Energy Exchange

An Old-Timer Reflects On The Importance Of New Technology To Battle Methane Emissions, And What You Can Do About It

Anyone younger than 30 may not understand what a skipping record sounds like;  in their lives, listening to tunes has more often meant hitting a playlist on iTunes or streaming Pandora, than it has meant dusting off an old record. To us “old” folks who remember when clunky 8-track tapes were the height of portable music cool, today’s options are nothing less than astounding.

Believe it or not, I was thinking about this as I participated yesterday in a panel at the World Resource Institute in Washington, D.C. to discuss their new paper titled, “Cleaning the Air: Reducing Upstream Greenhouse Gas Emissions From U.S. Natural Gas Systems.”  Reviewing the report, and reflecting on EDF’s own work to understand and reduce methane and other air pollution, it’s clear a huge opportunity exists for technology to revolutionize air quality practices in the gas industry, just as it reengineered production and delivery of audio in the music industry. And the prospects are very bright that it will.

Champions of natural gas like to say that natural gas is a preferred fossil fuel alternative to coal and oil because it has less carbon content than either, and therefore, when burned, produces less carbon dioxide, which is the a primary cause of global warming. This is true.

But what is often not said is that natural gas is primarily made up of methane, which itself is a powerful greenhouse gas pollutant, many times more powerful than carbon dioxide, particularly when methane is first released into the atmosphere. Even small leaks at the wellhead or along the infrastructure used to process and transport the gas to our power plants, homes and businesses can undo much of the greenhouse gas benefits we think we are getting when we substitute natural gas for coal or petroleum sources.  Read More »

Posted in Methane, Natural Gas / Tagged , | Read 1 Response

Weathering The Storm Next Time: Gov. Cuomo’s NYS 2100 Panel Offers Smart Plan To Keep The Lights On, Emissions Down

Extreme weather and aging infrastructure came together with a vengeance in Sandy, showing the fragility of the basic systems that sustain this vibrant city and region. Like so many others, my family lost power, heat and water during Superstorm Sandy, and I watched out my window as a giant flash marked the moment that waters crested a 12-foot retaining wall at the 14th Street ConEd plant.

New Yorkers are all too familiar with the devastation that followed, and the disruption that spread far beyond the water’s reach. As the immediate crises are resolved, our attention is now on the complex challenge of long-term resilience.

One big step: The NYS 2100 Commission, a panel of experts assembled by New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo back in November, just two weeks after the storm. EDF President Fred Krupp served on the commission, and our energy team prepared extensive recommendations on how to make our energy system more robust, resilient and adaptable. In yesterday’s State of the State address, he talked about the results.

As it turns out, some important solutions were right under our noses.

For example, amid the darkness and devastation, there were dozens of homes, businesses, even whole communities that kept their lights on and the water because they were designed to isolate breakdowns, heal quicker, and work with natural systems rather than against them.

Success stories were located across our region: 

  • Lights stayed on for sixty thousand residents of Co-op City in the Bronx thanks to a combined heat and power plant that can operate independent of the grid. Ditto the office tower at One Penn Plaza, an apartment building at 11 Fifth Avenue, and large parts of the campuses at Princeton and NYU. 
  • In Bayonne, NJ, the Midtown Community School used a combination of solar panels and a generator to offer a safe, warm place to stay for over 50 residents during the storm. 
  • On Long Island, the Villani family kept their lights on thanks to a 4.8 kw solar array that happens to have a battery bank. “We had friends and neighbors coming over to charge phones and batteries,” Stephanie Villani said. 
  • In lower Manhattan, the community group Solar one used solar panels to offer residents of Stuyvesant Town, the sprawling 35-building apartment complex, a place to charge their phones and computers.

Exceptions like these should be the rule next time. Unfortunately, today’s utility grid is set up to discourage more of these success stories – which are also cleaner and more efficient.

Source: Reuters

In fact, many buildings outfitted with fresh new solar arrays stayed dark thanks to cumbersome, outdated rules and regulations. Ironically, the solar panels were not making electricity when the grid was down, precisely because they were permanently connected to the grid and had to be shut down, rather than simply unhook when the larger system failed. So instead of sunshine, they were running on diesel power – if they were running at all.

