety of other work for the Alliance, including development of the organization's Web site along with a range of editorial services, such as writing articles for the Alliance newsletter. Now, according to Gardner, the Alliance has sufficient staff to do its own Web functions and editorial services.
A recent Alliance survey of Con.WEB readers showed this publication to be generally useful to them (an aggregate 3.5 on a 1- to 5-point scale), although some suggestions were made to improve the content and format. Gardner, who described this publication as "well-known and high quality," nevertheless said the Alliance wants a broader Con.WEB distribution to more Alliance stakeholders, including legislators, regulators and utility general managers. The Alliance is also interested in having more news about its activities, and Northwest energy efficiency generally, in Energy NewsData's Clearing Up weekly newsletter. Con.WEB "is preaching to the choir and a greater need is bringing more people into the fold," said Alliance board member John Hines.
[Editor's note: We will keep our readers informed about the evolution of Con.WEB in the coming months.]
Alliance Evaluation, Staffing
In other business, the Alliance board voted to authorize up to $80,000 for an independent general evaluation of the Alliance.
The board also voted, 10-6, to authorize the hiring of up to four additional staff people in the near future. While most board members supported Gardner's hiring request and the need to have enough employees to capably perform the Alliance's work, a few board members were hesitant about the growth of Alliance staff (now at 14 full-time equivalents) and expressed worry about a perception that the organization is perhaps not as lean as originally envisioned. Two of the four new positions are anticipated to be filled by year's end, and the remaining two will be filled only if needed.--Mark Ohrenschall
The federal government is reportedly the largest energy consumer in America, with an $8 billion annual bill. That represents a lot of energy--and a lot of opportunities to use energy more efficiently and cleanly.
Tapping federal energy efficiency and renewable energy potential was a dominant theme of an early August conference in Bellevue, WA that brought together several hundred interested people: federal energy officials and managers, utility representatives, local and state government energy people, private-sector purveyors of products and services, and others.
"Energy '98--Breaking The Barriers" explored efficiency and renewables from perspectives as global as the earth's climate and as particular as a clogged air filter. Conference speakers highlighted the importance of pursuing the efficiency/renewables path, and various means toward a successful journey. "You Have The Power" was the exhorting subtitle for the Aug. 3-5 gathering at Meydenbauer Convention Center.
Energy '98 was sponsored by the U.S. Department of Energy's Federal Energy Management Program, and co-sponsored by the federal General Services Administration and Defense Logistics Agency, in conjunction with Bonneville Power Administration, Northwest Energy Efficiency Council, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Western Area Power Administration and the states of Washington, Oregon and California.
The Big View
Energy '98 attracted a number of high-ranking federal officials, who explained and proclaimed the government's expressed commitment to energy efficiency and renewable energy.
President Clinton, in a July 25 radio address distributed in print form at the conference, said he has proposed $6.3 billion in research and tax incentives over five years "to encourage the private sector to work with us to improve our energy efficiency, generate clean power, and reduce the greenhouse gases that contribute so much to global warming." He directed Cabinet agencies to collaborate with the private sector on energy-efficient retrofits of federal facilities, replace 300,000 light bulbs with fluorescent bulbs and bring existing federal buildings up to Energy Star efficiency levels. He also announced that seven federal agencies will adopt "sustainable design" guidelines for their new buildings. These measures collectively could save the federal government up to $1 billion annually.
Previously, in 1994, Clinton by executive order set a goal of reducing federal energy consumption 30 percent from 1985 levels by 2005. The federal government already is saving $700 million compared to the 1985 baseline, reported John Archibald, acting director of FEMP. Total federal energy consumption dropped 20.3 percent from 1985 to 1995.
Vice President Al Gore also strongly endorsed federal energy-saving initiatives. Addressing Energy '98 in a videotaped message, Gore told conference attendees that "your work embodies our administration's commitment to protect the environment, grow the economy and, as the nation's largest energy user, provide an example for others to follow."
