CWEB.034/October.30.1998
|
Comments? Advice? Send feedback to the editor. |
Seasonal change is upon us, evident in the fading light and falling leaves and fickle weather. So, too, has change come to this publication.
We are adding a summary version for each month's issue, called Con.WEB In Brief, along with the more complete edition. We are also inaugurating a number of new features: a separate Links section, a complete archive of previous Con.WEB articles, a Calendar of Events, and a Comments option for sharing thoughts. And our newsletter's content will follow some roads previously less traveled in these pages.
This is the latest evolution in our nearly seven-year history of chronicling energy conservation in the Pacific Northwest. We started at the cusp of 1992 as the print publication Conservation Monitor, chartered, as explained then by our publisher Cyrus Noë, "to tell the unfolding story of regional energy conservation in the 1990s and to report on results." We continued in that vein for the next four years, adding coverage of renewable energy developments in line with our subtitle of Northwest Energy Resource Report.
At the beginning of 1996 we switched from print to cyberspace, from Conservation Monitor to Con.WEB. We were among the early practitioners of on-line publishing, and we've learned a considerable amount along the way--some, the hard way!
Now, approaching 1999, we have more revisions, stemming from our own thinking and experience and a reader survey (see below) conducted by the Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance. We thank the Alliance for its continued funding support, and we also thank those readers who participated in the survey.
The past seven years have brought many changes to this publication and the world we cover, but our fundamental mission remains unchanged. We will continue to strive to be a premier source of objective information on the course of Pacific Northwest energy efficiency and renewable energy. And we hope you will consider us the same.
Reader Survey
The Con.WEB reader survey went out in late spring to 581 e-mail addresses culled from Con.WEB and Alliance e-mail distribution lists. Altogether 150 responses came back, from government agencies (29 percent), utilities (25 percent), private-sector businesses (18 percent), non-profit organizations (12 percent), professional organizations (4 percent) and "other" (13 percent). We interpret this unusually high 26-percent response rate as a sign that many people care about our publication. Although 150 is a small fraction of the total number of "hits" our Con.WEB site receives each month, we can still learn much about reader opinions from this sample.
By and large, survey respondents like Con.WEB. The average rating for usefulness was 3.5 on a 1 to 5 scale (5 the highest), ranking us midway between "useful" and "for the most part useful." A huge majority of respondents who are familiar with Con.WEB--92 percent--would recommend us to others. And 53 percent said they would be willing to subscribe to Con.WEB in its current form, most at $50 a year or less. We have no current plans to switch to paid subscriptions, but we will gladly accept any donations . . .
In written comments respondents offered a number of primary reasons why they like Con.WEB: it is regional, informative, timely, comprehensive, balanced, interesting and journalistically solid. My personal favorite comment: " . . . there is good information. Mark O. does a good job." Thanks, Mom.
While we are gratified at the many positive responses, it is equally if not more educational to learn about our shortcomings. A few readers don't care for our Web format, finding it difficult to access and make time to read. Some said they missed the print form of Conservation Monitor. We are committed to Web publishing--it offers economic and environmental advantages, among others, and it represents a future of vast potential. We realize that future is not entirely here, so we plan to distribute a limited number of printed copies of Con.WEB. We also encourage readers to print Con.WEB from the Web if they are so inclined.
Reader comments also revealed some interest in a shorter Con.WEB. This is a legitimate point, especially in an age of information overload. We will address this in two ways. First, starting this month, each issue of Con.WEB will be divided into a summary version--essentially, brief accounts of the major stories--and a full version. The summary edition will pop onto your screen when you first access Con.WEB. A link to the full version is available just below the Con.WEB logo, and as a "button bar" on the left. Each summary story also will link to its full-length counterpart. This distinction offers a quick read and/or a more thorough read--you choose. Second, the stories in the full version will be more compact than in the past, and we will provide as many links as possible for more details.
In addition to format issues, a handful of commenters suggested Con.WEB is too soft in its content, using descriptions such as "fluff," "uncritical nature of the reporting" and "no substance for anybody seriously engaged in renewable or demand-side issues." These opinions merit examination, for they strike at the heart of our role.
We exist to report on energy efficiency and renewable energy in the Pacific Northwest, as objectively and thoroughly as possible. Pure objectivity, of course, is a myth for any publication. The stories we choose and the way we cover them exhibit subconscious biases. Over the years we may have leaned slightly toward a "cheerleader" perspective, although we haven't ignored conflicts and shortcomings and failures.
A number of factors come into play. For one we are a "news"letter; we frequently cover new developments with favorable potential for the practice of efficiency and renewables. For another, notwithstanding our goal of objectivity, we are still part of the Northwest conservation/renewables community, and we have been funded primarily by utilities over the past seven years. That may slightly shade our perspective. Also we are journalists--not energy analysts, engineers, number-crunchers or other technical types--and to some extent we rely on the expertise of others in understanding and explaining stories.
