CWEB.051/March.28.2000
Terry Esvelt proudly recites the bottom line of Bonneville Power Administration's conservation history: 750 average megawatts saved since 1982, on spending of $1.7 billion. He also acknowledges BPA's recent cutbacks in conservation funding.
Esvelt, Bonneville's vice president for energy
 |
| Terry Esvelt |
From Success to Uncertainty
Northwest energy conservation has made substantial but little-recognized progress, Esvelt believes. Bonneville-funded energy savings alone have created a "conservation power plant" equivalent to one of the largest generating resources in the region. Illustrative of conservation's positive and tangible impact is the marked decline of Washington per-household energy consumption since the early 1970s. "We need to talk about the successes more," said Esvelt. "There's a great story here, and it deserves to be more widely known."
A more pressing Northwest conservation story, however, lies in the tumult of electric industry restructuring. "In terms of structured utility programs," he said, "it's almost a uniform pattern of cutback and retrenchment. Clearly the uncertainties led by questions about how deregulation is going to unfold are the principal factors. In the case of BPA's retrenchment, we didn't think we needed any new resources. The 1996 Regional Review recommended that BPA not be relied upon to serve future regional load growth."
Diversity
But as utility conservation funding has generally trended downward, different institutional means to achieve energy savings have arisen in the Northwest. Public-power utility programs "have a lot more diversity" than in the days of BPA-funded centralized programs; Esvelt cited such examples as utility-provided rebates and loan programs, and a host of "great" initiatives from individual utilities.
"You've got NEEA (Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance) out there, a relatively new and I think exciting development, and you've got the public-benefits programs currently under way in Montana and soon to get under way in Oregon," said Esvelt. "There are lots of players in the game that weren't there before. I think that's healthy."
With utilities worried about conservation's rate impacts in a more competitive business environment, Esvelt believes public-purposes funding is a legitimate vehicle to deliver the public good of using energy more wisely--which the marketplace won't always provide. "We all recognize markets are imperfect," said Esvelt, who holds a master's degree in economics from the University of Oregon. "Providing information, helping change the economic dynamic of time horizon . . . internalizing externalities. Those are traditional government roles to 'fix' marketplace imperfections."
With the advent of electric restructuring, "Utilities are not the be-all and end-all of this industry. We need to reach consumers through a variety of avenues--utility programs, private-sector firms and government incentives and programs. That's changed the whole philosophy and set of assumptions about how conservation becomes a part of the industry."
He believes an open electric marketplace will actually prove a boon to conservation in one respect, by exposing consumers to more price volatilility than under the monopoly utility model and its average-cost pricing. "A trend line of deregulation will be that consumers are going to be much more amenable to conservation programs and investments, because they are seeing the right price signals."
Market Transformation, Technology
Esvelt is particularly enthusiastic about market transformation and technology advances for energy efficiency.
He called market transformation "clearly the hot topic" regionally and nationally in conservation. "People have understood that the challenge of acquiring conservation is daunting when you think about having to affect each and every individual purchase decision or consumption decision by the 10 million residents of the Pacific Northwest," he said. Instead, under market transformation, "You go 'upstream' and you influence the manufacturers and distributors to only offer energy-efficient equipment on their shelves. Then the consumer's decision is simple, at least as far as it affects our interests."
BPA has provided most of the funding for the Northwest's market transformation group, the Alliance, which Esvelt called "the best example that there is in the country" of collaboration across utility boundaries. "In the face of neck-and-neck competition at the wholesale power markets level, it's sort of remarkable we're all getting together and writing checks" for the Alliance. Esvelt serves on the board of the national Consortium for Energy Efficiency, and his CEE colleagues wonder how the Northwest gets it together so well. One answer: "Because we're thinking more of conservation on a systems scale, it's forced us to be collaborative."
Technology, meanwhile, is quietly but noticeably improving energy efficiency, Esvelt noted. Horizontal-axis washing machines and super-efficient refrigerators are prime examples, as is the diminishing controversy over appliance efficiency standards. Telecommunications and computers get a lot more attention for their technology advances, yet, he said, "It's the offshoot of those very same factors--such as computer microchips--that are making appliances more efficient. They're smart now." And much of this comes more from the marketplace than governments and utilities. "Competition is driving firms to introduce these new technologies because they can get a leg up on their competitors."
BPA's Role
Although Bonneville has discontinued its big-budget regionwide conservation programs, the agency remains active and committed to energy-saving initiatives.
"We've examined our role in conservation, and we've come to better understand we wear two different hats," said Esvelt. "One is as a government agency, and one of our functions is we are there to deliver public responsibilities." BPA's Alliance funding and its upcoming wholesale rate discount for conservation/renewable energy activities fall under this category.
"The other half is we are a power marketing agency," he said. "We're selling power, and we continue to think of conservation as a resource, as a business decision." This encompasses the proposed augmentation of power supplies for fiscal years 2002-2006 to meet increased wholesale demand, for which BPA plans to pursue at least 166 average megawatts of conservation. "That's going to be a big deal," said Esvelt.
He also thinks the region's transmission system has a vested and increasing interest in saving energy, particularly to reduce peak loads. "It's safe to say the transmission entity, whatever unfolds . . . the economics will drive them to assess what they should be doing to promote conservation in their arena . . . as a business choice."
Reaching 'The Man on The Street'
In the end, Esvelt acknowledged, most people don't think much about energy efficiency. "That is going to be the challenge of the future, and that's why market transformation is so important. We are trying to affect 'the man on the street,' and quite frankly he doesn't care much. So we need to affect the manufacturers, the distributors, the salespeople so that they are selling energy efficiency, not because the typical consumer cares much about energy efficiency, but because it's pushing all of his other buttons for what he wants in a refrigerator." For the businessperson, the key button is the bottom line--for example, building commissioning that helps confirm a building's long-term performance.
"I think if you're on the customer side, you should just sit back and enjoy the opportunities that are going to be in front of you," Esvelt said. "Consumers are going to make choices that are in their best self-interest . . . I think we need to give them choices that serve the conservation interests--which are so closely related to environmental quality--that can satisfy everybody."--Mark Ohrenschall
David Baylon believes energy efficiency will be around after electric industry restructuring--but not necessarily because of the Northwest's recent enthusiastic embrace of market transformation. "There are a lot of people in this region that believe these things are important, so there's a good chance things will continue," Baylon told Con.WEB. But if the region actually had to deliver the same amount of conservation savings achieved in the 1980s, market transformation "isn't a model that will work," he cautioned. "It isn't good enough. You have to buy resources to get resources."
Baylon is president of Seattle-based Ecotope, a consulting firm specializing in energy-efficient design and engineering in both residential and commercial buildings. He and his company have been involved in regional conservation efforts since the 1970s. Founded in 1975, Ecotope was the first regional consulting firm to investigate and apply solar energy technologies, and one of the first to research energy efficiency and the performance of different weatherization strategies, and to assess the performance of Bonneville Power Administration and other utility energy conservation programs. Ecotope's research has been especially important in the development and implementation of energy-efficient building codes throughout the region, both residential and commercial.
Building Codes Essential
Baylon still believes strong, solid building energy codes are essential to energy efficiency--and that they have played a big role in market transformation.
