April 19, 2010
by Environmental Building Strategies
in Renewable Energy
Tags: Blogmaster Hoang, EBS Team
The Southeastern region of the United States is an energy conundrum, comprising about one quarter of the demand in the country, yet having the lowest capacity for renewable energy (about 6%). This discrepancy is an incredible obstacle to any proposed Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) aimed at substantially reducing the nation’s carbon emissions. To reach a goal of 15% of each state’s power to be produced by renewable energy, we would need roughly 186 terrawatt hours of energy from various renewable sources to satisfy the Southeast Region’s needs. Among the problems with such a suggestion, are the lack of viable renewable energy technologies, outdated transmission lines, and the finances associated with overcoming these obstacles. Renewable energy is the future; unfortunately, our wind and solar technologies are not yet competitive with fossil fuel based alternatives, biomass technology would require a significant shift in our country’s farming focus, and hydroelectric options have been almost completely exhausted.
Wind energy seems quite promising with the only problems being that it is incredibly unreliable, many consider windmills an eye sore, but most importantly, it can only account for a maximum of 11% of the renewable energy demand in the region. Solutions range from building large hydro-storage facilities (using energy produced during low demand to pump water uphill into a reservoir and then producing hydro electric power during peak load hours) and locating wind farms on America’s uninhabited plains or offshore sites. Unfortunately, all of these technologies will be a moot point unless a complete overhaul of the electrical grid in the southeast occurs with substantial improvements and additions to the transmission lines to transport renewable energy from isolated areas of the Southeast Region.
Solar technologies are incredibly expensive to produce, yield low efficiency returns, and have not proven to be a viable solution on a large scale without considerable government subsidies. Although there have been recent advancements in multi-layered thin-film solar technologies, it will be decades before solar options become competitive if it happens at all. This is the least cost-effective solution for an RPS demand. By covering every rooftop in the Southeast with solar panels, solar energy can produce a whopping 1.1% of the renewable energy demand.
Biomass may have the most potential out of any of the renewable energy sources. In a perfect scenario where maximum efficiency for electrical production is reached, none of the farmed biomass is used for the production of liquid biofuels in cars, and all farming is directed towards the production of biomass fuels (none of these propositions is remotely likely) the Southeast could provide 27% of its renewable energy needs through biomass. This is a significant amount; however, realistically, it would only reach a fraction of that. The problem that makes this irrelevant is that burning biomass for electricity also produces CO2 pollution and does not qualify for any of the recently proposed RPS’s.
Although hydroelectricity seems like a magic solution to our problems, there may not be a single natural waterway in North America which has not already been exploited. Almost all the rivers have already been dammed for hydroelectric power and flooding controls, in many cases, multiple times. We can continue this process in the Southeast, but there are significant environmental repercussions of such actions. Not only does this disrupt the migration and birthing pattern of many species of fish, but, more importantly, it disrupts the natural flow and movement of nutrient rich sediment (dirt). This may not seem important until one looks at the bigger picture and chain of events in which this sediment fails to reach the deltas of our rivers, fails to fill in the coastlines of our country, then fails to feed the marshes and wetlands in the Southeast. Still not getting the picture? That’s OK, there’s more. Marshes and wetlands are our natural defenses against floods, hurricanes, and storms. The damming of our rivers and disruption of the flow of sediment is THE reason that our country experienced a disaster on the scale of Hurricane Katrina. Further expansion of hydropower through dams seems like a much less viable solution after this is taken into account. However, if it were decided that the dangers and consequences were worth braving, hydroelectric power has the capacity to provide a significant 26% of the renewable demand.
The sum of all these renewable percentages only equates to 65% of the 174TWhrs needed to fulfill an RPS of 15-20% renewable energy supply for the nation. Now, where would the remaining 35% come from? The Southeast Region would have to import that from neighboring states, requiring a massive overhaul of the electrical grid and the construction of high-efficiency, long distance transmission lines on a massive scale. The cost of such a gigantic infrastructure project alone would be staggering, however, the constant and never-ending importation of that much energy would cripple the states’ economies in the region. Even if trade-able carbon emissions were a part of the RPS and transmission lines were not necessary, this would still have a devastating effect on the local economy. Options for the Southeast Region of the United States to produce more than 10% renewable energy are significantly inadequate, so an all-encompassing RPS does not seem feasible with our current technology.