Yet I think we can move closer to (although never attaining) pure objectivity in our reporting. We can approach stories with a little more healthy skepticism, we can seek out formal evaluations and contrary opinions, and we can, in the words of one respondent, "be a little more probing about veracity." We will continue to work on those points, and in so doing I think we can better serve our readership.
For specific Con.WEB content survey respondents offered several areas of major interest, including electric industry restructuring, the Alliance, case studies/success stories, technologies, the private sector and statistics. All of these we have covered in the past, to varying extents, and we will cover in the future. In particular, look for expanded coverage of the energy efficiency/renewable energy marketplace as well as periodic theme issues exploring particular topics in-depth.
Information Resources
In addition to our continuing monthly coverage, we have added a number of information resources.
Links: This section provides links to Web sites relating to energy efficiency and/or renewable energy in the Pacific Northwest. We take an expansive view, including sites from the federal government, national organizations and other entities not strictly regional. This feature is a work in progress, and we welcome suggestions for additional Web sites; send an e-mail to marko@newsdata.com.
Back Issues/Subject Index: This is our history section. Here you will find all Con.WEB back issues, as well as a complete index of articles arranged by subject. Our search feature also can help locate archived material. For more help contact us by phone, (206) 285-4848, or e-mail, marko@newsdata.com. We can also look up 1992-1995 articles from Conservation Monitor, which are not available on-line.
Calendar of Events: Upcoming public events (meetings, workshops, conferences, classes, etc.) relating to Northwest efficiency and renewables are listed in this section. Let us know about yours, and we'll post it: phone, (206) 285-4848 or e-mail, marko@newsdata.com.
Comments: We are interested in your opinions, whether they be on a specific Con.WEB article or an issue relevant to Northwest efficiency and renewables. This is the place to send your thoughts. We will share them with our readers if 1) The sender is agreeable, and 2) The thoughts are not libelous or otherwise inappropriate for public distribution.
With thanks to all the people and organizations contributing in some form to Conservation Monitor/Con.WEB over the past seven years--too numerous to list, but all greatly appreciated--we look forward to another seven (or more) years.--Mark Ohrenschall
An age of opportunity is dawning for energy efficiency and renewable energy, here in the Northwest and around the world.
This optimistic assessment came from speakers representing three influential and diverse interests--environmental groups, industrial customers and Enron Corp.--at an Oct. 8 Energy Awareness Conference in Portland.
Each of the three addressed broad energy issues, and each, in their own way, shared a positive view of efficiency and renewables for the audience of energy and facility managers, utility and government representatives, engineers, consultants, sales representatives and others (including this reporter).
Ralph Cavanagh, Natural Resources Defense Council
Cavanagh, who for nearly 20 years has been immersed in energy issues in the Northwest and beyond, envisions a bright future for efficiency and renewables emerging from the present era of retrenchment.
"Sustainable energy use is going to be a commercial imperative in the new energy markets," he declared. "Market incentives and environmental imperatives are going to be in alignment."
Cavanagh began by listing major environmental challenges--global climate change, acid rain, urban ozone, disruption of river-based ecosystems--all of which are heavily influenced by energy use. "Both the core of the problem and the core of the solution are found in the energy sector," Cavanagh said.
The electric utility industry is in the midst of "the most fundamental restructuring of its existence," Cavanagh said, and utilities consequently have shied away from making long-term investments, including energy conservation and renewable energy. He estimated the Northwest invested 5 percent of its collective electric bill on efficiency and renewables in the early 1990s, but after "a sudden and tumultuous collapse" the figure is now less than 2 percent. Low-cost electrons rule the marketplace, and efficiency improvements are a low priority--or so the skeptics say. "I think it's time to take another and far more hopeful look," said Cavanagh.
Out of the fog of restructuring utilities are beginning to look ahead to what Cavanagh called "a more congenial future for energy efficiency than what anybody expected in the mid-90s." Competition in power generation is here to stay, but so is the regulated local utility, ensuring reliable service and reflecting community values. "As we re-establish the basis of hometown utilities, public investments will revive and expand once again," he believes.
Cavanagh reiterated the Regional Review's call for 3 percent of electric revenues earmarked for conservation and renewables, later calling it a "floor" for regional spending and suggesting that as public demand grows for those investments "the 3 percent will simply become irrelevant because there's so much more to do than that relatively small fraction of the bill will permit." He also described the Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance as an "extraordinarily promising regional initiative" providing a "first sign of revival" for public-purposes investments that promise environmental gains in the public interest.
Opportunity beckons for efficiency and renewables in the marketplace, where the price benefits of retail electric competition are not as great as anticipated. In California, Cavanagh said, total electric-bill savings available to consumers in the open market are in the range of 2 to 5 percent--"worth having, but not revolutionary and wildly exciting." In this context efficiency improvements represent a value-added service, providing "durable reductions that are not put at risk by fluctuations in the commodity market."
