Energy Exchange

How’s Your Electric Bill Treating You? Time To Give It Some Thought

This commentary originally appeared on EDF’s California Dream 2.0 Blog

When was the last time you really gave a lot of thought to your electric bill?

If your answer is “not very often”, then you’re not alone. In fact, the typical household thinks about their electric bill only six minutes a year.

The California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) now has the opportunity give people another way to control household energy bills by creating a system where changing the time you use electricity can save money. This won’t mean you’ll need to invest more time thinking about energy use, but you’d be well-served to think about the timing of it.

Last week, the CPUC held a public workshop inviting stakeholders — PG&E, SCE and, SDG&E, along with consumer, industry, and environmental groups — to present and discuss their proposals for revising the system of charges for residential electricity use. I had the pleasure of presenting EDF’s proposal for a time-of-use (TOU) pricing system: For customers looking for another option for saving money on their monthly bill, EDF sees TOU as the best pricing policy for both people and the environment; customers uncomfortable with this option would be able to “opt out” and choose another pricing structure.

Currently, the standard “tiered” rate charges customers higher prices for higher electricity usage. The approach is intended to send the message: “The more you use, the more you pay.” Read More »

Posted in California, Demand Response, Grid Modernization, Time of Use, Utility Business Models / Read 1 Response

NYC’s Storm Preparedness Means Rethinking How We Make And Use Energy

Source: Metamatic/Flickr

This commentary, authored by Andy Darrell, originally appeared on EDF Voices.

Last Tuesday, I caught a ferry from the lower Manhattan waterfront (just south of the substation that shorted out so dramatically in the midst of Hurricane Sandy) to the Brooklyn Navy Yard. There, Mayor Michael Bloomberg unveiled his vision of a New York that will be far better able to withstand the battering from giant storms that, thanks to climate change, are likely to arrive with increased frequency and fury.

The Mayor began by noting some stark facts:

  • “We expect that by mid-century up to one quarter of all of New York City’s land area, where 800,000 residents live today, will be in the floodplain.”
  • “[Wi]ithin FEMA’s new 100-year flood maps there are more than 500million square feet of New York  City buildings – equivalent to the entire city of Minneapolis.”
  • “About two-thirds of our major substations and nearly all the city’s power plants are in flood plains today.”
  • “A day without power can cost New York City more than a billion dollars.”

A lot of media attention in the wake of the speech focused on Bloomberg’s call for levees and seawalls to keep rising waters at bay. But embedded in the address was also an ambitious but practical rethinking of how New York City makes and uses energy. The plan frames a future in which solar, wind and microgrids play a much larger role in the city: Read More »

Posted in Climate, Energy Efficiency, New York, On-bill repayment / Tagged | Comments are closed

In Texas, Freshwater Use For Oil And Gas Should Be Reduced Strategically

Texas is suffering from a water deficit; one that is spurring lawmakers at the Texas Capitol to discuss unprecedented, and much needed, investments in our water infrastructure.  With roughly 98 percent of the state in drought and water use restrictions in place in 70 percent of Texas counties as of April 3, 2013, it is crucial that our legislators consider every tool available to protect Texas’ water supply.  One approach is reducing freshwater use in the oil and natural gas sector, which can help alleviate competition for scarce water resources; however, this should be deployed at strategic places and times to minimize pollution risks and ensure a sustained future water supply for Texas.

In the Texas Legislature, the House recently passed a bill which will provide $2 billion to fund water supply projects.  It might surprise you to hear that this high price tag represents less than 10 percent of the state funding that will be needed over the next 50 years to sustain water supplies for Texas’ growing population.  In light of this, it is essential that legislators enact bills that encourage responsible water management solutions. Although the oil and gas industry’s water use appears miniscule when considered on a statewide basis, even small amounts can have a big impact in the most water stricken areas. EDF created a map of the counties in Texas currently being impacted by water scarcity and that would benefit greatly if the oil and gas sector reduced its use of freshwater.

Data used to create the map revealed the following:

  • The majority of water used for Texas oil and gas development in 2011 was in 13 counties, ten of which currently have water restrictions in place.
  • For 12 counties, oil and gas water use made up at least 25 percent of overall county-wide demand in 2011.
  • In 15 counties, oil and gas water use is projected to be greater than or equal to 25 percent of the water deficit in those counties in 2020.
  • In five counties, 100 percent of the water deficit projected for 2020 can be met by cutting oil and gas water use by half.

The oil and gas industry is a prime candidate for reducing its reliance on freshwater because – unlike the agriculture and municipal sectors – using non-freshwater is technologically feasible.  Some of the most popular alternative water sources for the oil and gas industry include brackish (or salty) water, treated flowback water from hydraulic fracturing and reclaimed water from public wastewater treatment plants.  Taking advantage of these options could be a win-win-win for industry, people and the environment. Read More »

Posted in Natural Gas, Texas / Comments are closed

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