"The reports of my death are greatly exaggerated"- Mark Twain.
Like Mark Twain, the US electric utility industry will no doubt be surprised by my predictions that their death is coming soon. This is no apocalyptic prediction and certainly no veiled monkey wrench threat; so, DHS don’t get your knickers in a knot.
What I am talking about is the age old cyclical nature of technology and the natural evolution of things from disbursed to central and back to disbursed again. I am sure entropy is at work in this, or chaos theory or at least a corollary version of my mother’s plea to, “put all your toys in one box”. But, I knew that keeping my toys spread out through the house was more efficient. I could get them quicker and if one broke I didn’t have to go all the way back to the toy box to get a new one.
Hang with me just a little longer this is really cool stuff and what you are about to learn will help you for the rest of your life.
The popular press and media hype about renewable energy versus that bad old kind of energy made from coal and hydrocarbon fuels leads many people to believe that if those greedy bastards at the electric utility company would just use wind and solar instead of coal, our electric bills would drop with green house gas emissions. Then Al Gore could retire and quit using all that jet fuel to travel around the world telling everyone about global climate change.
It must be a fossil fuel baron’s conspiracy keeping the world from clean air and cheap power right? After all the sun shines everywhere and that damned spring wind makes everyone insane part of the year and Wyoming residents crazy all year long. You just have to watch our vice president for awhile to see the proof of that, but I digress.
If you want to call yourself an American, or an Environmentalist or an Industrialist or a true blue techie, you have to know the history of electricity generation. I’m not going to launch into the details of the knock down drag out contest between the Alternating Current philosophies of Thomas Edison and the Direct Current philosophies of Nikola Tesla, but read those links and find out what the limitations where of each system because that same argument is coming back to haunt the electric utility industry.
It’s no secret that distributed distribution (e.g. home light plants and individual municipal electric generation) systems generally went the way of the dinosaur. Efficiencies for power production and air quality have long been assumed to be best with a central location for power production. Why else do you think all of those investor owned, cooperative and municipal utilities got together to power the industrial world from central power plants? Check it out yourself. If you live in or near a city that existed before the 1940’s, I’ll bet you that they had their own, light plant or power plant. When large central station transmission lines came to the neighborhood most of these municipalities dropped their power generation facilities and started buying the bulk of their electricity from a wholesale power supplier. Doing this reduced their costs and their headaches. It also made the air in your city cleaner.
Yet as construction costs, electricity demand, and environmental concerns grow, it will be these big central power suppliers that will disappear like an extinct reptile. No- wait; I like electric utilities, really. Without them we would have all been in the dark and powerless. Yet today, their desperate fight for survival is due to the fact that the big money and the big expense, is still in central station electricity generation. And, it’s the “big expense” part of the equation that spells the death knell for electric power generation as we know it.
Of course the electric utilities argue that alternate energy is not capable of powering our society. They are right and they will continue to be right for another 15 to 50 years or until society changes and that is where it gets interesting. Society is changing and the change is accelerating in a way that will make distributed power generation king again, dethroning King Coal and its entire kingdom. Remember, “The stone age did not end because we ran out of stones and the Oil (fossil fuel) Age will not end because we ran out of Oil (fossil fuels). – Don Huberts, Shell Hydrogen.
My next Blog entry will begin to explain how I think this is going to happen.
Monday, November 26, 2007
Tuesday, October 30, 2007
Air Permit Denial Threatens to Cost Consumers
Like the old Chinese curse, " may you live in interesting times", recent events could be on track for a perfect storm for electric utility generation, with electricity consumers caught in the middle and footing the bill as usual.
The convergence of recent US Supreme Court decisions, pending State and Federal government climate change legislation and citizen discussions about global warming put consumers at risk for a deluge of electric rate increases. Add a cold winter, or higher transportation and maintenance costs and the writing is on the wall. For those consumers that believe that current electricity rates are too low and do not reflect the external costs of air pollution created during electricity generation, the recent decision to deny power plant air quality permits in Kansas is a good decision. For those consumers struggling on fixed incomes or tight budgets, the decision may mean electric rates will continue to climb. That could be bad for everyone.
The Background
Tri-State G&T proposed the joint construction of the largest coal-fired power plant in the United States, to be built at the cost of $3.6 billion. The power plant with its two 700-megawatt generators was to be built and financed by several utilities including, Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association, Sunflower Electric Association, Golden Spread Electric Cooperative, Inc, and Midwest Energy.All four companies are member owned, non-profit cooperative corporations. The first three companies are wholesale power suppliers. Sunflower, organized in 1957, serves six rural electric distribution cooperatives in 34 western Kansas counties. Tri-State, started in 1952, is owned by and serves 44 electric cooperatives across portions of Colorado, Nebraska, New Mexico and Wyoming. Golden Spread Electric Cooperative was founded in 1984 and serves 16 distribution cooperatives in Oklahoma and Texas. Midwest Energy serves customers in central and western Kansas.
The new power plants are planned as an expansion to existing power generation facilities owned by Sunflower on their 10,000-acre, 360-megawatt Holcomb Station site. This is located approximately four miles south of Holcomb, Kansas.
The original plan was for Golden Spread, Sunflower, Tri-State and other investors to jointly own the first new 700-megawatt unit. Construction of the first unit was planned to begin in 2007 and be operational in 2012. Golden Spread planed to own 400 megawatts of the unit’s output for supply to its member systems. Sunflower expected to provide up to 150 megawatts to its member systems, and Midwest Energy was in for 75 megawatts. Tri-State planned to own the second 700-megawatt unit, to supply power to its member systems. This unit was projected to be online in 2013, but recent proposals before the denial show Tri-State postponing construction and tying the construction schedule to future load growth.
