Energy Exchange

California Follows Smart Meter Best Practice: Proactively Address Public Concerns

By Lauren Navarro / Published: February 2, 2012

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

Energy powers our economy. But our outdated energy system is wasteful, expensive and a major source of pollution, leading to the deaths of approximately 60,000 Americans per year. Utilities in California and across the country are now investing billions of dollars to modernize that infrastructure, making use of the information technologies that have revolutionized so many other realms of our lives. The smart grid they’re building will improve air quality and the health of millions of Americans affected by air so dirty it is often dangerous to breathe.

Smart meters are a key component of the smart grid. They unlock air quality, climate pollution and public health benefits by enabling two-way, real-time communication that gives households, small businesses, manufacturers and farmers (and the utilities that serve them) the data they need to cut energy use and electricity costs. These devices help ensure that every day energy users reap the many benefits of the smart grid.

Yesterday, the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) approved a proposal by Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E) that allows customers to keep their analog meters and opt out of using the new wireless smart meters. This decision is designed to address concerns of individuals who describe themselves as having electromagnetic hypersensitivity to radio frequencies (RF), and report getting headaches, fatigue, nausea and insomnia from exposure.

The radio frequencies used by smart meters are now pervasive in our lives, emitted by our cell phones, microwaves, baby monitors, and numerous other devices we use daily. To understand the potential health risks associated with use of these devices, EDF has completed a thorough review of the scientific literature on the potential effects of electromagnetic and radio frequencies (EMF/RF) on human health. We have reviewed reports from the World Health Organization (WHO) and the California Council of Science and Technology (CCST). We also consulted with outside experts, including Dr. Leeka Kheifets, a Professor in Residence at UCLA who sits on the Standing Committee on Epidemiology for the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection.

The WHO review states that “in the area of biological effects and medical applications of non-ionizing radiation, approximately 25,000 articles have been published over the past 30 years. Scientific knowledge in this area is now more extensive than for most chemicals.” These studies, it concludes, find that “current evidence does not confirm the existence of any health consequences from exposure to low level electromagnetic fields.”

The WHO assessment spotlights the importance of conducting rigorous scientific research to evaluate environmental and health problems, a core principle of EDF. Our policies are based on the best available science and are altered as necessary when new evidence comes to light.

This research helped inform EDF’s position that the limited RF exposure levels associated with smart meters should not result in reduced support for the smart grid, especially in light of the significant health benefits it will deliver by enabling far less use of fossil fuels and far greater reliance on clean, renewable energy, including small, community-based generation like rooftop solar PV.

Today’s ruling strikes the proper balance: sustaining progress toward a smart grid with its multiple public health benefits while addressing individuals’ concerns. It gives consumers the same type of choice about what technologies to use in their everyday life.

We support the PUC’s decision and continuing research on the possible health effects of radio frequencies.

For more information on this topic, please see EDF President Fred Krupp’s memo on “Health and the smart grid.”

Are Natural Gas Vehicles Good For Climate Change?

By Drew Nelson / Published: February 1, 2012

Source: Pike Research

Last week, in a speech in Las Vegas, President Obama called for getting more natural gas vehicles (NGVs) on the road in the United States. NGV proponents applauded the speech and immediately reiterated the conventional wisdom that because natural gas burns cleaner than gasoline or diesel, NGVs lead to reduced greenhouse gas emissions. However, recent science shows that the conventional wisdom may not be right.

While it is clear that the actual combustion of natural gas is cleaner than the combustion of gasoline or diesel, there are other emissions associated with the production, delivery and use of those fuels. Natural gas is essentially methane, a potent greenhouse gas. Over 2o years, a pound of methane is 72 times more potent than a pound of carbon dioxide. As natural gas is produced and piped across the country, there are plenty of opportunities for it to leak into the atmosphere. EPA estimates that leak rate to be somewhere between 2-3%, but the exact amount is the subject of much debate.

What we do know is that whatever the percentage of methane that is lost to the atmosphere, it erodes the climate benefits of combusting natural gas. In other words, the higher the leak rates the less the benefits. If leakage is high enough, NGVs can actually be worse for climate for some period of time. A newly published study concluded that over 20 years, NGVs were worse for the climate than gasoline or diesel vehicles unless current leak rates are reduced. With current leak rates, even after 100 years NGVs are no better for the climate than gasoline or diesel vehicles.

Because methane is more potent over shorter time frames, if we remove more methane now, we can reap quick benefits for the climate system. However, if we emit more methane now, it will have a greater negative impact on the climate system. This may be precisely the outcome we get if we aren’t careful in how we proceed with NGVs. Before large-scale policies encouraging NGVs are written into law, we should better understand the leak rate of methane from the natural gas supply and take actions to ensure it is low enough that putting more NGV on the road does not harm the climate. Understanding and reducing leak rates is critical to accepting NGVs as a legitimate GHG strategy. EDF is working to do this, but until we have better data and see an industry committed to reducing leaks, we will reserve judgment on whether the President’s call for accelerating NGVs is justified.