Numbers and percentages courtesy of:
Hadley, Stanton W., Key, Thomas., Deb, Rajat. May 2009. Power Transfer Potential to the Southeast in Response to a Renewable Portfolio Standard: Interim Report 2.
-EBS Blogmaster Hoang
October 7, 2009
by Environmental Building Strategies
in Energy, Renewable Energy
Tags: energy, Renewable Energy, Solar
With the recent surge in money going towards renewable energy research and implementation, many people are forgetting a key factor in reducing our impact on the environment: energy efficiency.
Utilizing renewable energy in your home or commercial building is great, don’t get me wrong, but before this expensive option is employed, you should first look at the efficiency of your home or building’s energy systems.
If your building wastes energy, you should prioritize improving this aspect and use the money that you had set aside for a renewable project to accomplish the task.
Once you have collected enough savings from the efficiency retrofits, you can look to implement a renewable energy generation system. By following this succession your system can be sized accurately, and your benefit to the environment, the ultimate goal of all these measures, will be significantly better.
Benefits of Energy Efficiency
In the United States, buildings use 72 percent of electricity consumption, 39 percent of energy use, and produce 38 percent of all carbon dioxide emissions.
If we, as a nation, are looking to decrease our C02 emissions and conserve energy and electricity, we should look no further than the existing buildings in our country.
Recently, as new construction projects have been on the decline, the opportunity to retrofit existing buildings has been increasing. There is vast potential for energy savings in these buildings, which makes them prime project candidates.
A study done by a Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory scientist claimed that commissioning all of the nation’s commercial buildings would yield the greatest energy savings per dollar spent of any option, including wind and solar energy production. Commissioning involves fine tuning a building’s existing energy systems to improve performance and eliminate wasteful energy use.
After commissioning the building, and saving tons of CO2, energy and money, you can determine what systems need retrofitting.
The fact that commissioning alone has the potential to save the most energy per dollar spent just shows the prospective savings that upgrading a building’s energy systems would create. In the near future, all existing building upgrades should be green focused, as it not only makes environmental sense but economic sense as well.
The same Lawrence Berkeley study claims that $30 billion dollars in energy costs and 300 million tons of greenhouse gas emissions can be saved a year by existing building retrofit projects with paybacks of one year or less.
Renewables
Let’s be honest, renewable generation doesn’t always make economic sense. This is why federal, state and local municipalities have set up generous rebate and tax credit systems to offset the costs. Even with these savings measures, many solar and wind projects have long paybacks.
Take San Francisco, for example. On top of the 30 percent federal solar rebate and the California Solar Initiative rebate (currently at $1.10 per watt for commercial and residential solar installations), San Francisco offers a $1,500 rebate per kilowatt up to 10 kilowatts.
With all of these rebates you are still looking at 10 to 15 years or more to recoup initial costs. Ten years is not bad, but compare this to energy efficiency retrofit projects, which typically have paybacks of one to five years and produce significant energy and cost savings, and it doesn’t seem to make monetary sense to choose solar installation first.
What does make sense is to evaluate and implement efficient upgrades into your building or home and then look to install renewable energy generation down the line. That way, when you do implement the photovoltaic cells or wind turbine they can be smaller, less ambitious projects that still produce the same percentage of your buildings energy use as was initially desired.
If you use 30 percent less energy after the retrofits, you can make the renewable installation 30 percent smaller.
Success
There has been some success in getting government money to the energy efficiency sector. On September 14 the Department of Energy announced that it would allocate $454 million from the stimulus bill to a new program called “Retrofit Ramp-up.”