All this is "very good news for people who are good at making energy efficiency happen," Cavanagh said.
Meanwhile, green power represents a promising renewable-energy market for residential as well as commercial and industrial customers. The largest green-power purchaser in California, Cavanagh noted, is Toyota.
Ken Canon, Industrial Customers of Northwest Utilities
Like Cavanagh, but for a different constituency, Canon also is a longtime active participant in Northwest energy affairs.
The 42 ICNU members collectively spend $600 million each year on electricity services, and typically use more than 14 billion kilowatt-hours annually (about 1,600 average megawatts). They welcome retail competition in the electric industry, and its prospect of lower prices, better products and services, and innovations. "This should be very exciting for all of you," Canon told the audience. "You can bring that innovation down to the end-use customer." Industrial customers also like the prospect of controlling their own electric destiny, according to Canon.
Canon agrees "wholeheartedly" with Cavanagh's assessment of the electric marketplace. "Commodity providers will find [they're] not going to make it on a commodity alone. That is going to be one of the major driving forces in both energy efficiency and renewable resources."
Efficiency, Canon said, represents "an incredibly value-added type of service to provide to customers." In the Portland General Electric customer choice pilot program, Smurfit Newsprint Corp. received a number of supplier bids very close in price, he related. The company ultimately selected Illinova Energy Partners, whose bid featured energy efficiency components (see Con.WEB, Feb. 26, 1998). "That was very important" to Smurfit, he said. He also expects restructuring to bring about "the resurgence of the industrial energy manager."
Canon, though, has a less enthusiastic perspective on the issue of public-purposes spending for conservation and renewables. A Regional Review steering committee member, Canon believes the Review's final report he signed two years ago "is probably over-quoted in 1998. A lot of things have changed." Prices then in the wholesale electricity market fell in the range of 1.4 cents to 1.7 cents per kilowatt-hour; now they're around 2.4 cents/KWh to 2.8 cents/KWh. The Review didn't fully address scenarios for a higher-priced power market, according to Canon.
Public purposes are "a major issue" in restructuring at the legislative level. "There will be considerable debate about how it's done, and what does the public really want when it's characterized as a tax, which it will be characterized as," Canon said. ICNU members are concerned about the potential complexity and the definition of public purposes, he added.
Canon also differed with Cavanagh on the nature of the 3-percent public-purposes spending level suggested by the Review: "I did see that as a cap and not a floor. That was very important for industry."
Thomas White, Enron Energy Services and Enron Renewable Energy Corp.
White, a top Enron executive in the areas of energy services and renewable energy, took a worldwide perspective--befitting his company.
"The major trends leading into the 21st century are creating enormous opportunities for visionary global energy companies," he began. "Developing countries are opening to privatization and competition. Competition and environmental concerns are driving the need for technology and efficiency gains in the production, transportation and distribution of energy; and, consumers are benefiting from lower prices, enhanced reliability and greater product and service innovation."
These portend "significant opportunities for natural gas in the foreseeable future, and for other clean energy alternatives in the longer term," according to White. Combined-cycle gas-fired power plants are considerably less expensive to build and much less polluting than coal-fired plants, he said. Their net conversion efficiencies are approaching 60 percent as technology advances.
On the demand side, White noted that "super-efficient electric motors and variable-speed motor drives that last longer, generate less heat and put less load on the factory's air conditioning are helping to reduce the U.S. manufacturing industry's $36 billion annual electric bill. The tremendous cost savings potential for commercial and light industrial customers," he continued, "is resulting in substantial growth opportunities for energy services companies" competing in the $200 billion U.S. market for energy management, services and equipment.
White also envisions a growing international market share for wind and solar energy "as improved technology and greater economies of scale make them more competitive with conventional fuels." Non-hydro renewables now supply 3.7 percent of the world's energy.
Solar photovoltaic costs dropped more than 50 percent from 1985 to 1995, and this renewable resource has great potential for rooftops (in places where electricity prices are high) and remote off-grid sites. However, White said PV costs still exceed 20 cents per kilowatt-hour and must go much lower for PV to gain broad application. Wind energy, however, already is "fairly competitive" as a cost-effective energy resource, thanks in part to government-funded research and development.
Enron is putting money on the renewables market with its ownership of two large wind-turbine companies and a 50-percent ownership of the largest U.S.-owned PV manufacturer, he noted. On the retail level White foresees "intense interest" in green-power purchases in the coming years.--Mark Ohrenschall
Representatives of the Conservation and Renewable Energy System have confirmed CARES' proposed Juniper Point wind-energy project will probably be suspended. Consultant Brian Walters, who is managing the project for CARES, said the consortium of seven Washington public utility districts has been unable to reach a lease agreement with Goldendale Aluminum, which owns the site in the Columbia Hills near the south-central Washington community of Goldendale. "Unless we can come to some agreement with Goldendale, there will be no wind project at Juniper Point," he said.