Posted in Natural Gas / Comments are closed

Improving New York’s Proposed Hydraulic Fracturing Regulations

By Mark Brownstein / Published: January 31, 2012

Around the country, states are taking a serious look at their regulations to manage shale gas development. New York has the potential to be a leader among these states. Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) believes that strong regulations and aggressive enforcement is critical to protecting public health and the environment from high-volume hydraulic fracturing and other hydrocarbon extraction activities in New York State. To that end, we have submitted detailed comments on the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC)’s proposed rules and permitting conditions for hydraulic fracturing. The NYSDEC can put New York at the forefront of safe and clean shale gas development by implementing our suggestions in several critical areas:

1) Chemical Disclosure: Full public disclosure is rapidly becoming the industry norm across the country, but the proposed NYSDEC disclosure rules for chemicals used in the hydraulic fracturing process only covers chemicals with Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS), thus failing to capture perhaps half or more of the chemicals used. This is especially problematic because MSDS only explore hazards in occupational settings and do not consider implications for public health or the environment. Further, the proposed rule only requires disclosure of additive products proposed to be used in hydraulic fracturing, as opposed to the chemicals actually used during the hydraulic fracturing process. EDF feels strongly that operators should disclose all hydraulic fracturing chemicals used on a well-by-well basis, posted on a searchable, publically accessible website.

2) Well Construction: Properly constructed, tested and maintained wells are critical to protecting New York’s precious groundwater and surface water aquifers from contamination by drilling fluid, wastewater and natural gas seepage. The proposed well construction regulations and permitting conditions need improvement to meet industry best practice standards. Furthermore, some of the proposed rules represent potential safety hazards for well pad workers. A model regulatory framework EDF, and others, are developing could be used to greatly improve NYDEC’s proposed well construction regulations.

3) GHG Emissions/Methane Leakage: EDF is a leading advocate of strict standards on limiting methane emissions from natural gas production. Methane is a pernicious greenhouse gas, many more times more powerful than carbon dioxide. To reduce the peak warming and improve air quality, it is critical to minimize the amount of methane vented or flared at the production site or leaked during storage and transmission. We strongly urge the NYSDEC to impose specific Green Completion and other emission-reducing requirements on operators, and to formulate hard emissions targets that provide incentives for operators to reduce methane leakage even further.

4) Wastewater: Hydraulic fracturing produces huge volumes of potentially toxic and radioactive wastewater. New York recognizes this problem but does not seriously address the lack of capacity for processing or safely storing hydraulic fracturing waste materials within the state. Current technology does not allow for safe, cost-effective purification of hydraulic fracturing wastewater at treatment centers for re-introduction into the water system, and should be banned. Insofar as it appears that the final disposition of the bulk of the wastewater produced in New York will be trucked out of state to deep injection wells, the proposed regulations and permitting conditions must grapple with this expensive and perhaps unsustainable practice. Finally, since wastewater recycling will likely be the dominant treatment option undertaken by shale gas operators in New York, this practice needs to be more thoughtfully and transparently regulated.

5) Phase-in: Even with the best rules on the books, it will take time to hire and train the necessary staff to implement and enforce the rules properly. New York is essentially building a regulatory program from scratch. EDF believes the NYSDEC should learn how to walk before it can run. Our suggestion is that New York phase in the regulatory program region by region. In this way, the state can be sure that the pace of drilling activity will not outpace its ability to adequately administer the regulations. So, too, this phase-in approach will allow the state to acquire valuable experience in step-wise fashion. The key is not doing it quickly, but doing it correctly.

These and other adjustments to the proposed rules and permitting conditions are necessary to protect public health and the environment in New York. Shale gas extraction can be made safe through strong regulations and aggressive enforcement to protect communities. EDF is committed to working with the NYSDEC on these issues to produce the most responsible hydraulic fracturing regulatory framework in the nation.

EDF’s full comments on New York’s hydraulic fracturing regulations are available here.

Posted in Natural Gas, New York / Tagged fracking, Hydraulic Fracturing | Read 6 Responses

State Of The Union Address: A Mixed Bag On Natural Gas

By Mark Brownstein / Published: January 25, 2012

In President Obama’s State of the Union address last night, he laid out his plans for the expanded role that natural gas will play in the future. The President stated:

“We have a supply of natural gas that can last America nearly one hundred years, and my Administration will take every possible action to safely develop this energy. Experts believe this will support more than 600,000 jobs by the end of the decade. And I’m requiring all companies that drill for gas on public lands to disclose the chemicals they use.”

I am pleased to see a commitment to the full disclosure of hydraulic fracturing chemicals, but this is only the first step in getting the rules right for natural gas. As we discussed back in November, EDF President Fred Krupp sat on the Shale Gas Subcommittee of the Secretary of Energy Advisory Board (Subcommittee), which provided strong recommendations for strengthening environmental management in the shale gas industry and developing this abundant energy source in ways that safeguard public health and the environment.

