Full Fuel-Cycle and Building Energy Efficiency Initiatives · 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 0.00...
17
Full Fuel-Cycle and Building Energy Efficiency Initiatives Georgia Environmental Conference August 25, 2011, Savannah, GA Neil P. Leslie, P.E., Gas Technology Institute 847 768 0926, [email protected]
Transcript of Full Fuel-Cycle and Building Energy Efficiency Initiatives · 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 0.00...
Full Fuel-Cycle and Building Energy Efficiency Initiatives
Georgia Environmental Conference
August 25, 2011, Savannah, GA
Neil P. Leslie, P.E., Gas Technology Institute
847 768 0926, [email protected]
2
U.S. Energy Use Profile 2009
Source: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory 2010
3
U.S. CO2 Emissions Profile 2008
Source: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory 2009
4
U.S. Power Generation Trends
Source: EIA Annual Energy Review 2009
0
5
10
15
20
25
1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
Ener
gy C
on
sum
pti
on
(Qu
adri
llion
BTU
)
Coal Petroleum Natural Gas Nuclear Hydro
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
Biomass
Geothermal
Wind
Solar
5
US Electricity Capacity & Generation Mix Forecast through 2035
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
2008 Reference No GHG concern Extended policies $75/ton GHG price
U.S. Electric Capacity and Generation Mix in 2008 and 2035 under Four Scenarios
Coal Petroleum/Gas Steam Natural Gas Nuclear Renewables Pumped Storage/Other
Cap
acit
y
Ge
ne
rati
on
Source: EIA Annual Energy Outlook 2011
66
2035 Electricity Generation Scenario Projections
Opportunity for no carbon & low carbon fuels in place of coal,
and implementing carbon capture and sequestration
Source: EIA Annual Energy Outlook 2010
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
2008 Low Economic Growth Reference High Economic Growth
Figure 61. Electricity generation by fuel in three cases, 2008 and 2035
billion kilowatthours
Renewables
Nuclear
Natural Gas
Petroleum
Coal
7
Commercial Prices Highly Variable Power Plant Heat Rate Stable
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030
He
at R
ate
E/G
Pri
ce R
atio
Commercial Electric to Gas Price Ratio and Heat Rate
US Average E/G Ratio US Average Heat Rate for Fossil-Fueled Plants (kWh/kWh)
Source: EIA
8
Original Minimum Code
Original “Beyond Code”
New Minimum Code
New “Beyond Code”
Evolution of Building Energy Codes
Average Buildings
Net Zero Use
99
Future Pathways
>All-electric buildings─ Combination of nuclear, coal with CCS, renewables
─ Natural gas is a bridge fuel for generation
─ Eliminate fossil fuel consumption, zero site emissions
─ Heat pumps key for heating, water heating
─ Favored based on federal funding and strategy
─ High risk of failure, costly to implement
>Mixed fuel buildings─ Least cost option for near term
─ Long term viability depends on gas industry strategy and electric progress
10
Growing national recognition of important role of source energy
and carbon emissions
Importance of Source Energy in Building Codes & Standards
California’s Title 24 building codes use source energy and time dependent valuation to drive
a comprehensive energy efficiency decision-making process for builders and consumers
1111Source: AHRI
Increased Electric Water Heater Share Coincides with New Regulations
1,000,000
2,000,000
3,000,000
4,000,000
5,000,000
6,000,000
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
Residential Water Heater Shipments
GAS
ELECTRIC
-
60,000
120,000
19
97
19
98
19
99
20
00
20
01
20
02
20
03
20
04
20
05
20
06
20
07
20
08
20
09
Commercial Water Heater Shipments
GAS
ELECTRIC
20
40
60
80
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
Commercial Water Heater Market Share
ELECTRIC
GAS
40
50
60
19
97
19
98
19
99
20
00
20
01
20
02
20
03
20
04
20
05
20
06
20
07
20
08
20
09
Residential Water Heater Market Share
GAS
ELECTRIC
1212
Source Energy Methodology in National Initiatives
>DOE Section 502(e) credit when source use falls while gas use rises, amended October 1, 2004
>National Academy of Science full-fuel-cycle recommendations, May 15, 2009
>DOE RFI on National Energy Rating Program for Homes, June 8, 2010
>DOE RFI on National Asset Rating Program for Commercial Buildings , August 8, 2011
>DOE Policy on adopting NAS full-fuel-cycle recommendations, August 18, 2011
1313
Source Energy Methodology in National Initiatives (Continued)
>EPA – Portfolio Manager, Target Finder, ENERGY STAR for Buildings & Manufacturing Plants
>GBI Green Globes for Commercial Buildings, 2005 with 2010 updates
>US Green Building Council LEED V.3 for Existing Buildings (EBOM), updated April 2010
>DOE NOPR on fossil fuel reduction in new Federal buildings, October 15, 2010
>ICC International Green Construction Code (Public Version 2.0), November 2010
1414
Source Energy Methodology in National Initiatives (Continued)
>ASHRAE Building Labeling Program (bEQ), 2009
>Joint Statement by AGA and NRDC Endorsing the NRC Full-Fuel Cycle Energy Consumption Measurement Recommendations 9/9/09
─ http://www.aga.org/NR/rdonlyres/B0D35A27-0470-4969-BB4F-B0D6DCCFBA03/0/0909NRDC.PDF
>DOE Agreement on Data Centers 2/1/10─ http://apps1.eere.energy.gov/news/progress_alerts.cf
m/pa_id=301
─ DOE, FEMP, EPA, ASHRAE, USGBC, others
>CALGreen Code 1/1/11(linked to Title 24)
1515
Fuel Switching Incentives Appearing in EE Programs
>Fuel switching incentives in several states:─ Florida, Idaho, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New
York, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Texas, Vermont, Washington
─ Affected rates (gas, electric, or both) depend on approved program terms
>“Gas-only” incentives, especially high efficiency water heaters
>Trend expected to continue
1616
Summary
> Full fuel-cycle is a necessary supplement to site energy to address
building energy efficiency and emissions issues
─ Site energy is not suitable to meet building or national energy conservation
goals or additional policy goals
─ Source energy is a superior approach and may be sufficient to meet
national energy conservation goals; necessary but not sufficient for other
policy goals
─ Additional metrics (e.g., GHG emissions, environmental impacts) required
to meet other policy goals
> Full fuel-cycle energy efficiency metrics can be implemented now
─ Several options available for implementation
─ Sufficient precision, accuracy, and flexibility
─ Workable methods exist to address changes over time
1717
Summary (Continued)
>Shift to codes, standards, and national energy policies based on full fuel-cycle methodology
─ Energy efficiency and environmental concerns
─ More complete information about total energy use and GHG emissions
─ More equitable than site energy methodologies
─ Facilitate cost-effective energy efficiency investments