An example, says Baylon, is the way the window market has changed since regional energy codes set higher efficiency standards. In the early 1980s, the best windows available were either aluminum or wood-framed and double-paned. Today, the highest performing windows are usually vinyl-framed (a type that didn't exist in 1980), available in double and triple panes, with low-emissivity coatings, argon filling and other variations that make it possible to install windows far more efficient than code.
"There was no market for vinyl windows until codes," Baylon said. "Now, manufacturers in the state of Oregon produce 75 percent of the windows installed throughout the country." These windows are less expensive in inflation-adjusted dollars than their 1980s predecessors, twice as energy-efficient and better made, he added. And that's not because of technology alone, Baylon said, but also because of the market-transforming effect of building codes.
The same case could be made with lighting technologies, Baylon believes. The widespread use of energy-efficient T-8 fluorescent bulbs and ballasts was prompted in part by code requirements for more efficient lighting. Washington state's energy code includes a prescriptive path that essentially allows builders to use as much lighting as they want--as long as it's energy-efficient. "This suggests the technologies you require are the technologies that get used," he said.
Market Transformation Shortcomings
One problem with the region's current reliance/emphasis on market transformation, according to Baylon, is that the Northwest hasn't yet figured out how to adapt traditional utility conservation programs to a decidedly different paradigm. "You hear often that the market will take care of this; the market will take care of that," he observed. "But the mechanics of making that happen aren't related to the mechanics of energy efficiency, especially if there is no technical element to the marketing effort."
An example, said Baylon, is the Efficient Building Practices Initiative--a Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance project aimed at promoting the design and construction of energy-efficient commercial buildings. "It's a marketing program to convince people that energy-efficient buildings are good for them," Baylon said. "The marketing hook is productivity and the worker satisfaction aspect," which is being sold via television ads that are "relatively zippy but [without] much content."
While energy efficiency strategies may affect productivity and worker comfort, Baylon pointed out it's hard to generalize about how energy efficiency directly relates to these goals. "At the end of the day, what we're selling is productive buildings without selling the content of the buildings. Does that do anything?" (Editor's note: See Con.WEB, Feb. 25, 2000 for a story on the Efficient Building Practices Initiative marketing campaign.)
The approach seems to be based on the "perception that codes would work better and cheaper if people in general understood how buildings work," he added. But Baylon questions whether it's possible to build demand for energy-efficient buildings without supporting building codes as well. "You must maintain code enforcement to make it work," he said.
An alternative, Baylon suggested, might be placing more emphasis on performance testing of buildings--with independent certification--using direct criteria on whether buildings and their components meet required efficiency and performance standards. "The idea would be to sell this certification so that people will find it valuable," he said--although it admittedly might be a tough sell for new buildings that are supposed to be energy-efficient from the outset. But no such rating system exists, he said, and "if you're only marketing but not delivering any technical improvements . . . " Baylon also noted that energy-efficient building codes were developed for a good reason: "There was no way to focus consumers' interest" on energy efficiency standards that aren't seen as part of the finished product. "The product is always the problem," he said.
Efficiency Has Come A Long Way
But despite these concerns, Baylon believes energy efficiency has come a long way since its beginnings in the late 1970s and early 1980s. And electric industry restructuring isn't as big an issue for conservation's future, he added, as "maintaining public involvement in the service of energy efficiency."
Under the old paradigm, electric utilities were the public entities that played the major role in providing efficiency programs. "The actually practical impact" of restructuring "has been to gut conservation departments as though this is not the utilities' problem. So whose problem is it?"
Efficiency as Luxury?
An unintended consequence of this, Baylon fears, is that energy efficiency will become a "luxury item," available to people building 8,000-square-foot homes and others who can afford the services of private consultants and architects. "From the perspective of Ecotope as a business, it won't matter," Baylon said; the company's private-sector work has doubled in the past five years, and current demand is larger than Ecotope's ability to meet it. "But it matters to me, and it ought to matter as a matter of public policy." A sound energy code is the "gateway" to making sure energy efficiency is included in public policy. "It gets the issue on the screen," he said. But the public sector still needs to be involved.
"I'm having trouble believing at least at this juncture that absence of public financing is a good idea." Baylon believes organizations like the Alliance have the ability to build and/or adapt the infrastructure necessary to maintain this public benefit commitment.
"Make the energy code the floor, then do the marketing to support it--and advances beyond code," he said.--Jude Noland
The Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance has $100 million in new committed funding for market transformation, along with enthusiastic endorsements from governors of the region's two most populous states.
Washington Gov. Gary Locke and Oregon Gov. John Kitzhaber joined Bonneville Power Administation leader Judi Johansen and other Northwest utility officials at the March 17 formal announcement of the Alliance's funding renewal for 2000 through 2004. The ceremonial event took place at the
 |
| Oregon Gov. John Kitzhaber speaks while Alliance executive director Margie Gardner and Washington Gov. Gary Locke listen. (Photo courtesy of Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance) |
"Truly this is a celebration of the hard work put in by so many people and organizations over the last few years to move the Alliance from an idea to an accomplishment," said Alliance executive director Margie Gardner. Alliance projects have conserved 16 average megawatts to date, she noted, at less than half the cost of new generating resources, and are projected to save more than 400 aMW by 2010.
Environmental, Economic Benefits
The governors and Johansen lauded the Alliance as a collaborative venture bringing environmental and economic benefits to the Northwest.
Instead of individual states and utilities fostering energy savings, said Kitzhaber, "Working together as a region we can change those markets and increase the demand for energy-efficient products and services, rather than simply subsidizing the use of conservation measures. We can exert the clout of four million households to have an impact on the market, and work with industry to tap into the creative potential of the private sector."
He found it "particularly satisfying to see a cooperative effort like the Alliance, with the foresight and mission necessary to adopt the long-term view" and to provide "investments [that are] going to have their real payoffs in the future over a number of years." All forms of energy production create varying degrees of environmental impact, he noted, yet the Northwest and its energy needs continue to grow.
"Saving energy will extend the benefits of our low-cost power system in the Northwest, reduce CO2 emissions, and make businesses more competitive by reducing energy bills," said Kitzhaber. "Energy efficiency, reducing the demand for power, will preserve and protect the quality of environment we enjoy here in the Northwest," and help promote resource-efficient economic development.
Kitzhaber noted Oregon's electric industry restructuring legislation allows "substantial energy efficiency and renewable investments to continue even within a more competitive electric industry. The innovative, long-term and effective benefits of NEEA are producing exactly the kinds of returns I envisioned when we pursued this path in the Oregon Legislature."
He praised the Alliance collaborators--utilities, regulators, governments, environmentalists and businessess--for "work[ing] together so successfully in the marketplace to achieve both lasting environmental and economic benefits for the Northwest region. I don't believe the debate between environmental health and economic benefits needs to be a zero-sum game. This is a shining example of the things we can do."
Locke began his remarks with an "amen" to Kitzhaber's preceding talk. Washington state's top elected official called the market transformation collaborative "an environmental and economic success story . . . The Alliance is flying through our region like a superhero."