The initiative will save $100 million dollars a year in energy savings, according to the Department of Energy. It’s initially focused on whole-neighborhood efficiency retrofit programs that will produce significant cost effective solutions, especially ones that incorporate both public and private buildings.
The department’s hope is that these projects will provide successful sustainable business models for the rest of the country to follow.
The program provides funds to states, U.S. territories, counties, cities and Indian tribes to improve energy efficiency in the building and transportation sector. These entities have to fill out documentation explaining their project and how it will improve efficiency in their community. The applications are then reviewed by the Department of Energy and accepted or declined based upon the merits and potential energy savings of the project.
This is one of several programs funded by the stimulus bill that can be applied to energy efficiency retrofits. There is also a specific appliance upgrade program for residences that is quite comprehensive.
The future
The future seems extremely promising for all the green industries as many policy makers are starting to jump on the sustainable bandwagon. My hope is that the energy efficiency sector does not get overlooked. It may not be as flashy or exciting as renewable energy production but it is equally important. It is also a great place to start improving our eco-friendly practices and it is where money should begin funneling to first.
Once improvements are made in this sector it will be easier to move forward with renewable energy generation, especially small-scale on-site generation. As many buildings start to follow this model, the public will see renewable energy as a more viable and inexpensive solution to our current environmental situation.
In addition to energy savings, the energy efficiency sector has the potential to create a huge number of jobs. At a time when unemployment is rising above 10 percent in many states, job creation is exactly what our country needs. Estimates are that the existing building retrofits market is likely to be a $400 billion dollar industry, and it only makes sense.
Wouldn’t you move forward quickly with a project if you knew it would pay for itself in five years or less? Considering a huge portion of the existing 5 million commercial buildings in the United States could undergo retrofit projects and each project would employ construction workers, engineers, architects, project managers and planners, this industry alone could ignite job growth nationwide.
In light of the recent CO2 reduction benchmarks that are being pushed by President Obama (which will hopefully be more robust after the Copenhagen Conference), we need to act now. If the future of energy production is rooted in the success of renewable generation, the means to get to that end is energy efficiency retrofits.
— EBS Team —
July 7, 2009
by Environmental Building Strategies
in Energy, LEED, Renewable Energy
Document early and often
Parties need to understand the importance of documenting throughout the process. This is especially relevant when it comes to MR credits. Because of the volume of information those credits require, it is essential that team members provide the LEED Consultants or PM’s with the documentation to be able to quantify recycled content, regional compliance, etc. This means requesting all of the specifications of the materials you are purchasing from the wholesaler or manufacturer you are purchasing them from. For regional credits especially it is important to know what information to request. It is often the case that regional materials must not only be manufactured in a 500 mile radius from the building site but they must also be harvested in the same radius.
On a related note, the LEED V3 system has been written and is in place. You can upgrade to this system anytime this year and reap the benefits of a faster LEED online tool and a new and improved LEED 2009 credit system.
By implementing continuous documentation you will avoid the hassles of finding lost information or misplaced results further down the line – STAY ORGANIZED!
–The EBS Team
February 6, 2009
by Environmental Building Strategies
in Energy, Green Building, Renewable Energy, Uncategorized
Tags: Green Building Examples, Green Builoding, PGE, Teaching
For those of you in San Francisco interested in learning about energy efficient buildings go to the PGE headquarters on 5th and Howard. It is really one of the best resources to learning about all items related to green building. They have great demonstrations on lighting, windows, HVACs and many more. It really is a true hidden gem for our industry that is totally underutilized.
An example of a demonstration they have is two panels of glass one is LOW-E and the other is spectrally selective LOW-E glass. Behind the glass are about a 100 incandescent bulbs. When you turn on the switch you can feel the difference of the heat transmitted through the glass. It becomes very clear that for a commercial building it is crucial to have spectrally selective glass because commercial buildings are cooling dominated. Residential it is more important to have passive heating, so heat transmission is helpful, meaning that regular LOW-E glass is the right choice.
Just a cool little bit of information for all you green building enthusiasts.
— The EBS Team
Recent Comments