Walters recently discussed the project with George Darr, Bonneville Power Administration wind project manager. BPA had agreed to buy the output from the project--it has been envisioned as a 25-megawatt-capacity wind farm--and both Darr and Walters said CARES and BPA are looking for other ways they can work together on renewable energy. One possibility under discussion, according to Walters, is for CARES to play a marketing role in Bonneville Environmental Foundation's green power marketing efforts, perhaps acting as an aggregator. In the meantime, Walters said CARES hasn't given up on its wind project. "We'd still dearly love to see development at the Juniper Point site. It's not a case of BPA backing off," he added, but of Goldendale's hesitancy to sign a lease, because of concerns about potential liability from any lawsuits filed in connection with the project.
Walters said CARES was taken to court during the environmental review stage of Juniper Point. While the agency successfully defeated those suits, he said both the Yakama Indian Nation and the Columbia River Gorge Audubon Society have threatened additional legal action if the project goes ahead.
Although the future of the CARES wind project is dim, other Northwest wind projects are moving ahead. The Vansycle Ridge project in northeastern Oregon was to enter the testing phase in mid-October, according to Peter West of Renewable Northwest Project. The 24.9-MW-capacity facility, which has 35 wind turbines, is being developed by ESI Energy, an affiliate of a subsidiary of the holding company that owns Florida Power & Light. Portland General Electric is buying its energy output. (See Con.WEB, July 31, 1998.) While not geographically in the Northwest, the Wyoming Wind Energy Project--located between Laramie and Rawlins on a windswept mesa known 
as Foote Creek Rim--could be producing electricity for the region before the end of the year, and an expansion has already been proposed. (See Con.WEB, Sept. 29, 1998.) PacifiCorp has a 79-percent ownership share in the project, while the Eugene Water & Electric Board owns the remaining 21 percent. BPA has agreed to buy 37 percent of the energy from the project, and it recently signed a contract to sell the power to Salem Electric through 2001. As a result of the Salem Electric contract, BPA recently announced plans to purchase power from three additional Wyoming wind turbines with a total capacity of 1.8 MW. BPA's Darr said the income from the Salem sale will cover most costs of the new turbines, and "we have received numerous expressions of interest in additional wind generation." The new turbines are expected to go on-line in mid-1999.
West described the Wyoming wind project expansion as "a small piece, but it's the exact example of what we've been seeing: the policy push first, and the market keeps pulling along." West also said developers are interested in building other wind projects in the region. "There are good sites here, and [so is] the market potential for green power."
BPA, for its part, still wants to do two wind projects, according to Darr. The likely demise of CARES' Juniper Point project means the agency may be looking for another, but as for what will happen for the second project, "There's too much that's uncertain that I can comment on it," said Darr. Enron, which has acquired most of the sites previously controlled by the now-defunct Kenetech, is reportedly interested in working with BPA. "There are lots of people out there who want to develop wind," Darr said. "We get people approaching us all the time. We're aware [Enron] has acquired the Kenetech leases nearby."--Jude Noland
More Information:
Two landfill-gas renewable energy plants have opened in Washington in recent months--thanks, according to the developer, to federal tax credits and support from local government officials. And a third much bigger landfill-gas project is starting construction in the Evergreen State.
The new plants in Spokane and Tacoma bring to four the number of operating Pacific Northwest plants converting landfill methane into electricity. Together these four have an installed capacity of about 8.5 megawatts. Although negligible on a regionwide energy-production scale, landfill gas exceeds the combined Northwest capacity of commercial-scale wind, solar and geothermal resources--at least until the upcoming debut of two considerably larger wind-energy projects in Wyoming and Oregon.
This regional landfill-gas capacity will double with a planned 8.4-MW project in Washington's Klickitat County. The Klickitat County PUD announced Oct. 23 it will sell $12.9 million in bonds to finance the new plant at the Roosevelt regional landfill. Ground-clearing was to begin Oct. 27 and the plant, developed by an Enron Corp. subsidiary, is scheduled to come on-line in May. It will annually generate about 70 million kilowatt-hours (about 8 average megawatts), according to a PUD news release.
Klickitat envisions the Roosevelt project as a regional source of low-cost green power. Snohomish County PUD has committed to buying 2.5 MW, and, according to the news release, "In a maturing renewable power market, the PUD is looking for additional customers interested in a green resource that costs under 3 cents a kilowatt-hour to generate." This is "much cheaper than renewables like wind or solar power," according to the PUD.
Tacoma, Spokane Landfill-Gas Projects
Both the Spokane and Tacoma plants were developed by NEO, a landfill-gas company owned by a subsidiary of Minnesota-based Northern States Power. NEO, in turn, sells the energy output of both plants to the respective local utilities, Washington Water Power and Tacoma Power. The power-purchase price is 1.6 cents per kilowatt-hour in Tacoma, according to NEO vice president of development Allen Jensen. In Spokane, Water Power pays an escalating price starting at 1.96 cents/KWh in 1998 and rising to 3.06 cents/KWh in 2008, according to WWP's Doug Young. Water Power is required to accept the power output under provisions of the Public Utility Regulatory Policy Act (PURPA). The power-purchase prices essentially represent the utilities' cost for alternative power, Jensen said.