Locke, too, emphasized the multiple benefits of transforming energy efficiency markets. "People want to make environmentally correct choices. They also want to make financially smart choices. The Alliance is making sure they can do both."
The governor said he recently attended a celebration for a federal Superfund site cleanup that cost $120 million over 17 years. "That teaches us a tremendous lesson. We must focus on prevention, reduce our use of material and energy that can harm the environment. One of those ways is by starting to use clean energy."
Alliance projects, he said, are projected to "bring us a $600 million return over the next 20 years--$600 million in savings that could have been spent buying dirty energy." Alliance investments have helped reduce business operating costs and
 |
| BPA administrator Judi Johansen (Photo courtesy of Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance) |
He described the Alliance as "truly successful beyond our wildest expectations."
BPA administrator Johansen--whose organization has provided most of the Alliance's funding, on behalf of its customers--called the Alliance "a terrific testament" to the Northwest's tradition of cooperation on energy issues. "We are certainly the leader in energy innovation."
Although not present in Vancouver, Montana Gov. Marc Racicot issued the following statement: "I am pleased to join with my fellow governors in support of the Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance and its work in transforming the market for energy efficiency. This is a fine example of the benefits that can accrue to the Pacific Northwest when the people of the region work cooperatively and constructively toward a common goal, and I look forward to the Alliance's continued success."
$100 Million Funding Commitment
Kitzhaber, Locke and Johansen all signed the memorandum of agreement supporting the Alliance's five-year $100 million funding from Northwest utilities. Others penning the pact at the ceremony were general manager Randy Berggren of Eugene Water & Electric Board, chairman Larry Cassidy of the Northwest Power Planning Council, vice president for products and services Dave Carboneau of Portland General Electric, deputy
 |
| Gary Locke and John Kitzhaber sign the Alliance memorandum of agreement (Photo courtesy of Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance) |
The MOA calls for continued proportional funding from the same seven entities that provided the Alliance's initital $65 million budget from 1997-1999: Avista Utilities (formerly Washington Water Power), Idaho Power, Montana Power, PacifiCorp, PGE, Puget Sound Energy and BPA.
Bonneville's contribution will drop while large publicly owned utilities with non-BPA power sources will be asked for proportional contributions to the Alliance, both to begin October 2001. The MOA also has provisions for reduced or discontinued utility funding in the event of unacceptable regulatory cost-recovery, public-purposes legislation and/or disagreeable bylaw changes.
Silicon Crystal Growing Project
The host of the March 17 ceremony, Siemens Solar Industries, produces about 20 percent of the world market for solar photovoltaic cells and modules and is a partner in the Alliance's Silicon Crystal Growing Project. Its Vancouver facility grows single-crystal silicon ingots (or cylinder-shaped bars), which are shipped to California for further processing in the Siemens production chain, according to a company project summary.
Siemens and the Alliance joined forces in 1998 to investigate potential energy efficiencies in the super-hot energy-intensive furnaces in which silicon is made into ingots. With $1 million in Alliance funding for research and development, Siemens made a number of furnace changes, including added insulation, a new top shield, rearrangement of argon flows and a continuous recharge system.
Siemens has exceeded initial goals by reducing electricity consumption 51 percent, trimming argon consumption 81 percent and increasing productivity 20 percent, Siemens chief operating officer Chet Farris told the March 17 crowd. Ingot quality is better, too, translating into a 5-percent improvement in electricity performance of solar cells.
And the company has started the market transformation process of transferring these technology efficiencies into the much larger semiconductor manufacturing industry, which uses the same furnaces to grow silicon ingots for computer chip production.
"If it was not for the hard work and dedication of the people at NEEA and our own employees, this simply would not have been possible; we would never have pulled it off," Ferris said.--Mark Ohrenschall
More Information:
Seattle has adopted a landmark sustainable building policy for new and remodeled city-owned buildings.
The policy--endorsed by Mayor Paul Schell and the Seattle City Council--establishes standards for energy and water efficiency, material and resource conservation, site planning and indoor environmental quality, based on the LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) voluntary rating system developed by the U.S. Green Building Council. Seattle's new policy applies to all new or substantially remodeled city-owned buildings and facilities with more than 5,000 square feet of occupied space. That includes more than 40 projects currently in the works, including a downtown city hall and justice center, and a number of libraries and community centers.
The policy is intended to save money over time, provide healthy and comfortable buildings, improve employee productivity and minimize environmental impacts, city council member Richard Conlin wrote in a Jan. 18 guest column in The Seattle Times.
This is believed to be the Northwest's first municipal sustainable building policy, according to Lucia Athens of Seattle Public Utilities, who heads the city's Green Building Team. City officials hope Seattle's initiative will serve as a model. "We are encouraging the private sector and other jurisdictions to be looking at this," she told Con.WEB. "We're trying to lead by example, basically."
Schell touted the policy in his Jan. 24 State
of the City address: "With our programs in recycling and conservation, our preservation of river habitat and our restored urban creeks, we are already a national leader in environmental stewardship and green practices. But we can and will set even higher standards. We are committing to sustainable building practices for our new and renovated public facilities," a part of "moving beyond discrete institutional programs to integrate stewardship of the environment into everything we do."
The City Council unanimously approved the sustainable building policy in a Feb. 22 resolution, which noted, " . . . the City desires that its buildings and facilities be models of environmental, economic and social stewardship, contributing to the City's goals of protecting, conserving and enhancing the region's environmental resources and setting a community standard of sustainable building . . ."
Policy Origins
Seattle's new policy came primarily from the city's Green Building Team, according to Athens. It includes representatives from Seattle Public Utilities, Seattle City Light, Executive Services Department, Office of Environmental Management, Department of Design, Construction and Land Use, Parks and Recreation Department, Lighting Design Lab and Seattle Center.
"The driver behind adopting this is maybe it's time for the city to walk its talk and set an example for the rest of the community [in] what we're doing with our own buildings," said City Light's John Roberts.
Seattle chose LEED guidelines because they are national--"It's a common language we can us to discuss sustainability with design teams located anywhere," according to Athens--and they bring U.S. Green Building Council support in the form of technical rulings, marketing, networking and training. They also allow comparisons to other sustainable building programs.
The minimum standard in Seattle is the LEED Silver rating, which Roberts described as the second of four progressively higher levels. "It's definitely raising the bar" above standard building practice, he said.
LEED offers credits and prerequisites in five categories: site planning, energy efficiency, material and resource conservation, indoor environmental quality and water efficiency. Requirements for each category are addressed in so-called Seattle Supplements, which are intended "to provide integration of the LEED system with local building codes, practice, and City policies," a background paper reported. These supplements also list various resources for help in meeting the guidelines.
In energy efficiency, the sustainable building policy reflects a goal to exceed Seattle's already stringent energy code, according to Roberts: "We're raising the bar just a little bit higher." City projects must be at least 20 percent more energy-efficient than the 1997 Washington State Energy Code. Credits are also available for renewable energy and green power, best-practice commissioning, elimination of HCFCs and halons, and ongoing measurement and verification.
Cost, Other Implementation Issues
The Seattle sustainable building policy includes life-cycle cost analysis, which "looks at the net present value of design options as investments," the background paper said. "The goal is to achieve the highest, most cost-effective environmental performance possible over the life of the project."
