Prev | Next
Re-Use, Retrofit & Renew(able): The Three Green R's For Resuscitating & Renewing Existing Buildings
Martine Dion
BuildingEnergy08
A Tale of Two States Energy Plans in New York
Michael Colgrove
BuildingEnergy10
A Vermont Roadmap to a Zero-Carbon Building Sector by 2050
Blair Hamilton
BuildingEnergy 11
VEIC_ SPLASH_TYPE.jpg 0004C53C Macintosh HD BBA3A940:
Blair Hamilton
NESEA -March 9, 2011
Moving to a Sustainable
Energy Future
BUSINESS AS USUAL ENERGY USE
TIME
EFFICIENCY RESOURCES & REDUCED USE
SUSTAINABLE ENERGY RESOURCES
UNSUSTAINABLE ENERGY RESOURCES
ENERGY REQUIREMENTS
Vermont Climate Goals: 20 Years of Aiming Low and Achieving Lower
25% by 2012
•What if we shift national, state and community energy planning, policy and decision-making to focus on the climate results?
MC900156815[1]
•Shift from planning, regulating and investing based on current energy supply economics to least-cost achievement of climate goals (e.g., 80% reduction or 350 ppm by 2050)?
•A top-down and results-oriented approach to planning and policy is increasingly being used outside the US -particularly in Europe where carbon goals are considered by many to be "Legally Binding"
MC900156815[1]
•This Vermont analysis is a work-in-progress, exploring what it might look like for Vermont to achieve 2050 climate goals, starting with the building sector.
•The building sector will need to be zero carbon by 2050 -or close to zero.
•Efficiency is the least-cost option to provide the bulk of building-sector carbon reductions.
Assume the following hypotheses, if you will:
A Reasonable Mix of Strategies to Achieve Zero Carbon in Buildings by 2050
20 % On-Site Zero-Carbon Energy Supply
60 % Reduction in Consumption Through Efficiency
20 %Supply from a De-Carbonized Electric Grid
Components of a Vermont Roadmap to 2050
1.New Technologies
2.New Delivery Strategies
3.Expanded Infrastructure
4.New Policies
1. New Technology Examples
•Phase change material built-in to building components
•Windows with thermal performance equal to walls
•Easy and effective building air sealing systems w/associated ventilation
•User-aware, self-optimizing and self-diagnosing controls for equipment
•Improved heat recovery technology and controls for all sizes of loads
•Continued advances in solid-state lighting, including substrate growth improvements, AC compatibility, improved fixture design and thermoelectric generation from waste heat
•(Many more in full paper)
1. New Technologies
•But it's important to remember that many technologies, if not most of them, that we will rely upon to meet 2050 goals are not, as yet, known.
•Our energy forecasts and plans should not be constrained by our limited ability to account for new technologies.
•We tend to assume new technology will cost more and save less, but what is our experience?
From David Goldstein
Lighting Technology Development
2. New Delivery Strategies to get to 2050
•More relationship-based strategies
•Individualized building retrofit roadmaps
•More community-based strategies
•More upstream strategies
•Widespread new financing essential
•Smart-meter enabled strategies
3. Expanded Infrastructure to get to 2050
Potential Infrastructure Components:
•Expanded Sustainable Energy Utility
•New Vermont Green Energy Bank
•New Vermont Sustainable Energy Loan Guarantee Fund
•More and Better Skilled Contractors -and more who can do the whole job
•Current incremental and voluntary strategies are far too slow to meet necessary climate goals.
•When it comes to climate, Time Matters.
•We will need to transition to massive market-based investment driven by public policies (e.g. building energy requirements).
4. Policies to get to 2050
4. Policies to Get to 2050
Policy Strategy:New Regulatory Guidance
•Transition to a focus on achieving carbon goals from current government and regulatory policy focused on reducing energy use and cost.
•The least-cost planning paradigm that has served Vermont well in the utility sector will now need to be applied to determining the least-cost path to achieving carbon goals.
•This is a major shift from currently constrained energy resource least-cost planning based on minimizing costs using current and near-term supply costs.
4. Policies to Get to 2050
Policy Strategy:New Construction•New construction codes should require net-zero carbon emissions starting in 2020.
•Ramping up to this will require significant technical assistance and subsidies over the next decade.
•Policies addressing the definition and boundaries of "net zero" will require further development to assure that they address least-cost and other objectives for carbon reduction, with attention to avoiding sub-optimization to inappropriate objectives[1]
4. Policies to Get to 2050
Policy Strategy:Existing BuildingsTime-of-Sale Building Efficiency Requirements•Phase in from 2015 to 2025 as a condition of property transfer
•Relies on long-term mortgage financing, a known financial mechanism with existing infrastructure, to spread out costs over up to thirty years at relatively low interest rates
•Necessary improvements can be made by seller or buyer
•Expanded incrementally -more types of buildings and deeper efficiency
•Greatly reduces need for public subsidiesOther Supporting Strategies for Existing Buildings
•Building rating and labeling
•Delivery infrastructure development
•Innovative financing and loan guarantees
VEIC_Main_no swoosh.jpg 00377C5F Macintosh HD BBA3A940:
Accelerate the Cycle
Putting it All Together -Year-by-Year to 2050
•Assume all new buildings will be net zero carbon starting in 2020
•Focus on achieving 50% reduction through the retrofit of existing buildings: 240,000 residences and 51,000 businesses.
•Assume policies and programs can achieve another 10% savings in the natural replacement market (equipment, appliances and other products), bringing total carbon reduction from efficiency to 60% (to be further explored).
Estimated Average Costs for Deep Retrofits of All of Vermont's Building Stock
Level of Retrofit Savings Building Type 25% 40% 60% Single Detached $10,100 $18,800 $27,500 Commercial/Industrial $27,900 $52,300 $76,600
Path to Retrofitting All Buildings in Vermont by 2050
050,000100,000150,000200,000250,000300,000350,00020112013201520172019202120232025202720292031203320352037203920412043204520472049Cumulative Number of Retrofits
Annual Number of Retrofits and Depth of Savings
02000400060008000100001200020112013201520172019202120232025202720292031203320352037203920412043204520472049Annual Number of Retrofits 25% Savings Retrofits40% SavingsRetrofits60% Savings RetrofitsRevisits 25% to 60%
A Portfolio of Financing Tools, Evolving Over Time
Mix of Financing Mechanisms in 2013
Annual Investment in Retrofits
$0$50,000,000$100,000,000$150,000,000$200,000,000$250,000,000$300,000,000$350,000,000$400,000,00020112013201520172019202120232025202720292031203320352037203920412043204520472049Annual Private InvestmentAnnual Public Investment
Annual CO2 Reduction from Retrofits
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%20112013201520172019202120232025202720292031203320352037203920412043204520472049Percentage Reduction in CO2Average Annual % ReductionCumulative % Reduction
Annual Direct Employment in Building Retrofit
01,0002,0003,0004,0005,0006,0007,00020112013201520172019202120232025202720292031203320352037203920412043204520472049FTE Jobs
Thank You!
Blair Hamilton
Vermont Energy Investment Corporation
bhamilton@veic.org
802-658-6060 x1024
Accelerating Clean Energy Across the Northeast
David Cash
BuildingEnergy09
Advantages and Pitfalls of VRF Air-to-Air Heat Pump Systems
Daniel C. Lewis, PE & Adam S. Kohler, PE
BuildingEnergy10
Affordable Housing Energy Efficiency: Good Results With Good Practices
F. L. Andrew Padian
BuildingEnergy07
Air Change, Ventilation, and Dehumidification for Multi-Family Buildings
Armin Rudd
BuildingEnergy10
Air-to-Water Heat Pump Hydronic System with Inverter Driven Compressor: And Eco-Friendly Solution for Low Energy Homes
Lance Dyer
BuildingEnergy 11
Lance Dyer
Daikin AC Americas, Inc.