I would have liked to have seen the President speak directly to implementing the Subcommittee’s recommendations, beginning with the Department of the Interior (DOI). Simply committing to the disclosure of hydraulic fracturing chemicals isn’t enough. The recommendations included strict requirements for everything from well construction and the reduction or elimination of methane venting to groundwater protection to methane leakage and emissions flares, among others. These recommendations are ready to be implemented, and DOI has an opportunity to demonstrate best practice in its leasing and oversight of unconventional natural gas development on federal lands.

The jury is out on whether states will embrace the Subcommittee’s recommendations and it will take a concerted effort on the part of organizations like EDF and concerned citizens to demand swift action to improve the quality and effectiveness of state regulations. Implementation of the Subcommittee’s recommendations at the state level is a good place to start and some states are beginning to take a lead role. For example, on the issue of disclosure, Colorado recently set the bar for requiring the full disclosure of all chemicals used in hydraulic fracturing by making this information available on a searchable database. On the other hand, states like New York have proposed weaker requirements, asking companies to disclose only half of the proposed additive products instead of the chemicals actually used in the hydraulic fracturing treatment. For these reasons, it is crucial that the DOI disclosure requirements set a leading example that will influence states to do better. The DOI should start with Colorado, but can do even better.

Last night, the President demonstrated his commitment to domestic energy production through natural gas development and said that “America will develop this resource without putting the health and safety of our citizens at risk.” The federal government and the states have a shared responsibility to ensure that our air, land and water are safe wherever hydraulically fractured wells are drilled.

Posted in Natural Gas, Washington, DC / Comments are closed

Shutting Down Dirty Coal

By Michael Regan / Published: January 20, 2012

Source: Cleanwater

EDF helped write another chapter in the history book on polluting coal generation this week. Along with our partners, we announced a settlement with North Carolina-based Duke Energy that will legally require the utility to retire more than 1,600 megawatts of coal-fired generation.

The retiring plants represent about 4.5 million tons of carbon dioxide (CO2), 30,000 tons of sulfur dioxide (SO2) and over 5,000 tons of nitrogen dioxide (NOx) annually. People who live near or downwind of one of those plants have reason to celebrate.

Retiring the oldest, dirtiest and least efficient facilities requires Duke Energy to head toward cleaner generation and modernization of its fleet. That’s good news for everyone, considering Duke’s proposed merger with Progress Energy will create the largest utility in the country.

Posted in General / Comments are closed

Getting ‘Smart’ About Your Energy Use Just Got Easier

By Jamie Fine / Published: January 20, 2012

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

Source: Green Button

On Wednesday, I attended a presentation of the Green Button at EMC², hosted by Silicon Valley Leadership Group, OSIsoft and SolarCity, and moderated by Aneesh Chopra, U.S. Chief Tech Officer and Advisor to the President.

In essence, Green Button is literally a green button on utility customer interface websites that customers can click to instantly download their historical energy use data in a simple, standardized electronic format. Customers can then upload the data into software applications, or give it to consultants that provide services such as identifying how to save money by using less energy.

All of the big California utilities – SCE, SDG&E and PG&E – have embraced the concept and will offer the Green Button to their millions of customers. There is a hope that utilities across the country will also adopt it.

One presenter observed that Americans, on average, waste 20% of the energy that they purchase. This creates a huge opportunity to save money on energy and help to protect the environment by avoiding demand for energy generated by dirty sources, including coal-fired power plants.

Yesterday’s event revealed what can be accomplished when software innovators, government leaders and utilities focus on a common goal. Chopra is widely recognized as an IT innovator in government and he challenged the utility industry to develop access to consumer data in September 2011. Now Green Button is a fully operational, widely embraced standard that will provide a buffet of energy use data for hungry software application developers.

Testimonials were provided by up-and-coming CEOs in the energy sector, including oPower, Tendril, Lucid Design Group and Simple Energy. Each company demonstrated how Green Button will drive innovations in energy use software applications. For example, Tendril announced that its platform, Tendril Connect, will “connect utilities and energy service providers, consumers and app developers to achieve smarter energy usage.”

One question I was left with was, “just how green is the Green Button?” Currently, only the color pallet is green; no pollution information (such as greenhouse gas emissions) is associated with the energy use data.

While Dr. David Wollman, Deputy Director of Smart Grid & Cyber-Physical Systems, and Manager, Smart Grid Standards and Research at the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), indicated that the Green Button standards do have accommodations for emissions information, there will need to be positive pressure to fully develop that piece of the button.

And that’s where EDF and you can come in. We need to encourage efforts to rigorously link emissions information with energy use, in both time and place.

As part of EDF’s smart grid work, we are working with utilities, regulatory agencies and third parties in California and across the country to ensure that innovators have access to an emerging and competitive utility market. Access to standardized energy use data is an essential piece. Why? So they can provide consumers with new tools that help them better understand and manage their energy use, which can save money, cut pollution and help protect the planet.

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