Building a smarter grid, and encouraging clean, efficient ‘microgrids’ that provide islands of heat and light means fewer outages and faster recovery. A smarter grid would also have the intelligence needed to pinpoint outages, cordon off damage, and reroute power.

Clearing out the legal cobwebs and requiring utilities to unlock their grids more easily would make their systems stronger and more resilient in a crisis, and open the door for more efficient, renewable energy solutions. It would also open up opportunities for new ways to finance the upgrades needed to take full advantage of efficiency and renewables in today’s buildings.

(You can read EDF’s blueprint for a smarter, more robust grid here.)

Climate change means that higher sea levels and more extreme storms are the new normal. Unfortunately, some of this is already locked in. But we still have an opportunity to prevent the worst, most costly consequences by working together to reduce heat-trapping pollution. Superstorm Sandy reminded us of the need to prepare for a more challenging future. We need to make sure the steps not only protect against the impacts we can’t avoid, but also help prevent those we can.

Yes, we will have to fortify our buildings and infrastructure, change building codes and keep generators on hand in the face of extreme weather. But a lot of the steps we can take to keep the lights on during a crisis are also steps we can take to cut the pollution that is linked to climate change and extreme weather in the first place.

As we invest federal emergency dollars to rebuild, as we get ready for the next time – let’s make sure we’re taking every step that solves for both safety and less pollution at the same time. Efficiency, a smart grid, transparent information, renewables. Unlocking multiple benefits like these can help us rebuild better, faster and stronger. And lead the way for the world’s great cities, many of which are on the coast and in harm’s way just like New York.

My kids and I were lucky to weather the storm with just inconvenience. But as I think about how might live in a future New York City, I’d like to be sure that we’re doing everything we can now to run this town on safe, clean energy. The Cuomo commission report takes a big step in that direction: let’s join the Governor and the members of this commission in making its recommendations a reality. This is an opportunity that business, political and community leaders must not miss.

Posted in Demand Response, Energy Efficiency, Grid Modernization, New York, Renewable Energy / Tagged , | Read 1 Response

Loose Use Of Facts Undermines Credibility Of White’s OpEd

This commentary was originally posted on the EDF Texas Clean Air Matters Blog.

An erroneous and misleading opinion piece by Kathleen Hartnett White with the Texas Public Policy Foundation, ran in Sunday’s The Austin American-Statesman. In the article, White misrepresents several important details from a 4-year old EDF report that was prepared by Dr. Al Armendariz, a former Regional Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency. The report catalogued emissions from oil and gas production in the Barnett Shale area. Her purported facts about the study findings are just plain wrong.

First, she claims that the report concluded that ozone precursor emissions from Barnett Shale production are twice as large as all mobile source emissions in the area. In fact, the report concluded that peak Barnett Shale emissions, while significant, were roughly comparable to emissions from cars and trucks (see press release accompanying the report).

White then claims that Dr. Armendariz’s study considered methane to be an ozone precursor, contrary to what is clearly stated in the report at p. 8. While it is true that methane does form ozone, albeit slowly, the report states “[m]ethane and ethane are specifically excluded from the definition of VOC” (volatile organic compounds). Thus, the report excluded methane from the comparison to mobile emissions of ozone precursors.

It is unclear if the author even read Dr. Armendariz’s work, which was not computer modeling, as she claims. Rather, it was an emissions “inventory,” a catalog of the air pollutant emissions from oil/gas sources in the Barnett Shale area, constructed using established engineering practices and industry-backed data sources. The core pieces of information for the inventory were oil/gas production data that are available for every county in Texas from databases at the Texas Railroad Commission. Dr. Armendariz’s resulting emissions estimates were in reasonable agreement with estimates issued by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality later in 2009 (10-20% difference).

You can’t make a strong case when you get facts wrong. And, it is irresponsible for White to make her case by manipulating science, while cynically blaming government bodies of committing the same sin.