ResidentialSolutions Sales Specialist
Daikin Altherma House graphic
ALTHerma MONOBLOC(DENV)
Air-To-Water Heat Pump Hydronic System with Inverter Driven Compressor
An Eco Friendly Solution for Low Energy Homes
Daikin Altherma House graphic
ALTHerma MONOBLOC(DENV)
1.An Electrically Driven Total Comfort air-to-water heat pump system that utilizes an outdoor R-410A heat pump system
2.Most efficient work with an Inverter controlled compressor (variable speed), to extract renewable heat from the outdoor air
3.The system transfers this heat through refrigerant piping to a refrigerant-to-water brazed plate heat exchanger in the hydrobox (indoor unit on split system and incorporated in the outdoor unit on the Self Contained System).
Air-to-Water Heat Pump-What is it?
The air/water heat pump is an interesting alternative for classic gas or fuel oil heating that offer unique benefits:.Uses renewable energy sources (extracts heat from outside air)
.Delivers considerable savings in energy costs
.Delivers a significant contribution in the fight against CO2emissions
.Provide heating, cooling and domestic hot water
Air-to-Water Heat Pump
Heat Pump Concept
Not creating heat energy, only move heat from the outside to the inside.
Localized CO2emissions = 0
A 3-ton Air-to-Water Heat Pump produces 35,300 Btu/h of heat with the equivalent electrical input of 3.17 kW will achieve a 3.26 COP. This is 3 times as efficient or uses a 1/3 of the power as electric resistance heat
Hydronic heating and chilled water cooling systems use water transported through piping to condition the air temperature inside a residence and heat DHW. A heat pump can accomplish all three functions. With hundreds of possible system configurations, the proper design is capable of meeting the exact comfort needs of its owner. Some systems using Air-to-Water Heat Pumps may be as simple as a heating only application connected to a loop of flexible plastic tubing that warms the floor. Others may use Air-to-Water Heat Pumps connected to an assortment of heat emitters like low temperatures radiators, fan coil units, or radiant in floor. Those same applications can also provide a residence with domestic hot water and chilled water for cooling.
Why Hydronic Heating and Chilled Water Cooling?
Whole House Comfort System
•Revolutionary INVERTER driven Air-to-Water Heat Pump Hot Water System aimed at providing a solution primarily for Heating.
•Air-to-Water Heat Pump offers the customer many advantages including:
•Extremely Efficient Operation (versus Fossil Fuel & Resistance Heat Systems)
•Significant Reduction of CO2 emissions
•Possibility to integrate DHW and Cooling
•Heat Pumps are internationally recognized as "Renewable Energy" technology
•Air-to-Water Heat Pump System is extremely flexible and can be configured inmany different ways, here are the different options:
•A) Space Heating Only
•B) Space Heating & DHW Production
•C) Space Heating & DHW Production (With Solar)
•D) Space Heating & Space Cooling
•E) Space Heating, Space Cooling & DHW Production
•F) Space Heating, Space Cooling & DHW Production (With Solar)
New Proof HE Chart.jpg
Higher
Efficiencywith
lower TLW frequency control
COP
Compressor frequency
Outside Temperature
Heating load
T°LW100.4°F/38°C
T°LW86°F/30°C
T°LW78.8°F/26°C
T°LW93.2°F/34°C
100%
40%
14°F/-10°C
60.8°F/16°C
T°LW= temperature to the floor heating loops
Inverter control in combination with outdoor reset control results in excellent efficiencies (COP's).
•Maximum efficiencyby controlling the compressor rpm, for adapting output and requirements.
•Maximum comfortunder all conditions, including stable room temperatures
•Soft start-up
•Increased operating life, due to continuous partial-load operations
Inverter Compressor
Key Technology
Frequency controlled compressor (variable speed)
INVERTER
Key Technology
Benefits of an InverterGreat Heating Performance.Better control of evaporator temperature
.Outdoor unit fan/s speed is increased to achieve greater heat transfer
•Generates higher discharge gas temperature and higher capacity at lower outdoor temperatures
•Allows the heat pump to maintain 50% of its total capacity down to 5F outdoor temperature
How can it be applied?
H/P + Electric B/U
Dual Fuel
100% Heat pump coverage : selection of bigger capacity and higher investment cost heat pump
Best balance between investment cost and running cost, results in lowest Lifecycle Cost
Utilization of Heat Pump then switching over to alternative heat source like boiler for ultra cold climate heating days
http://www.buildingtalk.com/news/dmp/dmp205_01.jpeg
http://homeinspectorintoronto.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/3-300x157.jpg
Under-FloorRadiant Heating
Heat / Cool
Fan Convector
Centralized Ducted Unit
Bath Tub
All Sink & Faucet needs
Showers
Location Customizable
Home Comfort
Ultimate Flexibility
New Construction
Renovation / Replacement
Zoning or Single Zone
Concealed Units or Duct Free exposed
Partial house or Whole House
Self Contained or Split System
Mild Climate
Heat Pump Only
Cold Climate
Ultra-Cold Climate
Space Heating
Cooling
Domestic Hot Water
Solar
Typical conditions for the heating LWT are:
86 to 95°F (at design conditions) for floor heating
86 to 113°F (at design conditions) for fan coil units and
104 to 122°F (at design conditions) for low temperature radiators
Typical conditions for cooling LWT are:
41 to 71°F (at design conditions) for fan coil unit
Selection Conditions for Air-to-Water Heat pump System
A Great Solution for LEED, Low Energy & Net Zero Energy Homes
The Air-to-Water Heat Pump portfolio offers many attributes that make it appealing to the "green" movement with LEED, Low Energy and even Net Zero Energy applications.
Scope
Feature/ Attribute
Environment
1.All Equipment contains materials that are fully recyclable.
2.Inherent design andoperational features mean effective tie in to Grid-Tied Solar PV (Low start up amps, operating amps, no locked rotor amps etc).
3.DHW Production via Optional Solar Thermal solution and using the Air-to-Water heat pump.
4.A Heating and DHW solution with NO Localized CO2 emissions.
Efficiency
1.Enhanced energy savings via Inverter Compressoroperation where energy consumption matches the load.
2.Further savings via theOutdoor Reset Function to control LWT depending on Ambient temperatures.
3.Operational efficiencies (COP up to 4.5)similar to or better than Geo-Thermal WSHP solutions, without the added cost of well drilling, excavation etc
Application
1.Excellent flexibilityfor the architect / designer to apply the Air-to-Water system to suit any home design, scale or performance scope.
2.Unobtrusive and aesthetically pleasing complete Heating, Cooling and DHW
3.Full utilization of hydronic circuit, thus small diameter piping, high heat transfer coefficient and comfort of Low Sound Level In-Floor Radiant, Low Velocity Fan Convectors or Radiators.
LEED Certified
•Received HERS rating of 62 (thus 5-Star+ Home)
•Low environmental impact
•High efficiency system
•Will be incorporated to solar thermal in future
•Already grid tied solar PV
•Low monthly operating costs
•Radiant Heat utilized for enhanced comfort
•1styear home energy costs average less than $2 per day
LEED Platinum Certified
•3-Ton Air-to-Water Heat Pump + DHW solution installed to 1800sqft New Construction Home in Oregon in 2009.
