Shades of Green Update

J.P. BlackfordThe George Washington University

School of Engineering and Applied ScienceDEED Intern

Shades of Green Update – Agenda

• What’s New

• Where we are in 2005 – the Update

• Proposed New Additions

• Where do we go from here??

Shades of Green – What’s New?

• Biggest change from 2001 Shades– Non-Utility Generators

Generating Capacity by Sector

4% 7%

39%

10%

40% Co-Ops

Federal

IOUs

Public Power

Non-Utilities

Shades of Green – The UpdateGenerating Capacity Mix by Utility Sector -- Current

0% 20% 40% 60% 80%

Coal

Gas

Oil

Nuclear

Hydro

Other

Percentage of Capacity

Non-Utility

Co-Ops

IOUs

Public Power

• Public Power still leads the way with hydro and has the second lowest coal generation

• Non-Utility Generators have very high Natural Gas generation

Renewable Capcity

• Public Power’s position remained very strong, but showed no significant growth (but, neither did IOUs or Co-Ops).

• Vast majority of renewables are Hydro

Renewable Capacity by Utility Sector

0.00%

5.00%

10.00%

15.00%

20.00%

25.00%

Public Power IOUs Co-Ops Non-Utility

Per

cen

tag

e o

f C

apac

ity

A bit more on Renewables…

• We lead the way with Hydro

• We fall behind on non-hydro renewables to the Non-Utility generators

Hydroelectric Capacity by Utility Sector

0.00%

5.00%

10.00%

15.00%

20.00%

25.00%

Public Power IOUs Co-Ops Non-Utility

Pe

rce

nta

ge

of

Ca

pa

cit

y

Non-Hydro Renewable Capacity by Utility Sector

0.00%

0.50%

1.00%

1.50%

2.00%

2.50%

3.00%

3.50%

4.00%

4.50%

5.00%

Public Power IOUs Co-Ops Non-Utility

Pe

rce

nta

ge

of

Ca

pa

cit

y

Fossil Fuel Mix -- Capacity

• PP uses less coal than all but Non-Utility• PP uses more oil than the others• But, the fuel mix isn’t really all that significant…

Fuel Mix of Fossil Fuel Capacity by Utility Type

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Public Power IOUs Co-Ops Non-Utility

Gas

Oil

Coal

Fossil Fuel Mix -- Generation

• PP has significant non-utilized gas capacity– Peaking units are gas-fired– This is a snap-shot of one year

• PP coal generation has declined, IOUs increased, Co-Ops remained steady

Fossil Fuel Generation by Utility Sector and Fuel Type

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Public Power IOUs Co-Ops Non-Utility

Per

cen

t o

f G

ener

atio

n

Gas

Oil

Coal

Operating Coal Capacity Age

• Obviously, plants have gotten older, so the graphs show that change…

Operating Coal Capacity by Age and Utility Type

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%

0-10

11-20

21-30

31-40

over 40

Age

of B

oile

r, y

ears

Percent of Capacity

Non-Util

Co-Ops

IOUs

Public Power

Emissions – Sulfur Dioxide

• PP retains its rank as the lowest Sulfur Dioxide emissions

Sulfur Dioxide Emissions, 2003

0.000

0.100

0.200

0.300

0.400

0.500

0.600

0.700

0.800

0.900

1.000

Public Power IOUs Co-Ops Non-Utiltiy

Lb

s/M

MB

TU

Emissions – Nitrogen Oxides

• PP is still lower than IOUs and Co-Ops, but, is higher than Non-Utility Generators

Nitrogen Oxides Emissions, 2003

0.000

0.050

0.100

0.150

0.200

0.250

0.300

0.350

0.400

0.450

Public Power IOUs Co-Ops Non-Utiltiy

Lbs/

MM

BTU

Emissions – Carbon DioxideBased on Capacity

• We’ve improved!• But, the Non-Utility generators emissions are

lower than ours.