In addition, for both new facilities NEO takes a federal tax credit of $1 per million Btu, which Jensen said roughly equals 1.5 cents/KWh. "That's the reason the projects have gone ahead," Jensen said. The combination of power revenues and tax credits make these ventures economically viable for NEO. "I wouldn't do it and lose money," he noted. "I am an investor-owned company and I have to turn a profit."
Jensen also credited the backing of local government officials, specifically Monica Hairston of the city of Spokane's Solid Waste Management and Karen Larkin, Tacoma's assistant public works director/utility services. "I can't emphasize too much that in both cases the project would have walked had those two women not been involved and decided it would work," Jensen said.
The 1.9-MW-capacity Tacoma plant began operating in late summer. It represents a "win-win" proposition, according to Tacoma city official Gary Kato. "The city claims use for that [methane] resource we've been flaring off, and gets paid a little bit for it" through NEO's lease of gas rights. "This company is able to come in and utilize the gas and make a profit."
The Tacoma landfill already had a system in place to collect methane created within the garbage by the anaerobic decomposition of organic matter. It has about 600 separate gas wells, according to NEO consultant Walt Forslund. NEO tapped into that fraction of wells that collect higher quality gas (around 50-percent methane). The gas is compressed, filtered and burned in two Caterpillar engines, each attached to a generator capable of spinning out about .95 MW apiece. "There's really no rocket science there," Forslund said of the gas-to-energy conversion process. "It's very reliable."
Although some people are skeptical about classifying landfill gas as renewable energy, it has been accepted as renewable by the federal government and the Regional Review, among others. The burning process does create emissions, primarily carbon dioxide, according to Forslund. However, he noted the landfill-gas-to-energy emissions are "essentially comparable" to those created by simple flaring of methane, and they meet local air-quality regulations in both Spokane and Tacoma. "You're going to destroy [methane] one way or another," said Jensen. "This has to do with the productive use of the gas; use gas to generate electricity rather than waste." He also touted the value of displacing other power generation and supporting local voltage.
The .92-MW-capacity landfill-gas plant at a north Spokane landfill is NEO's other new Washington project. It opened commercially in late May, according to Water Power's Young. The Spokane landfill is closed and capped with a rubber membrane, which Jensen said "makes it particularly easy to get the gas." By the same token the gas resource will only decline, while Tacoma, which is still accepting limited amounts of garbage, has "plenty of additional gas" available, according to Jensen.
NEO has no current plans to expand energy production at either Washington site, although Jensen left this possibility open should a green-power retail market develop. "We're looking forward to deregulation," said Jensen. "We also hope there's a groundswell of interest in a higher rate paid for renewable energy." NEO is scouting other landfill-gas projects in the Northwest; Jensen specifically mentioned a current prospect in Snohomish County north of Seattle. But the region's low electric costs pose a considerable economic hurdle, Jensen said. "You can't make it work without support from either green initiative-type stuff or the tax credit."--Mark Ohrenschall
More Information:
Members of the board have selected Angus Duncan as executive director of the new Bonneville Environmental Foundation. Duncan was notified of his selection Oct. 21 by former U.S. Sen. Mark Hatfield, the foundation's president.
"Angus long ago earned the respect of both environmentalists and economic interests," Hatfield said in a Bonneville Power Administration news release. "As a member and chairperson of the Northwest Power Planning Council, he led that body through the thorny issues leading up to the adoption of a plan for restoring the environmental health of the Columbia Basin."
The organization intends to use a share of the endorsement premium earned from certain BPA hydroelectric projects to fund fish and wildlife and restoration efforts and new non-hydro renewable resources. It was formed in June by BPA, the Natural Resources Defense Council, the Renewable Northwest Project and the Northwest Energy Coalition. (See Con.WEB, June 25, 1998,)
"I'm thrilled at the prospects the Bonneville Environmental Foundation presents," Duncan said. "There are dedicated people all over the Northwest doing creative watershed work. We can help them. This is also a grand opportunity to build a renewable energy future on the region's existing hydroelectric base. We can accelerate that. And we will leverage these actions with green power revenues; that's an unbeatable package."
Duncan, a former Power Council member from Oregon, is president and senior fellow of the Columbia/Pacific Institute for Energy and the Environment, a Portland Statue University affiliate that develops and publishes analyses and works to implement public policy choices for Northwest energy and river management.--Ben Tansey
Some progress is reported on the many unresolved details of Bonneville Power Administration's plan to offer wholesale rate discounts for its customers that invest in energy conservation and renewable energy. This novel approach to encouraging conservation and renewables initiatives in the Northwest is an important element of BPA's September proposal for subscription to federal power beginning in 2001.