What motivates the federal government's aspirations for efficiency and renewables? Dan Reicher, DOE assistant secretary for energy efficiency and renewable energy, outlined some of the forces: reducing the country's steadily rising dependence on foreign oil, improving air quality, addressing climate-change concerns, expanding international economic opportunities for American energy-efficient and renewable-energy technologies, and saving taxpayer dollars.
Still, Reicher acknowledged, "A lot stands between us and success." Among the hurdles are inadequate congressional funding, little incentive for federal energy managers to conserve, difficulty in accessing private capital, procurement problems, lack of technical information and, with federal budget cuts, not enough staff.
"The greatest barrier is our own inertia," opined David Barram, administrator of the General Services Administration, which manages more than 250 million square feet of federal office space. "There are many products available. The greatest challenge is the people factor. We all simply need to embrace the needed technologies that can make a big contribution to saving money and energy, and increase government productivity. What choices will we make? What is our commitment to the future of the planet?" Barram outlined GSA's environmental initiatives, which he summarized as "buying green, building green, driving green and saving green." The agency already has cut its energy consumption 17 percent, he noted, and it saved $37 million in energy costs last year.
Tools of Opportunity
Energy '98 was packed with ideas to foster energy efficiency and renewable energy.
A trade show featured close to 100 exhibitors displaying a vast range of products and services.
Conference sessions, meanwhile, offered topics covering six categories: technology, efficient operation and maintenance, energy awareness, selling energy efficiency, alternative finance, and energy efficiency through procurement and contracting. An assortment of resources were highlighted--government, utility and private-sector.
The notion of alternative financing was popular at Energy '98. Reicher cited this as an important means to break down barriers to efficiency and renewables.
So did Archibald, who said the $8 billion annual federal energy bill pays to some extent for inefficient lighting, unproductive motors and heating systems that warm up outside air. But congressional appropriations to fix these problems are woefully small. Archibald cited a recent federal study that showed $6 billion would be needed to fund federal energy-saving measures with paybacks of 10 years or less. This year, he said, $75 million in such funding is available.
"How are we going to get at this problem?" Archibald asked. "The answer is alternative financing, using other people's money." With energy-saving performance contracting and utility dollars, he said federal agencies have access to $9 billion and the ability to get projects going in a matter of weeks or months--not years, as under the conventional federal process for improving energy efficiency.
"Right now is the best opportunity you will ever have," Archibald said. "I don't know if this will ever get better."
In renewables, one of the major federal initiatives emphasized at Energy '98 was the Million Solar Roofs program, which aims for one million solar rooftop installations nationwide by 2010. Under this program, the federal government, in collaboration with other public and private organizations, will work "to remove market barriers to solar energy use and to develop and strengthen demand for solar energy products and applications," according to a program brochure. Most of the financial investment for those million roofs will come from the private sector, Reicher told Con.WEB. In fact, he announced at the conference pending federal contract awards to two private firms to install solar PV panels and make efficiency improvements at federal buildings nationwide, under the DOE's Super Energy Saver Performance Contracting initiative. These two contracts eventually could save the government $50 million.
Reicher acknowledged solar energy is expensive--in the range of 15 to 30 cents per kilowatt-hour for solar photovoltaics, and 7 to 15 cents for solar hot water--but he noted it is a clean and fuel-free energy resource that also can help utilities shave their peak loads in hot weather.
Basic Stuff
Energy efficiency can be accomplished in many ways. A simple yet effective avenue is improved building operations, which can reasonably achieve energy savings in the range of 10 to 20 percent without investments in new equipment or large amounts of capital, according to Barry Abramson of Georgia-based Servidyne Systems.
Abramson cited the example of a 200,000-square-foot office building, and five straightforward strategies: tightening the lighting schedule by one hour a day, reducing HVAC operations 30 minutes a day, eliminating 2 degrees of reheating six months a year, extending the outside air economizer range by 20 percent, and cutting down the condenser water set point by 5 degrees. Together these can shrink the building's energy consumption by 12 percent, he told a packed conference session.