•Customer has been monitoring energy consumption since then.
•Selected as better alternative to Geo-WSHP due to landscaping restrictions.
http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcS1hetzjBsX-lxvEcQORqiNYPDQf1-4C9Dt2ye-wA50hez2R9C-
•LocationCalifornia
•Square Footage 2023
•% Energy Star App 100%
•% High Efficiency Lighting 25%
•Insulation Levels Medium
•Glazing U-Value/SGHC 0.6/6.5
•HVAC System 4.5-Ton Air-to-Water H/P
•PV System Size 7.4 KW
•PV System SF 429
•PV System Cost $19,917
•Added Cost Mortgage $107/MO
•OP Cost Standard House $283/MO
•CO2 Emissions Saved (lbs/yr) 10,284
•$ Saved Per Year After Tax $4,571
Net Zero Certified
HERS Certified
•New Hampshire -Twin Ponds Complex
•Type
-Apartment complex with 160 apartments
•Total Area
-160,167sq/ft
•Average apartment size
-1,000sq/ft
•Insulation Level
-R-50
•Energy Level
-Ended up as HERS Certified Index score of 68
•Winter Design Condition
-19.8°F
•Heating Load
-Up to 15,700 Btu/hr per apartment
•Air-to-Water heat pump system selected
-160x 3-Ton Air-to-Water Heat Pump System (total is 480-Tons)
-160x 50Gallon DHW Tanks
•Heating/Cooling Distribution
-Fan Coil Unit for both Cooling and Heating
16
http://cdn.amybsells.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/energyrating.jpg
Conclusions
•Eco-efficient design.
•Utilization of Renewable energy from the Outside Air.
•High Full Load and Excellent Part Load Efficiencies.
•Attractive, "affordable" system price.
•High operating and service reliability.
•Low installation costs.
•Flexible and simple installation.
•Adaptable to Radiant Floor, Fan Coil & Radiator Applications
•No local consumption of fossil fuels.
•30-98% reduction in total CO2emissions.
•Optional year-round comfort with active cooling function.
•Simple match up for Solar Thermal and/or Grid Tied Solar PV.
•Excellent solution for Low Energy / Net Zero Homes
Questions ?
Thank You
An Effective State Policy for Clean, Efficient Energy: Massachusetts APS for Combined Heat & Power (CHP)
John Ballam
BuildingEnergy 11
Creating A Greener Energy Future For the Commonwealth
An Effective State Policy for
Clean, Efficient Energy:
M h tt APSf
Massachusetts APS for
Combined Heat & Power (CHP)
John Ballam, P.E.
Manager, Engineering
MA Department of Energy Resources
Overview of MA Portfolio Standard Programs
Renewable Energy Portfolio Standard (RPS)
Alternative Energy Portfolio Standard (APS)
Policy Purpose
•
Creates obligation of all retail electricity suppliers to acquire Renewable Energy Certificates (RECs) equal to a set percentage (Minimum Standard) of load served. Purchase of RECs from qualified generators provides additional revenue.
•
Strategy is to "green up" the ISO-NE grid. Generation from throughout New England and adjacent control areas are eligible (except for solar and CHP).
RPS/APS Standards
• Renewable Energy Portfolio Standard - RPS Class I
•
•
New (post-1997) renewable energy generation - original program (began 2002)
•
RPS Solar Carve Out - begins in 2010 to grow solar PV sector to 400 MW
•
Renewable Energy Portfolio Standard - RPS Class II
•
Supports MA share of existing (pre-1998) RE generation
•
Subclass supports existing Waste-to-Energy Plants in MA and dedicates at least 50% of revenues to recycling programs
•
Alternative Energy Portfolio Standard (APS)
•
Supports non-RE technologies (flywheels, gasification, CHP)
•
CHP of key importance - provides credits for efficiency gains in electric and thermal production
Alternative Energy Portfolio Standard
•
Established under Green Communities Act 2008. Provides for RPS-type program for alternative (non-renewable) technologies.
•
Program compliance obligation began in 2009.
•
Eligible technologies include flywheels, CHP, gasification with carbon capture/sequestration, paper derived fuels.
•
Key technology of interest is CHP. Provides credit for electric generation and useful thermal load.
•
Qualified units produce Alternative Energy Credits (AECs).
•
Alternative Compliance Payment (ACP) Rate is $20/MWh (2010) and increases with CPI.
AECs for CHP Account for Efficiency Gains
Eelec / effelec
Eelec
Without CHP
Load
Etherm / efftherm
Etherm
Eelec
Load
ECHP_in
CHP ECHP i
With CHP
Load With CHP
Etherm
all energy expressed in MWh
Benefits Expected from CHP
•
Savings due to increased efficiency, combined with avoided demand and time of use charges.
•
Significant reductions in GHG emissions. A "good performing" natural gas fueled system operating in MA - achieves an annual net source reduction of about 19% due to:
•
Reduced fuel consumption
•
Use of natural gas and/or renewable fuels having CO2 emission factors significantly less than the ISONE grid average emission factor for each grid supplied MWh to generate electricity.
•
Greater control over facility energy costs.
•
Increased reliability
•
Reduction to grid peak loads.
Benefits Expected from CHP
MA Alternative Portfolio Standard -
Minimum Standard and
Cumulative CHP Demand
Year APS Minimum Standard Est. MW of Installed CHP
2009 1.00%
2010 1.50% 64
2011 2.00% 92
2012 2.50% 121
2013 3.00% 148
2014 3.50% 177
2015 3.75% 205
2016 4.00% 215
2017 4.25% 226
2018 4.50% 237
2019 4.75% 249
2020 5.00% 261
Approximately 27 MW of new CHP installations required each year through 2014, and half this amount in years following.
Estimate based upon APS being met only by CHP
Guidelines for APS Eligible CHP Systems
• System has to have started operation after Jan. 1, 2008.
- Exceptions: The incremental production from older systems due to due to additional loads and/or increased efficiency.
• EXAMPLE: 2009 Addition of a heat driven chiller to a 2005 CHP system to supply a new process cooling load
system to supply a new process cooling load.
• Metering of fuel, kWh and BTUs heat supplied to a useful load by revenue grade meters is required as the basis for determination of the AECs generated per quarter
- Reduced meter requirements for systems < 200kW are in
draft form and will be issued for public comment soon.
Guidelines for APS Eligible CHP Systems
•
Meter reading and computation of the AECS are by an independent verifier.
•
Program supports incremental CHP
- Provides incentive for existing electric-only power plants to add useful thermal load, or for thermal-only plants to add electrical generation
generation.
•
CHP Projects must serve thermal load in MA
•
CHP Units may also qualify for Utility EE Funding
- Per Green Communities Act, CHP projects passing a cost-effectiveness screen are eligible for support (up to $750/kW) from the electric utility energy efficiency programs.
APS Benefit - Example
Unit Electric Generating Capacity Unit Useful Heat Generating Capacity Electric Generation EFF Fuel to CHP (mWh) AECs/hr $/hr Maximum Equivalent Full Load Run hrs/year AECs/yr Maximum Annual Value for AECs ($/year)
kW MWh/yr MMBTU/yr MWh/yr MMBTU/yr MWh/yr
500 3500 15203 4455 0.33 36198 10606 0.80 15.91 $ 7000 5568 111,363.64 $
Useful Heat CHP Overall Value per Annual Value
as a % of Total Heat Output Efficiency @Full Load Load AEC (from pull down list below) for AECs ($/year) ($/year)
42% 0.75 17.00 $ 94,659.09 $
Remarks:
Ratio of AECs to MWh electric generated is
1.6:1. So, for every kWh generated 2.7 cents is earned. As O&M cost range from 2 to 4 cents per kWh, this benefit will cover a substantial portion of these costs.