In practice, Athens acknowledged, green-building projects sometimes cost more initially--an issue that has already arisen in city building projects with established budgets.
A preliminary cost analysis of the city's planned justice center showed the budget would need to increase 3.5 percent to meet the LEED silver rating, she said. On the other hand, the energy measures would pay back in two years and indoor environmental quality measures in four years, for a building expected to last a century. "We definitely are trying to analyze this from a cost-benefit perspective, to make sure we are getting a good return on our investments in green building," she said. Those returns include lower operating costs, increased worker productivity, decreased legal liabilities for poor indoor environmental quality, and longer-lived buildings.
Council member Conlin wrote in his guest column that new Seattle public schools are being constructed with sustainable design practices--such as occupancy sensors for lighting--that have saved the school district $1.3 million in the past two years in electric and water bills.
Seattle's new policy says this about cost: "All capital construction which falls under this policy will be expected to budget to meet at minimum the LEED silver rating. Budget planning and life cycle cost analysis to achieve a higher rating . . . is encouraged." City building projects also are eligible for City Light rebates on qualifying energy efficiency measures, Roberts noted.
Seattle building designers have reacted "pretty positively" to the new policy, according to Athens, noting the presence of more than 60 private-sector building professionals at a recent LEED training workshop in Seattle. "We're getting a lot of interest . . . from consultants and potential consultants," she said.
Although the sustainable building policy has no force of law--"The fact is, it's on the honor system," acknowledged Roberts--city departments involved in building projects are expected to comply. Training and technical assistance will be available, Athens said. Eventually the policy should be incorporated into requests for proposals and requests for qualifications for city building projects.
Seattle's new policy will be subject to review. The City Council resolution calls for a report by December 2000 on the status of LEED guidelines applied in city projects, a summary of implementation issues and an evaluation plan for measuring costs and benefits.--Mark Ohrenschall
More Information:
Bonneville Power Administration should pursue at least 166 average megawatts of energy conservation from 2002 to 2006, the Northwest Power Planning Council recommends.
The Council's latest figure is slightly higher than the 150 aMW minimum proposed in a December draft issue paper. It also leaves open additional energy savings from Bonneville's direct-service industrial (DSI) customers. "These recommendations reallocate the regional [conservation] target to Bonneville according to the revised load estimates and estimating a separate target for the DSIs," states the Council's Feb. 23 recommendation.
BPA's conservation goals for fiscal years 2002-2006 should include 80 aMW for energy savings from Bonneville's conservation and renewable energy wholesale rate discount, the Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance and low-income weatherization. Another 86 aMW should come from BPA "conservation augmentation" initiatives now under development (see story below). Additional DSI efficiency potential remains to be determined.
These should be minimum--not maximum--targets for cost-effective conservation, the Council said. The regional planning group also noted the numbers will change, if necessary, to reflect BPA's final subscribed power commitments for the five-year rate period. Bonneville estimates it will need nearly 1,600 aMW of additional energy--including conservation--to serve anticipated loads from 2002-2006.
As to the "how" of BPA's conservation augmentation, the Council endorsed a "middle ground" approach outlined in the issue paper. This falls between long-term life-cycle conservation and a short-term market-mimicking acquisition approach. In the middle ground, "Bonneville should strive to acquire conservation for as little as it can while still meeting its goal. It should not employ an explicit rate-impact test," the Council suggested. BPA should pay for savings based on their market value (such as accounting for timing and geographical variations), and it "should be willing to acquire conservation that would produce savings beyond the 2002-2006 period," although customers whose contracts end in 2006 should be responsible for any unrecovered costs or undelivered savings.
The Council turned thumbs down on modifying the conservation/renewable discount for augmentation, an idea raised by Council staff in the issue paper. "It was designed with a different purpose in mind and would require extensive modification to be the basis for the acquisition activity," which could delay BPA's pending rate case, the Council said.
On the issue of competitive bidding, the Council suggested a "standard offer" approach in some circumstances, primarily for conventional residential and small commercial efficiency measures, and a more flexible strategy in other cases--particularly for large commercial and industrial customers. "The Council recommends that Bonneville solicit interest from customers and third parties and work with those parties to negotiate mutually acceptable terms (quantity, price, timing, etc.). Bonneville's utility customers should have first right of refusal but should not have the ability to block access of consumers to Bonneville-supported conservation services."
The Council also recommended against combined demand-side management initiatives by BPA's power and transmission business lines. And although renewable energy resources are not believed by the Council to be cost-effective, should renewables be proposed at "a competitive rate, Bonneville can and should acquire that power."
Public Comment
The Council's Feb. 23 recommendations came out of issue paper analysis, staff consultations with BPA and other parties, and public comments on the issue paper.
Commenters weighed in all around the original 150 aMW target. That's too low, wrote the Washington State Department of Community, Trade and Economic Development, Emerald PUD/ Northwest Energy Coalition/Natural Resources Defense Council/Northwest Energy Efficiency Council/Renewable Northwest Project, and Seattle City Light.
"Merely 'reserving' 150 aMW for conservation as part of its augmentation program, as Bonneville proposes, is a far cry from pursuing conservation as the first priority resource," wrote City Light. "The Regional Power Act clearly intends that the [BPA] Administrator shall acquire conservation and renewables to the 'maximum extent practicable,' not the minimum possible." EPUD/NWEC/NRDC/NEEC/RNP faulted the draft issue paper for failing to account for externalities, regulatory risks associated with climate change, and risks of volatile market prices, and also insufficiently crediting transmission and distribution system benefits of conservation. This group thought the Council lowballed industrial conservation potential. And it lamented the absence of renewables in the Council draft issue paper: "BPA's augmentation principles should guarantee the acquisition of at least 150 aMWs of non-hydro renewable resources as part of the overall acquisition effort."
Meanwhile, a group of six industrial customers and Benton PUD thought 150 aMW of cost-effective conservation was just fine for 2002-2006.
Pacific Northwest Generating Cooperative criticized BPA for getting into a situation where it needs new power supplies, "driven by their own decisions and reactions to political pressure from the [investor-owned utilities] and DSIs to provide them with service . . . Given the context of the augmentation plan it is inappropriate for BPA to initiate a long-term conservation acquisition program as part of augmentation." And 150 aMW may be too large a target, PNGC said, especially if good hydro conditions emerge during the five-year rate period.
Industrial Customers of Northwest Utilities wondered about the risk of BPA wholesale prices rising above market levels, and called for a "conservation exit strategy" if that happens. ICNU also advocated looking for near-term energy-saving opportunities: "A short-term payback conservation program could capture conservation that is low cost, hasn't been accomplished, all while keeping the costs and benefits within the five year BPA augmentation time frame."
ICNU joined many other commenters in support of BPA competitive bidding for conservation. Benton PUD agreed, "[a]s long as the home utility has first right of refusal."
The Northwest Energy Efficiency Council acknowledged that right, "but we do endorse the earliest possible involvement of Third Parties in conservation acquisition." NEEC proposed a rolling two-month solicitation for utility conservation bids (starting as soon as power sales contracts are signed), followed by open solicitations to other parties to fill "gaps" in utility offerings.