Carbon Dioxide Emissions, 2003

0.000

50.000

100.000

150.000

200.000

250.000

Public Power IOUs Co-Ops Non-Utiltiy

Lb

s/M

MB

TU

Emissions – Carbon DioxideBased on Generation

Carbon Dioxide Emissions per MWh Generated

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

Public Power IOU Co-Ops Non-Utility

Em

issi

on

s R

ate

(CO

2/M

Wh

)

• The trend between PP, IOUs and Co-Ops remains the same, but, Non-Utilities are slightly better than PP

Hydroelectric Capacity

• PP still has approximately 4 times the hydro capacity as IOUs

Hydroelectric Capacity by Utility Sector

0.00%

5.00%

10.00%

15.00%

20.00%

25.00%

Public Power IOUs Co-Ops Non-Utility

Per

cen

tag

e o

f C

apac

ity

Non-Hydro Renewables

• Non-Utility Generators have significantly more non-hydro renewables.

• PP has increased its non-hydro capacity (by about 20%), while IOU capacity decreased and co-ops remained nearly the same

Non-Hydro Renewable Capacity by Utility Sector

0.00%

0.50%

1.00%

1.50%

2.00%

2.50%

3.00%

3.50%

4.00%

4.50%

5.00%

Public Power IOUs Co-Ops Non-Utility

Per

cen

tag

e o

f C

apac

ity

DSM

• Same general trend, though PP spending did decrease.

DSM Spending as a Percent of Retail Revenue

0.00%

0.10%

0.20%

0.30%

0.40%

0.50%

0.60%

0.70%

0.80%

PP IOUs Co-Ops

Landfill Gas

Currently:• 370 LFGE projects already

exist and another 200 are under development

• In 2003, these projects removed over 17.7 MMTCE of methane annually, which equates to removing emissions equivalent to 14.3 million cars, planting 19.3 million acres of forest, or preventing the use of 152 million barrels of oil.

Previously:• 317 LFGE projects existed and

another 54 are under construction

Landfill gas may prove to be more significant since new EPA data shows that the heat trapping potential of methane is 23 times as strong as carbon dioxide – this is up from 21.

What’s New??

Zero Emissions Capacity

• This counts Hydro and Nuclear.

• PP clearly leads the way in these generating technologies that have no emissions

Zero Emissions Capacity

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

Cooperative Investor-Owned Public Power Non-UtilityGenerators

Per

cent

age

of C

apac

ity

Mercury

• Graph considers Fossil Fuel generation only.

• PP has significantly lower mercury emissions than the other generators.

Mercury Emission Rate for Fossil Fuel Generation

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

2

Public Power IOUs Co-Ops Non-Utility

mg/

MM

Btu

Green Pricing

• PP has significantly more utilities offering green pricing programs to their customers

Number of Utilities Offering Green Pricing Programs in 2003

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Public Power IOUs Co-Ops

Num

ber o

f Util

ities

Green Pricing – Continued

• PP average green pricing premium is less than IOUs or Co-Ops.

• This is misleading, though, due to IOU solar programs which have significantly higher premiums.

• Looking at the median, the premiums are similar…

Average Green Pricing Premium

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

Public Power IOUs Co-Ops

cent

s/kW

h

Renewable Portfolio Standards

Disclaimers– Hydro may or may not be counted in all of the state RPS standards– Some figures are misleading due to limited PP presence in some states– Credit may or may not be given for existing renewables in the proposed RPS

Why are we Green?

Things we really can’t control:

• Location– We’ve got a lot of Hydro capacity due to

where we’re generating our power (Pacific NW, for instance)

• Age– We got into the generation side later, so our

plants are newer, and therefore cleaner

Still…

Conclusions

• We’re still greener than the IOUs and Co-Ops…

• That’s great, but, it poses a bigger question:

Where do we go from here?

• How do we want to proceed on the Shades of Green Update

• Case Studies

• Small Member Contributions

The “spin” on the Update

• We’re still Green, but look at what we’re doing to become even greener…– Case Studies (more on that soon…)

• Policy Pressures that PP will be facing– GHG intensity– RPS– Others?

• Opportunities for PP– Landfill Gas – Anything Else?

Case Studies

• We want to show that while PP is green, we’re trying to be greener:– Tree Power– Holland (MI) mercury thermometer and

industrial switch program– Others??

• These are likely programs that we’re not getting credit for elsewhere!

Small Member Contributions

• How can we collect what our smaller (<25 MWh) generators are doing?– Most are exempt from reporting– Voluntary reporting may be too burdensome

for smaller generators

Anything else?

• Other items to include in the update to Shades of Green

• Questions?• Comments / Suggestions?

J.P. Blackfordjpblackford@appanet.org

202-467-2985