Examples of Projected APS Benefit by Size
and Application
• Based on the system inputs and $17/AEC as used in the previous example
Size (kW)
APS $/yr
Application
System Types
10 IC Genset with heat recovery
$ 1,900.00
Residential, Small Commercial
250 $ 47,330.00 Small Industrial, institutional,
health care commercial mixed use
500 $ 94,659.09 health care, commercial, mixed use and district energy.
1,000
$ 189,318.18 IC Genset &/or Gas Turbine +
HSRSG Boiler + Steam Turbine
5,000
$ 946,590.91 Mid-sized to large Industrial, Absortpion Chiller Option
institutional, health care,
commercial, mixed use and district
energy.
10,000 $ 1,893,181.82
15,000 $ 2,839,772.73
APS CHP Projects Currently Generating
AECs
• 19 MW in three campus district energy systems - UMass Amherst, Amherst and Smith Colleges (2009)
• 2 MW at Titleist Golf Ball Manufacturer (2009)
• Two 2 MW Dairy Processing Plants (2010)
• 5.65 MW at Harvard U. Blackstone Central Plant (2010)
• 1.2 MW at Genzyme - Allston Plant (2011)
• 250 kW CHP at Southeast Regional School (2011)
• 300 kW CHP at Worcester Housing (2011)
• 555 kW CHP at Boston Scientific (2011)
See the list of qualified projects at the DOER web page:
mass.gov/energy/aps
APS CHP Projects Currently Generating
AECs
•
75 kW -Nursing Home
•
75kW -Nursing Home
•
135 kW -Sports Club
•
75 kW -Sports Club
•
100 kW -Hotel
•
75 kW -Multi-Family
•
CHP Qualifications by DOER
(as of 1/10/2011)
Look Ahead
• What does the APS Program "pipeline" look like?
-
75 to 200 kW: Encouraging increased interest and participation by developers and owners of systems in this size range. Expected that simplified metering requirements will assist
simplified metering requirements will assist.
-
500 to 3000 kW: Expect steady but slow growth
-
= 5000 kW : One definite project and several others ranging from 10,000 to 13,000 kW which are contingent on economy.
Look Ahead
• Scenarios that could produce a "step-function" increase in the number of AECs generated:
- New or incremental use of by-product heat
generated by utility scale power plants. •• AA steam based plant b d l t supplies warm condenser li d
t return water for heating commercial green houses
• Supply of heat to a nearby host customer by changing operating mode and/or increasing the steam production capacity of the station.
- Reduction or elimination of utility standby tariffs.
Look Ahead
•
Relaxation of existing limits on size of systems that can be interconnected to area and spot distribution networks.
•
Program Related: E dG id li
- Expand Guidelines to:
•
address determination of biomass fuel usage including digester gas and wood chips.
•
Provide examples of correct application or the APS formula to frequently occurring cases under the incremental provisions.
Other Topics
• Treatment of parasitic loads.
• Examples: Fuel gas compressors , boiler feedwater pumps.
- If total draw from plant auxiliary systems is > 25 kW at full load and the APS kWh meter is not located such that these ld dhb ddb
loads are netted out, they must be computed and subtracted dfrom the metered APS kWh.
» If any single parasitic load represents > 60% of the total parasitic load , that load must be provided with a dedicated kWh meter which must be read along with the main kWh meter.
» AECs = ) /0.33 + /0.80
(Eelec - EelecP EthermECHP_in
Other Topics
•
Treatment of supplemental firing:
-
Usually associated with gas turbine + HRSG systems. Allows augmented HRSG output when design steam load exceeds capacity of heat addition rate from the gas turbine hot
g
exhaust stream.
-
A separate APS meter must be added to the supplemental burner fuel supply. The fuel supplied to the burner must be subtracted along with the turbine fuel in the formula.
•
Formula for Gas Turbine + HRSG with Parasitic Load >25kW at full load and supplemental firing
•
AECs = ) /0.33 + /0.80
(Eelec - EelecP Etherm
(Egasturbine in + Esupplemental in )
Resources at the MA DOER APS Website
www.mass.gov/energy/aps
Statement of Qualification Application Standards for APS meters Tools for estimating AECs generated for your project
DOER CONTACT INFO
Dwayne Breger Director, Renewables Division 617-626-7327 dwayne.breger@state.ma.us
Howard Bernstein APS/RPS Program Manager 617-626-7355 howard.bernstein@state.ma.us
John Ballam Engineering Manager 617-626-1070 john.ballam@state.ma.us
Gerry Bingham Senior Coordinator 617-626-7378 gerry.bingham@state.ma.us
Avoiding High-GWP Insulation
Alex Wilson
BuildingEnergy 11
Concerns about extruded polystyrene
•
Two concerns
•
The first is that the flame retardant HBCD is used in all polystyrene building insulation
•
The second is that XPS is made with
Dow Styrofoam -image from HomeConstruction
HFC blowing agent
Improvement.com
• Today, focusing on
this second issue
Issue addressed in June, 2010 issue of Environmental Building News
•
Dr. Danny Harvey raised the concern in a 2007 scientific paper
•
We examined and updated Harvey's assumptions
•
Generating a lot of discussion this week
•
With certain types of insulation, more isn't always better
June 2010 EBN
Alternatives to XPS: Foamglas
•
Cellular glass has been made since 1937 (not marketed as a building insulation in U.S. until now)
•
100% inorganic •• N b tibl ith t
Noncombustible without
flame retardants
•
CO2 as fills the cells, not HFC (GWP of 1 vs. 1,400)
•
2 1/2 times as expensive as XPS
•
Not stocked, but made in the U.S. and can be shipped anywhere
Balancing the Investment: Enclosure, Mechanicals, Renewables
Katrin Klingenberg
BuildingEnergy 11
March 8, 2011
© 2011 PHIUS
Katrin Klingenberg, Executive Director
www.passivehouse.us
www.PHAlliance.com
Passive House Institute US | PHIUS
Balancing the InvestmentEnclosure. Mechanicals. Renewables
March 8, 2011
© 2011 PHIUS
Smith House -2003, Urbana Illinois
C:\Documents and Settings\Katrin\Desktop\pics\SOUTHsmall.jpg
C:\Documents and Settings\Katrin\Desktop\Portfolio\Smith House\pics\SH-nside haus.jpg
C:\Documents and Settings\Katrin\Desktop\3rd PH conference pics\smith house.JPG
C:\Documents and Settings\Katrin\Desktop\Projects 07-08\project photos & data sheets\Smith House\SH-westelevation.jpg
March 8, 2011
© 2011 PHIUS
IMG_0415
Stanton Residence -2009, Urbana IL -e-co lab
March 8, 2011
© 2011 PHIUS
(Source: IEA Information Paper: Energy Efficiency requirements in Building Codes, Author Jens Laustsen)
Economic Feasibility of Passive Energy Measures-
Note: Costs are for central Europe (Germany)
March 8, 2011
© 2011 PHIUS
(Source: IEA Information Paper: Energy Efficiency requirements in Building Codes, Author Jens Laustsen)
Note: Costs are for central Europe (Germany)
March 8, 2011
© 2011 PHIUS
1 Cost Optimization-Passive House Enclosure Affordable Projects
March 8, 2011
© 2011 PHIUS
C:\Documents and Settings\Katrin\My Documents\4th N. American Passive House Conference\DOEs proposed climate zones.JPG
SI UnitsIP
1 Heat Load:=10 W/m2 = 1 W/ft2
Cooling Load:= 8 W/m2 = 0.8 W/ft2
2 Envelope Insulation:
Very Cold/humidMinneapolis, MNU=0.08 W/m2KR=71 hr-ft2-F/Btu
ColdChicago, ILU=0.094 W/m2KR=60 hr-ft2-F/Btu
Mixed/humidAshville, NCU=0.16 W/m2KR=35 hr-ft2-F/Btu
Mixed/dryLas Vegas, NVU=0.14 W/m2KR=40 hr-ft2-F/Btu
Marine Seattle, WAU=0.13 W/m2KR=44 hr-ft2-F/Btu
Hot/humidHouston, TXU=0.14 W/m2KR=40 hr-ft2-F/Btu
Hot/dryPhoenix, AZU=0.14 W/m2KR=40 hr-ft2-F/Btu
3 Thermal Bridge Free Construction:
Linear Thermal Transmittance.=0.01 W/mK.=0.006 Btu/hr-ft-F
4 High Performance Windows installed:
Overall Thermal Transmittance (Very Cold)U=0.6 W/m2KU=0.11 Btu/hr-ft2-F
Overall Thermal Transmittance (Cold/Mixed)U=0.85 W/m2KU=0.15 Btu/hr-ft2-F
Overall Thermal Transmittance (Hot)U=1.55 W/m2KU=0.27 Btu/hr-ft2-F
Solar Heat Gain Coefficient (Mixed/Cold)g-value=50%SHGC=50%
Solar Heat Gain Coefficient (Hot)g-value = 30%SHGC = 30%
5 Heat Recovery Ventilation:
Net Efficiencyh=80%h=80%
Electric Consumption of motor=0.45 Wh/m3 =0.76 W/cfm
Climate Specific Recommendations Passive House
March 8, 2011
© 2011 PHIUS
C:\Documents and Settings\Katrin\Desktop\PH presentation\resized\conv vs passive 4.jpg
Passive House Solution:
Thermal-bridge free and with the appropriate amount of insulation depending on design temperature!