Seattle City Light supported an "important role" for third parties in conservation acquisition, but worried that a bidding process based on price of delivered energy savings would promote "cream-skimming" of the lowest-cost conservation measures.
Commenters offered little support and some vigorous opposition to modifying the conservation/renewable discount and seeking demand-side coordination between BPA's power and transmission business lines.
One of the most provocative comments came from retired U.S. Army captain Earl Eigabroadt of Port Orchard, WA, who wrote: "What Bonneville really needs, and will need with greater urgency as time passes and demand increases, but which it will not get, at least not within the lifetime of the undersigned, is the output of what should have been WNP-3 and -5 at Satsop."--Mark Ohrenschall
More Information:
Bonneville Power Administration has committed to pursue at least 166 average megawatts of energy conservation from 2002 through 2006 to help meet anticipated higher demand for its wholesale power.
But a host of unresolved details remain on exactly how BPA plans to achieve its goal.
Roughly half of BPA's 166 aMW goal as outlined by the Northwest Power Planning Council (see related story) is forecast to come from the Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance, BPA's planned conservation/renewables wholesale rate discount, and low-income weatherization. That leaves 86 aMW from so-called "conservation augmentation" activities.
"We've got a blank slate," said BPA energy efficiency vice president Terry Esvelt at the March 22 inaugural meeting of the conservation augmentation working group. This is "exciting" but also daunting, he said, because BPA wants to fill in most of the conservation augmentation blanks by October--a year before the start of its next five-year rate period and the need for additional power supplies, including conservation.
Still to be determined are such issues as who will deliver conservation augmentation to BPA, the nature of those savings, which customer sectors will be targeted, energy savings verification and questions over timing, payments, costs and risks. These all emerged in the March 22 meeting, at the end of which BPA officials said they would create a strawman proposal for conservation augmentation by the next working group meeting on April 26.
BPA's Augmentation Context
BPA estimates it will need nearly 1,600 aMW of additional power to meet its loads from fiscal years 2002 through 2006, vice president for bulk marketing and transmission services Steve Oliver told the working group. The federal power marketing agency proposed in its pending rate case an average price of 2.81 cents per kilowatt-hour for the value of a flat block of power delivered to the Bonneville system during the five-year period. BPA already has purchased some 600 aMW of wholesale power for augmentation purposes. "It depends on the market how fast we'll go ahead and fill the portfolio," said Oliver.
But at least 150 aMW is reserved for cost-effective conservation, he reiterated.
Those energy savings will have to reduce Bonneville load, Esvelt noted. BPA's subscription process will determine the precise amount. He described "gobs of uncertainties" around the 166 aMW minimum target recommended by the Council, and pledged BPA will "run the best . . . programs we possibly can" and if the final number by 2006 is in that range, "I'm going to feel good."
Conservation augmentation is intended to be "a business deal" to avoid power purchases, Esvelt told the working group. And electric marketplace conditions--especially in peak-demand periods--will be an important factor for Bonneville. "We will give value for resources shaped for our highest-cost period," said Oliver.
For example, Esvelt noted summertime generally brings a "high-value power market" to the West Coast, driven by California air-conditioning loads. Accordingly, energy savings in Northwest irrigation and air-conditioning should be highly valued. Conversely, nighttime energy efficiencies--such as from street lighting--should be less valued, reflecting the slack power market.
Esvelt also said BPA will embark on a peak-load management program with its customers, a separate but complementary initiative to conservation augmentation.
Bonneville also wants specificity on the conservation delivery, such as amount and timing. "We can plan power purchases around it," said Oliver. "The key is measurability and some degree of certainty about whether it will be there."
Questions on How
As to how BPA will go about gaining the added efficiencies, the Pacific Northwest Electric Power Planning and Conservation Act gives utilities right of first refusal for conservation programs. But with conservation augmentation, "It's not clear it's going to work for everybody," specifically utilities that buy only some of their power from BPA, Oliver acknowledged. Bonneville direct-service customers, investor-owned utilities and utilities that sign up for BPA's Slice of the System program also may find it troublesome "to reduce their subscription amounts for conservation investments," Esvelt said. "If contract negotiations with those or other customers don't lead us to load reductions and we couldn't accomplish the Council's conservation target, that's a problem."
BPA could accelerate augmentation by targeting certain locations, and/or by hiring third parties to work in service territories of non-participating utility customers, Esvelt suggested.
He noted past BPA conservation programs have encountered equity issues, particularly the proportional distribution of dollars to utilities. For augmentation, BPA is thinking: "The equity is in the opportunity [to participate], not the result."
Since much of the cost-effective conservation opportunity regionwide lies in the industrial and large-commercial customer sectors, Esvelt wondered whether BPA augmentation should address those first and others later in sequential fashion.
Another issue is counting the energy savings gained through augmentation. While BPA needs to count on demonstrable load reductions, onerous measurment and verification requirements can hurt project cost-effectiveness. "My assumption is where we have a lot of knowledge, we don't need to do a lot of [measurement and verification]. Where not, maybe we do. My approach is let's be flexible," said Esvelt.
Bonneville's conservation augmentation principles make several references to the agency's need for frugality. With BPA nearing the limits of its borrowing authority from the U.S. Treasury, "Our preferred option would be other people use their capital and we pay debt service," said Esvelt. "We've done that before, but it's not easy." Some of the dollars for conservation measures, he noted, will come from willing customers. "That's one way we can get our costs down." And he said BPA will "somehow" account for conservation measures whose lives exceed power-sales contracts: "We are prepared to reflect that longer value."
As for conservation performance risks, Esvelt suggested, "If we carry more risk, we might want to pay less . . . That's open to negotiations."
And on the question of renewable energy resources for augmentation, cost-effectiveness is the key variable for BPA. "If there is any renewable project or program available at lower cost, or cost-effective relative to the market in this five-year period, we are more than willing to consider it," said Oliver.--Mark Ohrenschall
More Information:
Legislation to create public-purposes funding in Washington was introduced in the state Senate this session and discussed at a committee hearing, but it died quietly without a vote.
This public-purposes proposal--independent of electric industry restructuring--would have required Washington electric distribution utilities and direct-service customers to invest at least 3 percent of annual retail electricity revenues for energy conservation, renewable energy and low-income energy efficiency services.
It was widely acknowledged that the public-purposes funding bill had a minimal chance of passage this short Washington legislative session, which officially ended March 9. But the introduction of Senate Bill 6188 and a Feb. 1 hearing before the Senate Energy, Technology and Telecommunications Committee did allow issues to be aired. "With expectations [of passage] low, awareness and information were the goals and those were by and large achieved," said Stan Price of the Northwest Energy Efficiency Council, which supported the bill.
Price and others anticipate continuing discussions on public-purposes funding and electric industry restructuring in Washington, before the 2001 legislative session convenes next January.
The Northwest Energy Coalition was a major proponent of the public-purposes funding bill; Sen. Darlene Fairley, the measure's prime sponsor, told Con.WEB that NWEC brought the legislation to her.