He outlined four strategies for efficient building operations--scheduling, staging, setting and sourcing--all based on understanding occupant needs and building-system energy flows.
Abramson was followed by Dick Peters of Conservatron Control Corp., who presented vivid and visual examples of poor building operations and maintenance practices that waste considerable energy. Among his horror stories were dust-filled fan blades; a drain pan that functioned more like a petri dish; an air filter clogged after years of neglect; a locked damper; a duct that had been cut off and left open; a condenser unit cracked by cold; and a boiler room with no insulation. "I said, 'How come they didn't insulate the boiler room? They said, 'It's so damned hot it won't make any difference.' I was in tears I was laughing so hard," recalled Peters.
A conference participant from Edwards Air Force Base in California described Peters' show as a "good positive reinforcement" that he and his colleagues are doing their jobs well.--Mark Ohrenschall
More Information:
The Idaho Public Utilities Commission has approved Idaho Power's request to terminate its Agricultural Choices Program, which provided irrigation customers with information and incentives to improve the efficiency of their pumping equipment.
"The Ag Choices Program has proven to be a successful acquisition of a cost effective resource . . . (however), we cannot justify requiring Idaho Power to maintain a program designed solely for one customer class," the PUC said in its Aug. 11 ruling, which also pointed out that the conservation measures "are now more readily available on the open market."
At the same time, the PUC said the utility had to keep accepting new applications for the program until Aug. 28. That extension was related to an IPUC decision in May, in which commissioners said Idaho Power erred when it quit taking new customer applications for the program during the summer of 1997 (see Con.WEB, May 29, 1998). As part of the May 1998 ruling, the commission instructed the utility to continue taking applications pending its final decision on the utility's March 27 request to terminate the program--a decision that came Aug. 11.
New and large Agricultural Choices Program participants had until Aug. 28 to sign up. Once enrolled, customers have until Dec. 31 to complete improvements to their irrigation system. Medium-component customers have until Sept. 30 to submit applications and until June 30, 1999 to complete work under the program. Small-component customers have the same deadline for applying, but must complete work by Dec. 31.--Jude Noland
"Solar and Renewables: Coming of Age" is the title of the fall conference of the Solar Energy Association of Oregon, scheduled for Saturday, Sept. 19, at Portland State University.
The day-long event includes discussions on local community responses to electric utility restructuring; designing and living with solar energy; utility uses of renewable energy; working in a daylit office building; green energy certification; and the status of electric industry restructuring.
For registration and/or other conference information, call SEAO at (503) 231-5662. More conference details are available on the Web at http://oikos.com/seao/solar98.htm.
Washington has received $150,000 from the U.S. Department of Energy for the installation of off-grid solar photovoltaic systems.
This Washington project, one of 17 selected to receive funding under a special projects component of DOE's State Energy Program, will install "Plug and Play" solar PV systems through the state's 5,000 Solar Rooftops by 2005 collaborative, according to DOE. Potential applications include water pumping, communications, lighting and remote homes. At least $450,000 in other funding is anticipated for Washington's program.
For more information, contact Cory Plantenberg at the Energy Division of the Washington Department of Community, Trade and Economic Development: phone, (360) 956-2101; e-mail, coryp@ep.cted.wa.gov.
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-newsdata.com.
Con.WEB was created by the Energy NewsData Web team, including: Publisher-Cyrus Noë; Editor-Mark Ohrenschall;
Contributing Editors-Jude Noland; Cassandra Sweet
Contributing Writers-Jim DiPeso; Lynn Francisco; Kari Hanson; Garrett Hering; Amber Schwanke; Ben Tansey
Web Production-Michelle Noe
General Manager-Brooke Dickinson.
Please contact Mark Ohrenschall,
marko@newsdata.com,
with questions or comments on this site.
Copyright ©2004 Energy NewsData Corporation