It’s time we all get the facts right and use science to expose truths, not veil our own agenda. For our part, EDF is working with leading academic researchers and industry leaders to conduct scientifically rigorous measurements of emissions from natural gas production. Leaks that occur during production (as well as distribution and use) stand to significantly undermine the potential of natural gas as a lower carbon energy source.

Posted in Methane, Natural Gas, Texas / Comments are closed

Demand Response Means Big Money for Big Users

After a full week of triple digit temperatures in central Texas, the forecast this weekend for highs in the mid-90’s seems like a blessing both for our thermostat and for the unending topic of this blog series: our electric grid.  Officials from the Public Utility Commission (PUC) and the Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT) have been worried about the strain on our electric grid all summer long, but they aren’t just worried about this summer.  The energy crunch is an issue that we know will be with us until we deal with it; we can’t rely on dancing cats to ease the crunch. We need real solutions to avoid real problems in the future. 

It doesn’t have to be that way though, and it doesn’t need to cost as much as some worry it will, but that’s assuming that the PUC and ERCOT are able to move quickly and decisively to encourage demand response.  In our blog post last week we focused on the benefits of demand response for residential customers and small businesses, and that’s probably where the greatest overall potential lies.  But the quickest return – and the most financially savvy electric customers – might lie in the commercial and industrial markets today.  Fortunately two great examples in other parts of the country show how we could be doing more for those markets in demand response as well.

 “Making the Most of Your Energy” in NYC

Large commercial buildings typically face a number of hurdles when trying to upgrade their energy systems – particularly those with multiple tenants.  In New York City, the Rockefeller Group Development Corporation saw these hurdles as an opportunity for a new approach to energy management.  By selling their demand reductions to the grid, in the manner we’ve proposed for ERCOT, they managed to reduce energy usage by 60,000 kWh per month and reduced peak demand by 1.4 MW.  McGraw Hill now receives a net income (after payments for the financed upgrade) of $500,000 annually.

Rules in ERCOT might allow for this kind of savings already in some small ancillary services markets, so long as their metering system complies with ERCOT protocols.  Those ERCOT demand response markets are capped and already oversubscribed; leaving developers who want to build smart buildings or upgrade older ones are looking to other markets for their business.

Meanwhile, in the heartland….

We mean Warrick County, Indiana specifically. Alcoa, one of the world’s leading aluminum producers has worked with their grid operator Midwest ISO (MISO) to develop a completely new approach to industrial demand response that has blown the doors off of the possibilities for Texas’ industrial sector.  The market for aluminum is ruthless, and Before Alcoa anything that gives Alcoa a leg up helps them preserve critical jobs and tax income in their communities around the country. 

With this new market, Alcoa has managed to maintain international competitiveness for their Warrick County plant and is looking to expand demand response to their aluminum smelters in other parts of the country.  In Texas, where Alcoa’s Rockdale smelters are were not able already struggling to maintain international competitiveness and have been idled as a result, , new markets like the pilot project announced by ERCOT on Monday could mean the difference for other industries between staying profitable and shutting down operations.

Whether it’s in the city or the country, a big user or a small mom and pop store, demand response markets offer a new benefit to customers if the market rules allow customers to compete with other resources.  As we discussed earlier this week, the potential for these resources in Texas would help us meet 15 percent of our peak demand needs according to ERCOT’s Brattle Report.  That potential stretches across all types of customers, and must be part of the solution to the energy crunch in Texas if we want to keep rates down and maintain reliability.

Posted in Demand Response, General, Texas / Comments are closed

Saving Energy One Crab At A Time

Imagine the embarrassment of leaving your office lights turned on and returning to find a giant fiddler crab sitting on your desk.  This fishy situation is happening in office buildings all across Charlotte, North Carolina –the crabs are plastic, and the fiddler variety is used for their notorious attraction to light.  It is all part of a fun, social experiment happening in uptown Charlotte office buildings to remind employees to shut of their lights when leaving the office and power down their computers when headed home.  If employees leave their lights on, coworkers will place crabs in the offending employee’s office to remind them to turn off their lights. In order to rid themselves of the burdensome crab, that employee must covertly “tag” another absent minded coworker by leaving a crab on their desk – all in the name of energy efficiency.  