NWEC argued that steep declines in utility investments in conservation, renewables and low-income energy services, and continuing divisions over restructuring, called for a statewide system benefits charge. "We can't hold hostage commitments to public purposes while we wait for possible deregulation," NWEC said on its Web site. "[The m]essage is clear: statewide public policy is critical to ensure that the benefits of our . . . electricity system continue into the future." The coalition reported that at least one other state, Wisconsin, has created public-purposes funding without restructuring.
NWEC called conservation and renewables funding "critical" as the state faces a potential energy shortage. These investments benefit the environment and the economy, the coalition argued. And NWEC noted the Northwest Power Planning Council's estimate of 1,500 average megawatts of cost-effective energy savings available in the region over the next two decades--only 20 percent of which would be captured solely by the market.
In addition to creating 3-percent public-purposes funding, SB 6188 also would have established specific spending criteria: 49.5 percent at utility discretion, 14 percent for market transformation, 12.5 percent apiece for renewables and low-income, and 11 percent for cost-effective conservation. It would have allowed credits (up to 36.5 percent) to the extent large customers funded their own energy-saving investments. Certain small utilities could have opted for a 1.5-percent minimum standard. Publicly owned utilities could have collaborated to meet the 3-percent spending target in aggregate. And the bill would have created procedures to monitor and ensure compliance with the spending requirements. The legislation would have taken effect beginning July 1, 2001, with a sunset review completed by 2010.
Public-Purposes Funding Positions
SB 6188 gained sponsorship from Fairley and three co-sponsors: Sens. Lisa Brown, Adam Kline and Jeanne Kohl-Welles. All are Democrats.
Fairley described the 3-percent standard as "kind of a minimal level" already met by some utilities. She believes energy efficiency and renewable energy are vital for the future. She told Con.WEB the public-purposes funding measure had some legislative support, including from Brown, who chairs the Senate Energy, Technology and Telecommunications Committee. But Fairley said Brown wanted to focus on telecommunications legislation this session, and didn't bring the bill up for a committee vote.
Both Fairley and Brown "recognized that it's more likely to be addressed as part of a larger restructuring package than as a stand-alone piece, but nevertheless wanted to have a discussion," said committee staffer Andrea McNamara.
The independent nature of this legislation was its fatal flaw, in the eyes of Ken Canon of Industrial Customers of Northwest Utilities. "Public purposes . . . have always been linked to direct-access legislation," he said. "As a stand-alone bill, just kind of incrementally dealing with restructuring, we've never thought that was a good idea. That's the primary reason we opposed it."
A similar point came from Lew McMurran of the Washington PUD Association. "We would have preferred that it be in the context of a larger restructuring effort," he said. "That's not to say we prefer restructuring, but we didn't want to see a stand-alone bill go by itself." Public utility districts around the state have "different viewpoints" on conservation and renewables, he said, but they all realize public-purposes funding for conservation and renewables is an integral part of any restructuring. Still, "a number" of PUD commissioners have concerns about this as a tax whose spending isn't all locally controlled.
Both McMurran and Canon also questioned whether 3 percent is still the appropriate benchmark for public-purposes funding. That figure derived from the 1996 Regional Review, Canon said, and since then wholesale power market prices have risen substantially, which suggests the market will foster more energy efficiencies than anticipated by the Review. "More and more [conservation] things are cost-effective, and yet you collect more and more dollars for a programmatic fix," he said.
NEEC's Price believes public-purposes funding is a form of economic development, creating jobs and helping businesses grow. "From an [energy efficiency] industry perspective, we appreciate the environmental stewardship," said Price. But foremost to NEEC, "This was about business, the opportunity to invest public funds to clarify the market and give efficiency the opportunity it would deserve in what is otherwise an often-distorted energy marketplace. Consumers don't see appropriate price signals to get them to pursue efficiency." He described public-purposes funding as "a rational economic investment and a rational mechanism to create the right incentives for conserving energy and developing renewable resources in the state."--Mark Ohrenschall
More Information:
Operators of the Northwest's only nuclear power plant are investigating a potential wind-energy project in south-central Washington.
Energy Northwest--the utility consortium formerly known as the Washington Public Power Supply System--is looking at prospective locations in the Horse Heaven Hills south of the Tri-Cities of Kennewick-Richland-Pasco. The organization wants to expand its energy-generating enterprises beyond its current portfolio of WNP-2 and the Packwood Lake hydroelectric project.
"We're not ready to go out and erect any [wind-energy] towers," said Energy Northwest spokesman John Britton. "We're in the investigation stage. For us, we feel that's significant. It is a new area for us, and we're hopeful something will come of it."
Energy Northwest has hired wind-energy consultant Bob Baker, and is talking with local landowners about setting up meteorological towers to gather more detailed wind-resource data--a key first step in gauging the viability of a commercial-scale wind farm. "I'm confident we'll get there" with the data-gathering work, beginning this year, Britton said. "What happens after that point is anybody's guess."
Energy Northwest staff "has initially investigated new technology, energy markets, market entry strategy and siting of a wind project," according to its Jan. 27 Operations and Construction Committee meeting report. In addition, " . . . staff has signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with a turbine vendor to study the 'new technology' in wind turbines. The alliance will also be investigating ways to reduce capital costs and research advanced technology."
The committee report noted Energy Northwest "is looking to develop 100 net megawatts of renewable energy by 2006," which Britton described as "a goal. There are no firm plans to reach that."
Energy Northwest's Wind Interest
Energy Northwest's wind-energy interest is part of a larger effort to find new enterprises to reduce the costs of its flagship Plant 2 nuclear facility, the lone operating nuclear plant in the region.
"Energy Northwest is looking to branch out and lessen the organization's dependence on Plant 2," said Britton. Its cost of producing power has dropped from 3.45 cents per kilowatt-hour in 1994 to 2.26 cents/KWh in 1999, but the consortium wants to go lower. "If we want to make the plant more competitive," Britton explained, "It means cutting the cost of power more, and we need to find other areas of business to shift our costs off of Plant 2."
The consortium formed a business development group, and concluded Energy Northwest knows best how to generate electricity. Renewable energy and green power look promising as a market niche, Britton noted. Wind-energy technology and cost-effectiveness have greatly improved. And the Tri-Cities has an abundance of open land and wind, plus good access to Bonneville Power Administration transmission lines.
"We're thinking there may be some viability here," Britton said.
More Details
First, though, Energy Northwest needs to learn more details about wind in the Horse Heaven Hills, with at least a year's worth of data. "We've got to do the preliminary work," said Britton. "If it looks viable to us, we'll see if it looks viable to others" that might want to collaborate on wind-project ownership or buy green power.
Energy Northwest is heartened by the Vansycle Ridge Wind Project--less than 50 miles away across the Columbia River in northeastern Oregon. "Here's a good example of a renewable resource," said Britton. "It's well-accepted in the area, its costs are reasonable, it seems to be a viable project. Perhaps there's an opportunity for us to do something like that in the local area around the Tri-Cities."
Vansycle Ridge, in fact, is essentially "a continuation, the same geological structure" as the Horse Heaven Hills, according to senior resource analyst Jeff King of the Northwest Power Planning Council. The hills south of the Tri-Cities have long been considered promising for wind energy, he noted, although he is unaware of any previous significant interest or formal proposals.