Conservation/Renewables Working Group Tackles Issues
About 45 people attended a recent meeting of the so-called C/RD working group. "Some folks wanted to know how this got dropped into the subscription proposal with such little notice," said Terry Esvelt, BPA vice president for energy efficiency, "and what it means to have a Record of Decision that pertains to this in subscription, as opposed to being a rate case issue."
"We have spent over 18 months working on subscription contracts and rates," noted Noel Shelton of Energy Services, a consultant for aluminum companies. "In that period we did not have a single meeting to talk about how we should implement the public-purpose charge in the contracts. I was surprised to see it in the draft proposal, as we had no opportunity to debate this in the subscription process . . . The appropriate place to do a statement of purpose is in the rate case, after we have all the details." To merely incorporate it into the subscription ROD is "like signing a blank check," he said.
Shelton said he is disturbed the region seems to be taking on the package of the Regional Review in a piecemeal fashion: "It's not a comprehensive package anymore; its more a lace doily. Some elements just keep going on while everything else drops away."
Esvelt said the group spent a fair amount of time trying to understand which issues BPA would work out in the rate case and which would be addressed by the planned Regional Technical Forum. According to a BPA handout, the RTF, sponsored by the Northwest Power Planning Council, would determine what measures would qualify for the discount. Esvelt said the consensus at the recent C/RD meeting was that while there is no bright line between some matters, policy issues should be dealt with in the rate case and technical matters at the RTF. "Frankly, it's incumbent on Bonneville to be clear about what we want the RTF to help us with," Esvelt said.
Esvelt said the group also discussed some conflicts among the objectives set out for the discount. These call for helping the region meet the Regional Review's recommendation that 3 percent of electric utility retail revenues be dedicated to public purposes; that there be full participation by customers in the discount; and that the discount not have a significant effect on Bonneville's priority firm (PF) wholesale rate. "As it's becoming clear some objectives may be in conflict," Esvelt said, the question becomes: "How do we craft a compromise that doesn't serve to advance all objectives, but serves as the best balance?"
Competitive PF Rate/Regional Review Targets
Three percent of BPA customer revenues comes to somewhere between $60 million and $80 million, and the operative rule of thumb is that every $55 million adds another .1 cent per kilowatt-hour to the PF rate. The group considers that if BPA were to offer a dollar of discount for a dollar of customer public-purpose spending, full participation could be achieved, as all customers would be made whole, but meeting the 3-percent target means an impact of more than .1 cent/KWh on the PF rate. "Given all the pressure on the PF, there is a perception that would sacrifice keeping the PF competitive," in violation of one of the objectives, Esvelt said. But reducing the impact on PF to, for example, .05 cent/KWh, would likely cut into the objectives for participation and meeting the 3-percent target.
The Public Power Council supports defining a "credit process." It favors a .05 cent/KWh rate adder for public purposes, which it says would raise $30 million. The maximum credit earned for public purposes "would be equal to three percent of the utility's wholesale power bill for BPA requirements purchases," according to PPC, but utilities would be allowed to "pool and trade" their credits.
The Northwest Energy Coalition supports a "sliding scale" discount. Utility investments below 1 percent of retail revenues would not be eligible; investments between 1 percent and 3 percent would receive a discount of between .5 percent and 3 percent; and utilities investing more than 3 percent of revenue would be eligible for "a portion of the unclaimed funds up to a discount of four percent." Remaining funds could be allocated to utilities investing more than 5 percent in public purposes, or BPA could be authorized to use the money to invest in such programs, but not to buy down conservation debt.
The R/CD group is scheduled to reconvene during the first half of November to see what further progress can be made.--Ben Tansey
More Information:
Puget Sound Energy's conservation programs are generally working well, according to an evaluation report presented by Puget in September to the Washington Utilities & Transportation Commission. The utility was required to submit the evaluation report as a condition of the WUTC's June approval for extending the company's gas and electric conservation programs to April 1, 1999. Stakeholders had raised concerns that certain program evaluations the utility had been expected to complete had not been accomplished. "Specifically, evaluations of PSE's informational programs targeted to residential customers were conspicuously absent, resulting in no ability for the Company or its stakeholders to adequately determine cost-effectiveness and customer benefit," the WUTC report indicates. "All parties were concerned that program continuation should be tied to demonstrated results of successful program implementation."
The 90-day evaluation PSE conducted as a result indicates most of its programs are, indeed, successful. "The residential programs were a new set of information-based programs," said George Pohndorf, PSE director of special programs. "We found, and were quite pleased, that the program was working quite well and was cost-effective."
Residential Programs Evaluation
The report determined that the overall benefit-to-cost ratio for PSE's Residential Energy Efficiency Services (REES) was 2-to-1, and the prescriptive average energy savings per participant for the first year could be as high as 158 kilowatt-hours. REES includes the Energy Efficiency Hotline, Personal Energy Profile, Energy Information Brochures and Home Solutions.