And the amazing thing is that the playful reminder works!  After “Crab, You’re It!” was introduced in one of Mecklenburg County’s office buildings, 26% more lights were turned off when not in use, leading to significant energy savings.  

The “Crab, You’re It!” game – now adopted as part of the Envision Charlotte project – is just one of several innovative employee behavior change experiments that are leading to real energy reductions in office buildings in this entrepreneurial North Carolina city.  The creators of the game – the County of Mecklenburg staff – knew that most office employees are not motivated to save energy solely out of the goodness of their heart.  We are all busy and saving energy in the office is not always top of mind.  The key was to find a way for employees to actually get excited and have fun while saving energy.  And, let’s be honest.  Nobody wants to be crabbed.

Posted in Grid Modernization, North Carolina / Tagged | Read 1 Response

A Dynamic Approach To California Energy Use

This commentary was originally posted on the EDF California Dream 2.0 Blog.

Californians are poised for a more functional, data-driven model for setting the prices people pay for electricity.  The new model will make the massive differences in costs of providing electricity during the course of a typical day more evident to us as energy users, thereby inspiring more efficient use of electricity resources.

The California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) started a rulemaking to examine if the current rate structure for residential energy users is fair and equitable across customer classes and if it:

  • supports statewide-energy goals;
  • facilitating technologies that enable customers to better manage their usage and bills;
  • enables conservation and efficiency on the customer side of the meter; and
  • increases the reliance on non-fossil based generation to reduce overall greenhouse gas emissions.

We know already that the short answer is “no”, so CPUC is eyeing a transition to time variant (“dynamic”) rates.  According to Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E), with time variant, or what is often referred to as “time-of-use”, pricing – rates “will be higher during summer weekday afternoons when electric demand is higher, typically noon to 6 p.m., May through October. In return you’ll pay lower rates at all other times. This means that when you use energy is just as important as how much you use.” 

EDF’s Energy team has been, and will continue to be, closely involved in the CPUC’s rulemaking, which will examine several facets of the current system.  EDF has also been involved in the related smart grid proceedings, such as the deployment of smart grid infrastructure – which provides the ability to both measure energy use in real time and inform customers about the costs (and environmental impacts) of their choices to use electricity at different times of the day.  This Advanced Metering Infrastructure (AMI) enables a smoother transition to dynamic rates for residential consumers.

EDF is very encouraged that the CPUC is considering  time variant pricing because it will help consumers to be more thoughtful about their energy usage, particularly at times when demand is peaking and pushing electricity supply sources to their limits.  This type of rate structure can encourage conservation and reduce peak demand while providing customers with more choices that can ultimately lower their monthly bills.  For example, allowing consumers to see how much they can save on their electric bills by reducing their energy use during peak hours will encourage a shift of energy-intensive activities, such as washing and drying clothing and dishes, to off-peak (and less expensive) times of the day. 

Because a dynamic pricing system will alleviate pressure on the electric grid during peak demand, it will also lead to a more stable, less expensive energy system that is increasingly resilient to extreme weather events.  The economic motivation should also help to create an easy way for consumers to make decisions more efficiently, thereby lowering their electric bills and shrinking their environmental footprints.   

Futhermore, dynamic pricing can help integrate renewables and electric vehicles into the electric grid by allowing utilities to respond to price signals more effectively.  For example, time-of-use rates support electric vehicle charging at times when grid resources aren’t strained, such as late at night or early in the morning when most people are sleeping. 

This new approach will facilitate conservation and energy efficiency, as well as an increase in the use of clean energy sources that avoid harmful greenhouse gas and urban air pollution.   If adopted, the dynamic pricing model can be a common sense approach to saving energy and money, while promoting energy efficiency and a smarter, “greener,” electric grid country-wide.

Posted in California, Energy Efficiency, Grid Modernization, Time of Use / Read 3 Responses