Minimum surface temperature
with furniture placement: 58 F
Continuous Insulation-
Dimensioned to raise surface temperatures:
March 8, 2011
© 2011 PHIUS
\\Ecolab1\shareddocs\Extension stuff\Panels on site.JPG
March 8, 2011
© 2011 PHIUS
C:\Documents and Settings\Katrin\Desktop\P1020464.JPG
Interior OSB Sheathing as Continuous air-tight Layer-
March 8, 2011
© 2011 PHIUS
C:\Documents and Settings\Katrin\Desktop\P1020483.JPG
C:\Documents and Settings\Katrin\Desktop\P1020500.JPG
C:\Documents and Settings\Katrin\Desktop\P1020505.JPG
C:\Documents and Settings\Katrin\Desktop\P1020534.JPG
March 8, 2011
© 2011 PHIUS
C:\Documents and Settings\Katrin\My Documents\EcoLab - Stanton Photos\IMG_1508.jpg
C:\Documents and Settings\Katrin\My Documents\EcoLab - Stanton Photos\IMG_1505.jpg
March 8, 2011
© 2011 PHIUS
F:\SMITH HOUSE 051.JPG
Inset Windows to minimize Installation Thermal Bridge-
March 8, 2011
© 2011 PHIUS
C:\Documents and Settings\Katrin\Desktop\5th PH Conference 2010\Dublin - economical example\floor plan.TIF
March 8, 2011
© 2011 PHIUS
C:\Documents and Settings\Katrin\My Documents\ACI Kansas City\Germany Pics\IMG_0096.JPG
Larsen Trusses rated for New and Retrofit applications-
March 8, 2011
© 2011 PHIUS
C:\Documents and Settings\Katrin\Desktop\5th PH Conference 2010\Dublin - economical example\det slab.TIF
March 8, 2011
© 2011 PHIUS
C:\Documents and Settings\Katrin\My Documents\Conferences & Presentations & workshops\EEBA 2010\New folder\concrete.JPG
C:\Documents and Settings\Katrin\My Documents\Conferences & Presentations & workshops\EEBA 2010\New folder\keyed slab.JPG
C:\Documents and Settings\Katrin\My Documents\current PassivHausBau work\ThomasBahr Photos\foam bucket.JPG
Affordable Dublin House -2010, Urbana Illinois -e-co lab
March 8, 2011
© 2011 PHIUS
C:\Documents and Settings\Katrin\My Documents\current PassivHausBau work\ThomasBahr Photos\10-19-2010.JPG
March 8, 2011
© 2011 PHIUS
C:\Documents and Settings\Katrin\My Documents\current PassivHausBau work\ThomasBahr Photos\IMG_0805.JPG
C:\Documents and Settings\Katrin\My Documents\current PassivHausBau work\ThomasBahr Photos\IMG_0812.JPG
March 8, 2011
© 2011 PHIUS
C:\Documents and Settings\Katrin\Desktop\5th PH Conference 2010\Dublin - economical example\det 2nd floor.TIF
March 8, 2011
© 2011 PHIUS
C:\Documents and Settings\Katrin\Desktop\5th PH Conference 2010\Dublin - economical example\det roof.TIF
March 8, 2011
© 2011 PHIUS
C:\Documents and Settings\Katrin\Desktop\5th PH Conference 2010\Dublin - economical example\det window.TIF
March 8, 2011
© 2011 PHIUS
C:\Documents and Settings\Katrin\My Documents\Conferences & Presentations & workshops\EEBA 2010\ChristkindlMarket House.PNG
March 8, 2011
© 2011 PHIUS
2 Cost Optimization-Passive House Mechanicals Affordable Projects
March 8, 2011
© 2011 PHIUS
C:\Documents and Settings\Katrin\My Documents\4th N. American Passive House Conference\DOEs proposed climate zones.JPG
SI UnitsIP
1 Heat Load:=10 W/m2 = 1 W/ft2
Cooling Load:= 8 W/m2 = 0.8 W/ft2
2 Envelope Insulation:
Very Cold/humidMinneapolis, MNU=0.08 W/m2KR=71 hr-ft2-F/Btu
ColdChicago, ILU=0.094 W/m2KR=60 hr-ft2-F/Btu
Mixed/humidAshville, NCU=0.16 W/m2KR=35 hr-ft2-F/Btu
Mixed/dryLas Vegas, NVU=0.14 W/m2KR=40 hr-ft2-F/Btu
Marine Seattle, WAU=0.13 W/m2KR=44 hr-ft2-F/Btu
Hot/humidHouston, TXU=0.14 W/m2KR=40 hr-ft2-F/Btu
Hot/dryPhoenix, AZU=0.14 W/m2KR=40 hr-ft2-F/Btu
3 Thermal Bridge Free Construction:
Linear Thermal Transmittance.=0.01 W/mK.=0.006 Btu/hr-ft-F
4 High Performance Windows installed:
Overall Thermal Transmittance (Very Cold)U=0.6 W/m2KU=0.11 Btu/hr-ft2-F
Overall Thermal Transmittance (Cold/Mixed)U=0.85 W/m2KU=0.15 Btu/hr-ft2-F
Overall Thermal Transmittance (Hot)U=1.55 W/m2KU=0.27 Btu/hr-ft2-F
Solar Heat Gain Coefficient (Mixed/Cold)g-value=50%SHGC=50%
Solar Heat Gain Coefficient (Hot)g-value = 30%SHGC = 30%
5 Heat Recovery Ventilation:
Net Efficiencyh=80%h=80%
Electric Consumption of motor=0.45 Wh/m3 =0.76 W/cfm
Climate Specific Recommendations Passive House
March 8, 2011
© 2011 PHIUS
•ERV/HRV with integrated air-to-water heat exchange coil and/or air-to-air Heat Pump for heating/cooling
•Insulated Hot Water Tank w/ solar thermal collectors for DHW
(Image: Passivhaus Institut)
Components of the Minimized Mechanical System:
C:\Documents and Settings\Katrin\My Documents\Eingang\CEPHEUS\KOMPAKTAGGREGAT_OK.GIF
March 8, 2011
© 2011 PHIUS
The window as part of the mechanical system
March 8, 2011
© 2011 PHIUS
Passive House window
requirements for cold climates (triple-pane, argon filled, low-e on the right)
High Performance Glazing for minimized transmission losses-
March 8, 2011
© 2011 PHIUS
C:\Documents and Settings\Katrin\Desktop\Presentations\Solar Map.JPG
March 8, 2011
© 2011 PHIUS
Heating, cooling and dehumidification:
(Images:www.quietside.com/)
Mini-Split Air-to-Air Heat Pump
March 8, 2011© 2011 PHIUS
The Ultimate Air Recoup Aerator (Stirling Technologies):•95% Efficiency
•Air flow: 70-210 cubic feet/minute (cfm)
•Motor: General Electric ECM brushless motors
•Electrical Rating: 120/240 volts, AC, 60/50 Hz, 5/2.8 Amps
•Average electrical consumption:
•210 cfm (360m3/h) -200W
•60cfm -34 W
•Dimensions: 25" H x 19" W x 25" D (63.5 cm x 48.25 cm x 63.5 cm)
•Unit Weight: 72 lbs.