The company's evaluation and review indicated the Personal Energy Profile--essentially, a do-it-yourself home energy audit--was "the largest, most cost-effective and most thoroughly studied" program, with a benefit/cost ratio of 3-to-1 and prescriptive annual average savings of 182 KWh and 25 therms per participant.
Home Solutions--a $19.95 on-site energy inspection with efficiency recommendations, for electric service customers only--"does not enhance the cost-effectiveness of REES, and, when viewed in isolation, is not expected to be cost-effective going forward." Home Solutions generated 250 KWh and 16 therms of savings per participant. But the utility and its Technical Advisory Group agreed this program should be discontinued. "PSE will work with the TAG to identify opportunities for redirection of funds formerly dedicated to this effort."
An educational program, In Concert with the Environment, also received positive reviews from the company's advisory group and the WUTC staff. Puget said, however, it is more difficult to quantify the cost-effectiveness of this program, which teaches secondary school students and other members of their households about the wise use of energy, water and other resources, responsible waste management and hazardous waste disposal. Nonetheless, the utility's report pegged annual savings from ICE at 9 KWh and 8 therms per participant.
"Staff generally concurs with the Company that despite not penciling out as a cost-effective program based solely on energy savings, the numerous non-energy benefits associated with ICE make it worthwhile from a societal standpoint," the WUTC staff report said. Commission staff also 
"takes the Company seriously when it says they will work to acquire additional funders in support of this program." Pohndorf said PSE plans to ask 20 businesses to consider supporting ICE, and will send letters to another 150.
While the WUTC was primarily concerned about PSE's residential programs, the utility also reviewed its commercial/industrial energy efficiency consulting services and found these continued to be cost-effective as well. The utility estimated the programs' annual savings at 205,000 KWh and 6,000 therms, for first-year full avoided costs of $20 million.
The WUTC staff also commended Puget "for the level of analysis brought to bear" on the report. "The review included an allowance for input from many stakeholders, convened through the Company's Technical Advisory Group . . .
The resulting information was useful in making recommendations to the Company concerning these programs."
Pohndorf said the utility is committed to looking for other cost-effective conservation programs, and has hired a consultant to conduct an "exhaustive national search" for such promising initiatives.
Broader Vision
Pohndorf said Puget also provided the WUTC with an outline of its "broader vision" of looking at total system efficiencies as well as end-use conservation. Pohndorf said such efficiencies include distributed generation, which involves providing power at less centralized sites by using fuel cells or small-scale combustion turbines; green power, for which, as a distribution company, PSE could aggregate customers; and alternative-fuel vehicles, focusing on natural-gas powered vehicles.
Pohndorf said Puget told the commission it will continue its existing conservation programs and operate them as efficiently as possible. It will also provide reports to the WUTC three times each year on the programs and their performance, explore program enhancements suggested by the TAG, and ask for the TAG's input on such issues as avoided costs and the total resource cost test. At the same time, "We need to find a way to address the interests of large customers," Pohndorf said. They remain the largest potential source of additional energy savings--yet have indicated they'd rather do it themselves than with utility help. But Pohndorf is also positive about the larger vision outlined in the report. "We see a lot of promise there." --Jude Noland
More Information:
A new mixed-use development under construction in Beaverton, OR is taking an unusual approach to meeting the energy needs of its residents and tenants. Rather than installing individual heating and cooling systems for each residential and commercial unit, The Round is building a central plant to meet all of the million-square-foot development's heating and cooling needs, along with domestic hot water, telecommunications services and building security.
The central plant essentially runs the entire project, said Terry Egnor of MicroGrid, a Portland-based company working with MicroClimates System Inc. to design and build the central system. The Round, described as a "European-style development," will cover 4.7 acres and include residential units, office space and a retail/hotel complex with a 12-screen theater complex. The project is part of Beaverton's downtown revitalization efforts.
Central Plant, Controls Network Provide Major Efficiencies
The project's two major energy efficiency elements, according to Egnor, are the central plant and the use of a controls network to drive the system. The central plant achieves efficiencies by aggregating load and using the diversity of different loads to maximum advantage. Different loads peak at different times, Egnor pointed out--residential loads in the early mornings and evenings, office loads during the day. Using one load to offset the other reduces the amount and size of needed equipment.
At the same time, MicroClimates is using a controls system developed by MicroGrid's Tom Hartman. Egnor said Hartman has developed several new levels of technology for the MicroClimates system, including variable-drive/control technology allowing all parts of the system to respond to actual demand. Egnor said the controls system is 25-percent more efficient than a conventional system.