Mean 
annual wind speed is 15.7 miles per hour, according to 1976-1984 data collected at the Kennewick BPA microwave tower in the Horse Heaven Hills, and published in 1985 by the Pacific Northwest Wind Regional Energy Assessment Program. The strongest winds blow from November through July, coincident with winter peak demand and irrigation demand in late spring and summer. "Power producing wind speeds in the 12-50 mph range occur 55% of the time," the report said. It also noted, "There appear to be no environmental, land use, or climatic hazards."
Today, Horse Heaven Hills is "primarily a dryland wheat area for farming," said Britton. "Some is just desert," along with a smattering of government and irrigated agricultural lands. "We really haven't gotten to the point we want to deal with a government agency. At this point we're talking to some private landowners" about meteorological towers, and finding, "There doesn't seem to be a great deal of opposition."
A previous wind-energy plan for the Tri-Cities generated substantial local opposition in the early 1990s, when U.S. Windpower proposed at one time some 275 wind turbines for visually prominent Rattlesnake Ridge northwest of Richland. That project--which attracted initial interest from several Northwest investor-owned utilities--was eventually abandoned. "It's a picturesque part of the landscape and people didn't want to see windmills on it," said Britton. "We're not interested in even having any association with that project."
Vansycle Ridge, planned expansion at the Wyoming Wind Energy Project and now Energy Northwest's plans signify "almost a mini-boomlet in interest in wind," said King. And with BPA's energy conservation and renewable energy wholesale rate discount planned to begin in October 2001, "I can see why . . . Energy Northwest . . . might think it's an opportunity to do something, and maybe some of their [public power] members are interested."--Mark Ohrenschall
A Montana Indian tribe is looking to generate electricity from the big winds blowing across its reservation.
A prospective 15-megawatt-capacity wind farm on Blackfeet Nation land in northwestern Montana is being pursued by a tribal-owned corporation, Siyeh Development Corp. Siyeh development director Martin Wilde told Con.WEB he hopes to have the project operating within the next 18 months.
But he and others acknowledge a host of challenges. Siyeh needs to partner with a suitable developer and address financing, cost, transmission and siting. And it has to market the wind power.
Wilde has "a long way to go," said George Darr of Bonneville Power Administration, which is interested in but not committed to buying the wind-generated energy. "If he ultimately can put something together that makes sense and is within some reasonable cost boundaries, Bonneville will certainly consider it," said Darr.
Big Wind Country
Montana has sufficient wind resources to generate an astounding 116,000 average megawatts, according to a Renewable Northwest Project fact sheet. Montana's wind-energy potential is nearly seven times greater than Washington, Oregon and Idaho combined.
The Blackfeet reservation in northwestern Montana has a "ferocious wind resource," according to Wilde. "It's legendary for blowing semitrailers over and boxcars off the track" of the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway.
These winds, with an average year-round speed of about 20 mph, have already been tested as an energy-generating source. A 100-kilowatt-capacity demonstration wind turbine installed on the Blackfeet reservation in 1996 with U.S Department of Energy funding produces electricity sold at avoided cost to the local utility, Glacier Electric Cooperative. Monthly energy generation has varied from 1,600 kilowatt-hours to 25,000 KWh, reported Glacier's Roy Nollkamper. A second and smaller wind-energy plant, with four 10-KW-capacity turbines, generates power for the Browning wastewater treatment facility.
These applications have increased the local visibility of wind energy and the plausibility of a commercial-scale project, according to Wilde. They also have "established that doing projects on Indian lands is possible, as long as there's a sense of community development and a certain element of humanism in those developments . . . We've also learned this is a helluva wind resource. The turbines stand up; they haven't blown away," even in wind gusts exceeding 100 mph.
"The feasibility part is definitely there" for a substantial wind-energy project, said Nollkamper. However, he added, "It remains to get something going."
Wind Hurdles
One hurdle is the tribe's destitute economic condition. Blackfeet reservation unemployment is a staggering 69 percent, according to Blackfeet Tribal Business Council chairman William Old Chief's State of the Blackfeet Nation address in January. Glacier County has the nation's highest poverty rate, and 97 percent of its food stamp recipients live on the reservation. Browning's high school has a larger budget than the Blackfeet tribe.
This means, among many other consequences, the Blackfeet need help for a capital-intensive wind-energy project. "We've had ongoing discussions with a number of different styles of developers, including the large famous developers in the United States known to everyone as well as a few others less on the beaten track, folks who want to do things specifically with Indian tribes," said Wilde. "We seem to be coming to some meeting of the minds on the idea of joint development" between Siyeh and a developer.
One significant uncertainty involves the federal wind energy production tax credit, recently extended through 2001 at the inflation-adjusted rate of 1.5 cents/KWh. "If tribes are able to take advantage of that tax credit or find somebody else who can, that could bring the cost of energy down into the 3 to 4 cent [per KWh] range," said Darr. Otherwise, energy costs will likely range between 5 and 7 cents/KWh.
"What we'll try to do is set up some creative financing," said Wilde. "We're looking for a motivated developer who will work with us around these structures to make it a good project for them and for us."
As for would-be wind-energy buyers, Wilde identified federal power agencies (notably BPA), federal facilities and large corporations as the three primary markets.
"We have made a commitment to basically subsidize renewables for $15 million a year," said Darr. "We're just trying to do the most we can with that, and build the best portfolio. There's some geothermal we're looking at still, and additional wind projects [beyond the Wyoming Wind Energy Project, from which BPA buys the output from about 17 MW of capacity] would fit within that budget."
But he emphasized BPA has made no commitment to Montana wind. "It needs to be within the competitive range of other [wind] projects we're looking at," Darr said.
Transmission, Siting Issues
Darr believes transmission is the biggest impediment to the Blackfeet wind-energy initiative. It looks like Montana Power could integrate 15 MW, Darr said, "but we don't know exactly what it means." Building new transmission lines would be prohibitively difficult and expensive.
"We're out in the middle of nowhere," acknowledged Wilde. "We'd have to put in big transmission lines to really exploit this wind resource. We have 15 megawatts of headroom at this point that we intend to exploit . . . We're trying to get a 15-megawatt commercial wind farm on line in the next year to year and a half."
Siyeh has identified three potential locations on tribal land for a wind farm hosting an estimated 10 to 20 large turbines. A specific preferred site would be chosen based on such criteria as wind resource, proximity to transmission and environmental impacts. "All of this will be a standard [wind-energy] development with high standards for environmental concerns," Wilde said. Visibility and birds "are the main concerns, although neither one of them should be a problem at all."
Local reaction to wind energy is reportedly favorable. "The overwhelming response to both of these [existing] projects is, the community's proud of them, interested in them, and they consider them a real asset to the look of the town and the feel of the place," said Wilde.
Browning mayor William Morris supports wind energy. "We need something like this to pus us on the map," he told the Great Falls Tribune. "Anything we can do for economic benefit here is a plus." William Old Chief agreed, in a statement quoted in the newspaper: "Creating the windmills and wind farm show the progression of the Blackfeet Nation in its vision to update and improve the environment of the reservation . . . it is crucial that the Blackfeet people keep up with the modernization of today's society."--Mark Ohrenschall
Earth Day 2000 has a special focus on promoting energy efficiency and renewable energy, in the Northwest and beyond.