•Shipping Weight: 80 lbs.
•Mounting: Operates in vertical or horizontal position.
•Connects to 6" galvanized or flex ducts.
March 8, 2011
© 2011 PHIUS
Passive cooling/
dehumidification for
Hot/humid climates pre recovery
C:\Documents and Settings\Katrin\My Documents\ACI Kansas City\Germany Pics\IMG_0044.JPG
C:\Documents and Settings\Katrin\My Documents\ACI Kansas City\Germany Pics\IMG_0049.JPG
Closed Ground Loop Heat Exchanger for Defrost
March 8, 2011
© 2011 PHIUS
3Balancing the Investment of Enclosure, Mechanicals, Renewables
March 8, 2011
© 2011 PHIUS
(Source: IEA Information Paper: Energy Efficiency requirements in Building Codes, Author Jens Laustsen)
Note: Costs are for central Europe (Germany)
March 8, 2011
© 2011 PHIUS
C:\Documents and Settings\Katrin\My Documents\Conferences & Presentations & workshops\Better Buildings Conference 2011\ChristkindlMarket House.JPG
March 8, 2011© 2011 PHIUS
C:\Documents and Settings\Katrin\My Documents\Conferences & Presentations & workshops\RESNET 2010\Cost benefit.JPG
Cost Benefit of the Stanton House-
March 8, 2011
© 2011 PHIUS
Cost Benefit of the Stanton House with Renewables-
C:\Documents and Settings\Katrin\My Documents\Conferences & Presentations & workshops\RESNET 2010\zero energy cost benefiit.JPG
March 8, 2011
© 2011 PHIUS
8Certified Passive House Projects
March 8, 2011
© 2011 PHIUS
Freeman Home in Maine: 2010 Laura Briggs and Jonathan Knowles
C:\Documents and Settings\Katrin\My Documents\PHI Zertifizierungskriterien\Certified Projects\Freeman, Maine\freeman 1.jpg
C:\Documents and Settings\Katrin\My Documents\PHI Zertifizierungskriterien\Certified Projects\Freeman, Maine\freeman 2.JPG
March 8, 2011
© 2011 PHIUS
Solar Decathlon 2ndPlace 2009, DC & IL
IMG_0393
University of Illinois
March 8, 2011
© 2011 PHIUS
University of Illinois-Urbana-Champaign
March 8, 2011
© 2011 PHIUS
C:\Documents and Settings\Katrin\My Documents\PHI Zertifizierungskriterien\Certified Projects\GO logic\GO logic Project finished photo.JPG
GO Logic Home -2010, Maine: Alan Gibson and Matthew Omalia
March 8, 2011
© 2011 PHIUS
2010 Konkol Home, Wisconsin -Tim Eian
C:\Documents and Settings\Katrin\My Documents\PHI Zertifizierungskriterien\Certified Projects\Konkol\Konkol Home.JPG
March 8, 2011
© 2011 PHIUS
October 13 2010, OR
© 2009 PHIUS
C:\Documents and Settings\Katrin\My Documents\4th N. American Passive House Conference\conference poster.JPG
www.passivehouse.us
Passive House
Institute US
Mark your Calendar:
6thAnnual North American Passive House Conference:
November 2011
Washington, DC
March 8, 2011
© 2011 PHIUS
Passive House Institute US | PHIUS
Katrin Klingenberg, Executive Director
www.passivehouse.us
www.PHAlliance.com
C:\Documents and Settings\Katrin\My Documents\Alliance logos\certification mark 5.jpg
Certified Passive House Consultants Program
BE 08 Plenary
Alex Wilson
BuildingEnergy08
Best Practices for a Sustainable Campus
Ellen Watts
BuildingEnergy09
Biomass & Climate Change
Alan Nogee
BuildingEnergy 11
Biomass & Climate Change
NESEA Annual Conference
Boston, MA
March 10, 2010
Alan Nogee
Director, Climate & Energy Policy & Strategy
Union of Concerned Scientists
www.ucsusa.org
2
NESEA is a registered provider with the American Institute of Architects Continuing Education Systems. Credit earned on completion of this program will be recorded to CES Records for AIA members. Certificates of Completion for non-AIA members are available on request.
This program is registered with the AIA/CES for continuing professional education. As such, it does not include content that may be deemed or construed to be an approval or endorsement by the AIA of any material of construction or any method or manner of handling, using, distributing, or dealing in any material or product. Questions related to specific materials, methods, and services will be addressed at the conclusion of this presentation.
3
Learning Objectives
Biomass & Climate Change
.Understand the terms Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) and Renewable Energy Credits (RECs)
.Understand the complexity of biomass energy fuel issues
.Understand what biomass sources may and may not work for Greenhouse Gas mitigation
.Understand the barriers this biomass disqualification may present in attaining RPS standards
Biomass has unique attributes
+Solar storage
+Fits with natural landscape
+Rural economy benefits
+Electricity, heat, transportation
+Recycles carbon
+CCS: potential for negative carbon
But...
5
-Inefficient solar collector: hi land use
-Conflicts with food, fiber, fuel, wood products, wildlife, recreation, C storage in soils and trees
-Emissions comparable to fossil fuels
-Biodiversity, water, ecosystem impacts
Broad scientific agreement around beneficial bioenergy categories
Beneficial: balancing food, fuel and climate objectives
1) Perennial plants on degraded lands
2) Crop residues
3) Sustainably harvested wood and forest residues
4) Double crops and mixed cropping systems
5) Municipal and industrial wastes
•Tilman, D., et al. Beneficial Biofuels-The Food, Energy, and Environment Trilemma Science325:270-271
Details
But...
Manomet Report:Biomass Sustainability And Carbon Policy
.Advances understanding of timing of carbon cycle -debt/payback
.Important given urgency of C reductions, potential tipping points
.ID's hi payback (low-carbon) biomass sources:
.forest residues
.or displacing oil
.or thermal-led cogeneration
.likely other wastes (tree-trimming, landscaping, etc.)