MicroClimates also will be "bundling" utility services for residents and tenants of The Round--providing them one package for all their utility needs, including space conditioning, water and other services. "We started a dialogue with the developer about the unique opportunities with respect to packaging utilities," said
MicroClimate's Lonnie Dicus. Such an approach would add value for the developer and the customers, Dicus said, with a "mix of products and services that would be unique and competitively priced." Dicus said the central plant is a more efficient way to provide heating and cooling, for example, so MicroClimates will be able to offer a flat-rate charge regardless of usage or changes in the commodity price of fuel (natural gas, in this case). The only exception, he said, is an escalator to cover labor costs for the central plant. And the flat rate for residential users will be lower than for commercial customers.
The energy center will also provide domestic hot water and all telecommunications services, from telephone to T-1-equivalent Internet connections, as well as building security. Dicus said MicroClimates is building the telecommunications system, but has partnered with a competitive local exchange carrier, Integra, for the dial tone. Dicus also said the company hasn't yet completed negotiations with all of the local utilities. Electricity needed for lights and appliances will still be provided by the local utility--Portland General Electric. But Dicus said MicroClimates hopes to provide consolidated billing services to The Round as well.
Lighting Efficiencies
And electricity bills should be lower at The Round than at conventional developments, Egnor said, because the controls system for the central plant covers lighting for the commercial and public areas. All offices will have occupancy sensors and daylight dimmers; in fact, all the office lighting's high-efficiency ballasts will be dimmable.
Egnor said The Round is installing daylight sensors on building roofs, rather than in individual offices, that will better detect how daylight is affecting each face of the building and measure the relative light value on each face. This will make the daylight dimming system more accurate, and it will also be less expensive than installing sensors in every office.
At the same time, occupants will be able to adjust lighting to their individual needs. When the lights are turned off, Egnor said, they'll be reset to the programmed level of 35 footcandles, or about 60-percent power. "All of this is software," he added, "that will lead to a 50-percent savings compared to the typical system in office areas."
Lighting in the condominium buildings' common areas also will be controlled by the central system and will be programmed to drop to 50-percent levels from midnight to 7 am. However, Egnor said the common areas also have occupancy sensors that will bring the lights back up to full brightness for 10 minutes if someone comes in late.
The first phase of the project, which includes the energy center, is expected to be done by the end of this year and ready for occupancy by February or March. In addition to the energy center, it will include a four-story condominium/retail building and an office building. The second phase will include a three-story building with "hoffices"--combination homes/offices, with the office on the ground floor and the condo above, according to Egnor--as well as the hotel/theater/retail complex and another office building.--Jude Noland
More Information:
On the occasion of the 25th anniversary of the OPEC oil embargo, the Renewable Northwest Project has listed "The Top Ten Things You Can Do For Energy Security."
The United States consumes more foreign oil now than in 1973, noted RNP director Rachel Shimshak in a news release. "The good news is that we can do something about it by investing in renewable energy resources such as wind, solar, and geothermal that will benefit our economy and our environment, and keep our energy system clean and affordable for the long run."
RNP's top 10 personal actions: 1) Ask your utility to purchase new renewable resources such as wind, solar and geothermal. 2) Insist that your elected officials support clean, renewable energy. 3) Buy a solar water heater, and/or put solar cells on your roof to produce electricity. 4) Install energy-efficient products (such as compact fluorescent light bulbs and insulation) in your home and office. 5) Recycle household and office products, and purchase recycled products. 6) Ride MAX (in Portland), take the bus, bike, or carpool at least two times a week. 7) Patronize businesses that use clean energy. 8) Teach your children the conservation ethic. 9) Replace your most frequently used automobile with a fuel-efficient car (32 miles per gallon or more). 10) Become an active member of a local environmental organization.
Training courses for Building Operator Certification will be offered throughout Oregon and Washington in 1999.
BOC is a professional certification for staff who operate and maintain commercial and institutional buildings. Participants prepare for certification by attending seven courses in energy-efficient building systems maintenance, and completing tests and in-facility projects. They receive certification from the Northwest Energy Efficiency Council in Oregon and Washington, and the Idaho Building Operators Association in Idaho.
NEEC is offering BOC Level 1 certification classes next year in Wenatchee (Jan 27-July 14); Eugene (February-July); Everett (February-July 1999); Tacoma (March-October); Bellevue (April-November); Spokane (April-November); and Portland (Sept 1999-April 2000). A BOC Level II certification course is scheduled for Kent from September 1999 through April 2000.
For more information, contact Cynthia Putnam, BOC project manager, at cmputnam@aol.com or by phone, (206) 292-3977. For more information about courses offered in Idaho, contact Connie Searles at the Idaho Building Operators Association: phone, (208) 345-3072; e-mail, connies@iboa.org.
The Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance's partnership with the New York-based Lighting Research Center allows residents and businesses in Idaho, Montana, Oregon and Washington to receive LRC publications at the member rate, which is generally one-third of the retail price.
For more information on LRC publications, visit the organization's Web site or call (518) 276-8716.
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
Return to Contents