Seattle-based Earth Day Network is coordinating an international campaign in support of clean energy. It features a resource-packed Web site, and participation by celebrities including Earth Day founder Denis Hayes and actor Leonardo DiCaprio. EDN expects more than 500 million people worldwide to "raise a ruckus against environmental destruction and global warming" on April 22.
Meanwhile, the Washington state-based advocacy group Climate Solutions coordinates the Northwest Clean Energy Challenge, described as "a new campaign to capitalize on the momentum created by Earth Day 2000 and to galvanize clean energy action in the Pacific Northwest." Its overarching goals are to increase high-profile renewable-energy installations and foster new programs and policies for clean energy, by mobilizing citizen support and honoring supportive organizations.
Northwest Clean Energy Challenge
The Northwest Clean Energy Challenge hopes to get 100,000 Northwest citizens to express clean energy support to utilities and government officials by Earth Day 2001.
"At the close of the 20th century, we are sweating the ominous signs of climate change and considering the possibility of a Northwest without salmon," Climate Solution's Paul Horton said in a news release. "At the same time, a clean energy revolution is breaking out. Solar, wind, fuel cell and other clean energy technologies are poised to become significant power sources in coming decades.
"The NW Clean Energy challenge," continues the news release, "calls for a rapid transition to these proven clean, renewable energy technologies. It challenges NW utilities and energy policy makers to become clean energy leaders. The Challenge will reward leadership in a variety of high-profile ways including an aggressive media campaign celebrating achievements and a final recognition ceremony at the culmination of the campaign in April 2001."
Utilities can earn the top Green Ribbon Award by commiting to purchase or install new renewable energy resources equal to 1 percent of their total annual kilowatt-hour sales. Customer-installed renewable systems can be included if they had utility support or exceeded utility legal mandates. Commitments must be announced by Earth Day 2001; Earth Day 2003 is the deadline for installations or purchases. The Challenge defines renewable energy as solar, wind, geothermal and low-impact biomass.
The second-level Green Ribbon Award will go to utilities that install "highly visible renewable energy demonstration projects (solar, wind, fuel cell, hybrid or fuel cell vehicle fleet)."
Special awards for utilities will be considered for investments in energy conservation, renewables or low-income weatherization equivalent to 3 percent of retail sales; renewable energy packaged with demand-side and/or sustainable development programs; and removing barriers to distributed renewable energy installations.
For governments, meanwhile, the top award requires commitments to purchase or install new renewable energy equal to at least 5 percent of annual energy purchases. Businesses, meanwhile, can also receive recognition for renewable energy investments, according to Horton, and they too are encouraged to write utilities and government officials to advocate more renewables support.
Earth Day Network
Based in Seattle but operating globally, Earth Day Network plans to spread the clean-energy message around the globe. "We're using the unique mainstream vehicle of Earth Day to really do a lot of in-depth public education and awareness," EDN's Michelle Ackermann told Con.WEB in April 1999. "Energy is one of the most integral issues for our health and the health of the planet. The way we're currently doing it is hurting our health, polluting our air, harming our wildlife. The message is that pollution causes global warming. This is something folks are concerned about."
Earth Day Network offers a four-point U.S. Clean Energy Agenda. One point is to "increase four-fold the amount of energy obtained from non-hydro renewable sources such as the sun and the wind," and by 2020, "produce at least one-third of the nation's energy from renewable sources, and double the efficiency of energy use in homes, buildings, transportation, and industry." Other agenda items push cleaner air, cars and government energy investment policies, including a call for quadrupling federal spending on efficiency and renewables within five years.
Earth Day Network has created a voluminous Web site that lists events and groups around the globe (including the Northwest), news, products and many ways for people to participate in Earth Day 2000 and otherwise take clean-energy actions.
"If we're successful in 2000," EDN chairman Hayes told Con.WEB last year, "by 2005 we'll look at this as a . . . real inflection point with the effiency with which energy is used in the United States, and the marginal rate of new renewable energy will dramatically increase. Our objectives are not flitting a little bit on the margins, but beginning the serious process to move off fossil and nuclear fuels to renewable energy."--Mark Ohrenschall
More Information:
Energy conservation and renewable energy projects that help curb carbon dioxide emissions are eligible to seek funding from the Oregon Climate Trust. The trust has nearly $1 million available in CO2 mitigation funds from the Klamath Cogeneration Project, a 500-megawatt-capacity natural gas-fired power plant under construction in southern Oregon. That funding stems from 1997 Oregon legislation requiring new power plants to meet CO2 emission standards.
OCT seeks projects that will "avoid, sequester, or displace carbon dioxide emissions," according to a project solicitation summary. Projects also must be able to quantify CO2 emission reductions.
"There is a wide range of projects that we might fund," said OCT chairwoman Susan Anderson in a news release. Those include wind, solar, biomass, and geothermal energy; energy efficiency in homes, business and transportation; power plant efficiency upgrades and changing from burning coal to natural gas; and forest protection, reforestation and sustainable forestry.
Deadline for submitting proposal summaries is April 28. By early June OCT will identify a group of proposals for further consideration, and more detailed proposals will be due July 5. OCT plans to choose projects for negotation by mid-September and sign contracts by Dec. 31.
"Anyone can submit a proposal," said Sam Sadler of the Oregon Office of Energy, which determines the amount of CO2 offsets required of Oregon power plant developers. "There are no limitations by proposer or by geography."
Although projects can came from anywhere, "It is important that OCT acquire some offsets in Oregon, and OCT will give special treatment to projects located in Oregon," according to the solicitation summary.
More Details
With its $960,000 available from the Klamath Cogeneration Project, the trust anticipates funding one to six projects. Minimum amount of funding per project is $50,000. OCT plans to pursue a "diverse portfolio" of projects that wouldn't otherwise happen without its funding support. It also prefers permanent CO2 emission reductions, "such as energy-related projects," as opposed to "projects that temporarily sequester carbon, such as certain forest-related projects."
For energy-saving initiatives, "It's really just a matter of showing that the efficiency is going to result in savings in use of fossil fuel, and documenting it," said Sadler. The proposal summary lists several considerations for quantifying CO2 emission reductions, including baselines, range of uncertainties, length of benefits and monitoring and verification.
In the Climate Trust's evaluation criteria and weighting for project selection, cost-effectiveness counts for 50 percent. That measure is defined as "U.S. dollars per metric tonne of reasonably assured, additional CO2 [reductions]." Reliability of emissions reduction accounts for 25 percent, followed by monitoring and verification quality (15 percent) and permanence of CO2 mitigation (10 percent). Other selection factors will include portfolio diversity, "environmental, health, and socioeconomiic co-benefits," and location, specifically the "special consideration" for Oregon projects.
A bidders conference on OCT's carbon offset solicitation is scheduled for April 10 at 11 a.m. at PacifiCorp headquarters in Portland.--Mark Ohrenschall
More Information:
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