.ID's tradeoffs for policymakers
.Lots of questions for further research
Manomet debt/dividend model
Conclusion: Resources with short-term paybacks preferable to long-term paybacks
But: How to weigh short-term costs vs. long term benefits?
Importance of 2050 CO2 reduction goal?
Risk of higher near-term emissions: climate tipping points
10
Risk of higher long-term emissions: getting back to 350 ppm CO2
11
.Critical biomass/CCS role in reducing emissions?
.Path from here to there?
James Hansen
David Suzuki
Rajendra Pachauri
Bill McKibben
Manomet questions
-Underestimates loss of soil C?
-Would make paybacks longer
-Captures carbon "cash flow" timing but not "asset transfer" from geologic carbon to biogenic carbon.
12
Cary Institute -low estimate of sustainable Northeast resource still significant
4-15 million metric tons/yr.
Low case (4.2m) =
-6% of coal OR
-4-6% of electricity
-28% of liquid C&I heating fuels
-16% of liquid residential heating fuels
-5% of diesel or 2% of gasoline
13
Cary conclusions
•Intra-regional variation
-ME could replace 42% of liquid C&I fuel or 49% of residential
-NH could replace 84% of liquid C&I
•Short-term applications support infrastructure and human resources needed for long-term techs
-Distributed CHP
-Biomass/CCS? -negative carbon system
-E.g., Austria. Biomass heating in 1980s. Now 11% of electricity.
•Preserve wood products industries; additional carbon storage; avoid carbon in concrete, steel manufacturing
14
Carbon benefits from wood product storage, avoided concrete (Douglas fir plantation)
Source: O'Laughlin, 2010
.Could biomass help preserve New England's forest industries?
.Avoid development?
.What about other regions?
Power plants SO2 lbs./MWh
SO2 .secondary particulates = 85% of health damage
Merrimac, NH
Salem Harbor
Brayton Point
NATIONAL AVERAGE
New MA plant
(permitted)
Top 25 coal plants
Source: Environmental Integrity Project search engine, based on U.S. EPA E-Grid Data base.
Mt. Tom
Mass./NH power plants -SO2 lbs./MWh
NRC: SO2 .secondary particulates = 85% of health damage
Merrimac, NH
Salem
Brayton Pt
NATIONAL AVG
Maximum permitted for new MA coal or biomass plant
Source: Environmental Integrity Project search engine, based on U.S. EPA E-Grid Data base.
Biomass plants: Antares Consulting Group
Mt. Tom
Measured -avg. existing biomass
Best new biomass
With no value on land carbon, bioenergy and food crops devastate forests
But with equal tax on land carbon, forests expand, land for crops declines...
Wise/PNNL study interpretation:
"Under proposed and current legislation, all of the world could be deforested for biofuel sometime in the next century."
Common ground?
•Sustainable forest management --overall + residues
•Incentivize highest efficiency technology
•Incentivize displacing highest carbon fuels
•Regulatory flexibility on achieving low-carbon path that reflects the best science
•Avoid indirect land use change
•Preserve industry infrastructure
•Consider emission hot spots, but also system benefits
•More research on issues of timing, sustainability, infrastructure, optima, extension to different regions
Thank you.
."Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good."
."And don't let the good be the enemy of perfecting."
Alan Nogee
Thru 3/31/11:
617.301.8010
anogee@ucsusa.org
www.ucsusa.org
Thereafter:
anogee@gmail.com
On twitter: @alannogee
Biomass and Climate Change: The Massachusetts Example
Sue Reid
BuildingEnergy 11
1
NESEA is a registered provider with the American Institute of Architects Continuing Education Systems. Credit earned on completion of this program will be recorded to CES Records for AIA members. Certificates of Completion for non-AIA members are available on request.
This program is registered with the AIA/CES for continuing professional education. As such, it does not include content that may be deemed or construed to be an approval or endorsement by the AIA of any material of construction or any method or manner of handling, using, distributing, or dealing in any material or product. Questions related to specific materials, methods, and services will be addressed at the conclusion of this presentation.
Biomass & Climate Change:The Massachusetts ExampleNESEA Building Energy 2011
Sue Reid
Conservation Law Foundation
March 10, 2011
2
3
Learning ObjectivesBiomass & Climate Change
.Understand the complexity of biomass policy and fundamental requirements to ensure sustainability
.Using MA example, understand what biomass sources may and may not qualify for incentives
Biomass Policy: Essential Elements
•Carbon Accounting and GHG reductions
•Sustainable Harvesting Standards
•Efficiency
•Other: particulate matter (PM) emissions, location, cooling water impacts, etc.
•Big picture/competing demands: heating, electricity, transportation fuel
4
1: Carbon Accounting
•Framework: MA Global Warming Solutions Act (25% by 2020; 80%+ by 2050)
•Timeframe
-MA: 20 years
•Benchmark
-MA compares to natural gas facility emissions
•Metric
-50% less GHGs
5
1: Carbon Accounting
Whole Trees v.
"Residues"
6
IMGP0615.JPG
IMGP1130.JPG
2: Sustainable Harvesting Standards
•Need to Protect Forest Integrity:
-Ecosystem Services
-Carbon Sequestration
•Harvest residues: what fraction must be left behind for nutrient replenishment, habitat?
•How to measure and enforce?
7
2: Sustainable Harvesting Standards
sad trees.jpg
8
happy trees.jpg
3: Biomass Efficiency
•Typical thermo-electric biomass power plant = ~25% efficient, at best
•Heating unit efficiency > 80%
•Combined Heat & Power (CHP) ~60-80%
•MA: focus on promoting CHP, sliding scale for RECs
9
Stand-alone biomass power generation is like taking all of your solar PV panels...
10
solar happy house.jpg
...& putting them in the shade. Indeed worse, given finite wood supply.
11
sad house shaded.jpg
Likely eligibility for incentives:
•Small, efficient biomass CHP units
•Anaerobic digesters
•Is a Thermal RPS next?
12
ANY QUESTIONS??
For additional information:
www.clf.org
sreid@clf.org
THANK YOU!
13
Biomass Policy Development in Massachusetts: RPS Rulemaking
Dwayne Breger
BuildingEnergy 11
Creating A Greener Energy Future For the Commonwealth
Biomass Policy Development in MassachusettsRPS RulemakingDwayne Breger, PhDDirector, Renewable Energy DivisionMarch 9, 2011
NESEA BE 2011 Conference
Biomass and Greenhouse Gas Emissions -A Burning Issue
Boston, MA
NESEAis a registered provider with the American Institute of Architects Continuing Education Systems. Credit earned on completion of this program will be reported to CES Records for AIA members. Certificates of Completion for non-AIA members will be mailed at the completion of the conference.
This program is registered with the AIA/CES for continuing professional education. As such, it does not include content that may be deemed or construed to be an approval or endorsement by the AIA of any material of construction or any method or manner of handling, using, distributing, or dealing in any material or product. Questions related to specific materials, methods, and services will be addressed at the conclusion of this presentation.
3
Learning Objectives
•Understand the historical role of biomass in contributing to the MA RPS demand
•Appreciate the role of biomass developers in proposing new projects in MA
•Understand the attributes and concerns surrounding the use of biomass energy, and the role of the public in bringing forth policy concerns
•Appreciate the decisions and process of the MA state government to address science/policy issues
•Understand the draft regulations MA DOER has proposed pertaining to the eligibility of biomass for the MA RPS program
4
Primary Drivers for Clean Energy Policy (The Acts of 2008)
•Green Communities Act
.Expands EE delivery mechanisms and goals
.RPS -expansion and strengthening targets
.Net metering provisions
.Wind Siting Commission
•Global Warming Solutions Act
.2020 commitments -10-25% below 1990 levels
.2050 commitments -80% or more below 1990 levels
•Oceans Management Act
.Provides zoning-like planning of state waters
.Identifies presumptive areas for wind development
•Clean Energy Biofuels Act
.Mandate for advanced biofuels
.Paves way for transition to LCFS
5
MA Class I RPS Program Success
6
MA RPS Class ICompliance Trend By Technology
7
Biomass -How did we get here?
•RPS Program prompted significant private development interest in large central, electric-only biomass power plants in western MA
-Locations: Russell, Greenfield, Pittsfield, Springfield
•Concerns were raised by local citizens
-Truck traffic, air emissions, greenhouse gas emissions, forest impacts
•DOER and EEA Secretariat sought to understand biomass GHG accounting in light of GWSA and to assure protection of MA forests. Available science-based analysis of biomass GHG accounting was not satisfactory to DOER.
•Biomass opponents organized ballot referendum to restrict (essentially eliminate) any biomass from qualifying for RPS.
8
Biomass -Observations
What's good about biomass?
•Biomass presents a large indigenous energy resource in MA.
•Biomass can be effectively used for non-intermittent baseload power generation, and for CHP, heating, district energy, and cellulosic biofuels -offers a non-fossil substitute for coal and fuel oil.
•Biomass creates substantial local and sustained economic development.
What's problematic about biomass?
•Biomass has air emissions.
•Biomass impacts forests and calls for strict forest harvesting regulations and broader forest policy to maintain full range of forest services for nature and humans.
•Biomass is a renewable, but finite, resource, and total demand pressure on forests needs to be properly constrained.
What's not well understood about biomass?
•What are net impacts of biomass on carbon emissions, and how does forest management and the allowable re-sequestration timeframe impact this assessment?
9
Massachusetts ApproachDepartment of Energy ResourcesExecutive Office of Energy and Environmental AffairsDepartment of Environmental ProtectionDepartment of Conservation and Recreation
Step back .... study science .... establish prudent policy .... move forward
•EEA Secretary asked DOER to integrate "sustainability" criterion in RPS regulations for eligible biomass fuel
•DOER enacted suspension of new RPS qualifications for woody biomass units
•DOER commissioned comprehensive science-based study of forestry and carbon accounting issues (the "Manomet Study"). Completes Public Meetings and comments on study.
•DOER files draft proposed revisions to the RPS regulations pertaining to the eligibility of biomass units.
10
RPS Biomass RulemakingKey Principles
•Eligible Woody Biomass Fuels
-Rely primarily on forest residues, and non-forest sources
-Allow for limited thinning to avoid forest high-grading
-Implement/enforce fuel certification and tracking system
•Overall Efficiency Criterion
-Reduce Carbon Debt by requiring high efficiency use of biomass
-Maximize GHG and other benefits achieved from limited biomass resource
•Life-Cycle GHG Reduction
-Demonstrate reductions consistent with the GHG reduction commitments of the Commonwealth under the MA GWSA
•Grand-parenting Qualified Biomass Projects
-Provide reasonable timeframe for existing qualified units to meet new standards
11
RPS Biomass RulemakingKey Components: Eligible Biomass Fuel
•Forest Derived Residues
-Harvesting residues (tops/branches not used for products)
-Unacceptable Growing Stock
-Thinnings to improve timber stand
-Removals to improve regeneration goals, including invasive species
Forest Derived Residues limited to 15% of total removal of timber product for forest nutrient retention.
•Forest Salvage
-Downed storm damage
-Control of pest infestations
•Non-Forest Derived Residues
-Primary/secondary forest products industry residues
-Land clearing for land use change
-Clean yard/wood wastes (prunings, road/park maintenance
•Dedicated Energy Crops
12
RPS Biomass RulemakingKey Components: Fuel Certification/Tracking
•Biomass Fuel Certificate accompanies eligible fuels and provided to DOER quarterly by qualified Units.
•For forest derived eligible biomass, harvest site is provided an Eligible Forest Residue Tonnage Report prepared by certified forester approved/trained by DOER that stipulates the total number (tons) of Biomass Fuel Certificates that can be removed from the site.
•Advisory Panel will monitor tracking and verification procedures and provide findings/recommendations to DOER.
•Forest Impact Assessment will be conducted every 5 years.
12
13
RPS Biomass RulemakingKey Components: Overall Efficiency
•Generation Units must meet Minimum Overall Efficiency Criterion
•Overall Efficiency calculated as:
(Electric + Thermal + Bio-Products Energy Output) / Biomass Input Fuel
•Units provided RECs based on Quarterly Performance
-Units must achieve at least a 40% Overall Efficiency
-40% Overall Efficiency earns one-half REC credit per MWh
-60% and greater Overall Efficiency earns full REC credit per MWh
-REC credit ramps up linearly from ½ to full credit between 40 and 60% efficiency.
14
RPS Biomass RulemakingKey Components: Life-Cycle GHG Reduction
•Consistent with 2008 Global Warming Solutions Act, biomass units must demonstrate a life-cycle GHG reductions
-50% reduction compared to natural gas combined-cycle electric generation in 20 years
-Reduction of GHG from avoid fossil fuel serving heating loads are added
•Based on predominant use of residue biomass (alternative fate is quick decay) and high efficiency conversion (low carbon debt), the GHG reduction threshold should be feasible.
35% Carbon Debt5 year decay rate half life
15
RPS Biomass RulemakingKey Components: Previously Qualified Units
•Existing terms of Statement of Qualifications remain in effect through 2012.
•Starting in 2013, Units must utilize Eligible Biomass Fuels to remain qualified through 2014.
•Beginning 2015, all criteria must be met to remain qualified.
16
RPS Biomass RulemakingProcess and Timetable
•DOER filed draft proposed regulations on September 17thand held two Public Hearings on October 15th
•DOER is in receipt of nearly 500 written comments (available on DOER website)
•As required in law, DOER will file proposed final regulations with Legislature soon
•Following review by Legislative Committee, DOER will promulgate final regulations
17
A Vision for Woody Biomass in MA
•Changes to RPS eligibility for biomass does not close the door, but re-focuses market development on opportunities to utilize the limited resource in more efficient ways.
•Expectation is to see focus on smaller scale CHP systems, and emerging opportunities for district energy applications (campuses, office parks, hospitals, etc.)
•MA seeks to level policy playing field between biomass electric and thermal -eliminating the perverse incentive to utilize biomass in less efficient modes.
•MA/Northeast is highly depending on fuel oil for building heating, and emerging (EU based) highly efficient and clean biomass heating technology will be a focus of policy attention.
18
Questions/Comments
Contact Information
Dwayne Breger, Ph.D.
Director, Renewable and Alternative Energy Development
Massachusetts Department of Energy Resources
dwayne.breger@state.ma.us
http://www.mass.gov/doer
This concludes The American Institute of Architects Continuing Education Systems Program
Boardstock Insulation: Environmental Issues
Alex Wilson
BuildingEnergy10
Brightbuilt Barn:Making Net Zero Beautiful and Attainable
Phil Kaplan
BuildingEnergy10
Building America: This Year's Best Homes
Betsy Petit
BuildingEnergy08
Building America: This Year's Best Homes
Robb A. Aldrich
BuildingEnergy08
Prev | Next