The Denial
According to an October 18, 2007 Kansas Department of Health and Environment (KDHE), press release concern over carbon dioxide production was the key factor in permit denial. Bolstered by the recent US Supreme Court decision (Massachusetts v. EPA), KHDE Secretary Roderick L. Bremby, stated, "I believe it would be irresponsible to ignore emerging information about the contribution of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases to climate change and the potential harm to our environment and health if we do nothing".
Massachusetts v. EPA defined carbon dioxide ( CO2) as an air quality pollutant that should be regulated by the EPA. The 66 page Supreme Court Opinion refers to specific scientific studies and reports documenting the existing and predicted negative impacts from global climate change and ties these changes directly to human activity; specifically the accelerated production of green house gases. Carbon dioxide heads the list of these green house gas emissions.
The EPA defines coal fired electricity generation as the single largest source of CO2 emissions in the USA. Coal fired electricity generation exceeds CO2 emissions from the entire transportation sector.
This permit denial is the first such denial in the nation."We are disappointed with the Secretary's arbitrary and capricious action," said Earl Watkins, Sunflower's president and chief executive officer. Those disappointed with the denial point out the neither the EPA or the State of Kansas include CO2 as a regulated air pollutant. Project partners felt that they had met all environmental and regulatory requirements with their proposal.
This action also changes Sunflower's plans to invest in and advance algae technology that would use carbon dioxide from the power plants. Attempting to address carbon emissions, the project partners completed initial testing for an innovative algae reactor that would use a portion of the carbon dioxide emissions from Holcomb Station to produce biofuels, including ethanol and biodiesel. Funds that would have been earned from the power plant expansion project were expected to be used to finance Sunflower's investment in the commercial algae reactor.
The Next Step
Tri-State's general counsel Ken Reif reported to the G&T's employees, "Naturally we are all disappointed in this action and we are in the process of evaluating our options with Sunflower and our board."
Sunflower’s President and CEO Watkins said, "Politics aside, the 1.5 million cooperative customers still need reliable, low- cost power. We will endeavor to fulfill that mission in the appropriate way, but those customers will be harmed and the economy damaged by the Secretary's decision. Sunflower expects to pursue legal and legislative remedies to this denial."
Talk about Denial
Wholesale power utilities still do not get it. They continue to promote misleading statements regarding global warming or climate change and insist that decisions are being made based on emotion and "politics" rather than science. If it wasn’t for "politics", utilities and consumers would have been paying higher generation rates for decades to account for externalities - pollution etc., caused by fossil fuel electricity generation. Some argue that as soon as electricity becomes expensive enough to be worth saving, energy conservation will finally kick in and become a serious part of demand side management, instead of the token savings that it is inmost homes today.
In any case the Kansas Department of Health and Environment took one of the first steps toward new thinking and new energy solutions. In these interesting times it will be very interesting to see the impact that this permit decision has on other coal fired power plant construction plans across the nation. It will be even be more interesting to see how utilities meet the growing national demand for electricity with limited generation resources and a growing demand for climate change action.
© 2007Mark Daily
The convergence of recent US Supreme Court decisions, pending State and Federal government climate change legislation and citizen discussions about global warming put consumers at risk for a deluge of electric rate increases. Add a cold winter, or higher transportation and maintenance costs and the writing is on the wall. For those consumers that believe that current electricity rates are too low and do not reflect the external costs of air pollution created during electricity generation, the recent decision to deny power plant air quality permits in Kansas is a good decision. For those consumers struggling on fixed incomes or tight budgets, the decision may mean electric rates will continue to climb. That could be bad for everyone.
The Background
Tri-State G&T proposed the joint construction of the largest coal-fired power plant in the United States, to be built at the cost of $3.6 billion. The power plant with its two 700-megawatt generators was to be built and financed by several utilities including, Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association, Sunflower Electric Association, Golden Spread Electric Cooperative, Inc, and Midwest Energy.All four companies are member owned, non-profit cooperative corporations. The first three companies are wholesale power suppliers. Sunflower, organized in 1957, serves six rural electric distribution cooperatives in 34 western Kansas counties. Tri-State, started in 1952, is owned by and serves 44 electric cooperatives across portions of Colorado, Nebraska, New Mexico and Wyoming. Golden Spread Electric Cooperative was founded in 1984 and serves 16 distribution cooperatives in Oklahoma and Texas. Midwest Energy serves customers in central and western Kansas.
The new power plants are planned as an expansion to existing power generation facilities owned by Sunflower on their 10,000-acre, 360-megawatt Holcomb Station site. This is located approximately four miles south of Holcomb, Kansas.
The original plan was for Golden Spread, Sunflower, Tri-State and other investors to jointly own the first new 700-megawatt unit. Construction of the first unit was planned to begin in 2007 and be operational in 2012. Golden Spread planed to own 400 megawatts of the unit’s output for supply to its member systems. Sunflower expected to provide up to 150 megawatts to its member systems, and Midwest Energy was in for 75 megawatts. Tri-State planned to own the second 700-megawatt unit, to supply power to its member systems. This unit was projected to be online in 2013, but recent proposals before the denial show Tri-State postponing construction and tying the construction schedule to future load growth.
The Denial
According to an October 18, 2007 Kansas Department of Health and Environment (KDHE), press release concern over carbon dioxide production was the key factor in permit denial. Bolstered by the recent US Supreme Court decision (Massachusetts v. EPA), KHDE Secretary Roderick L. Bremby, stated, "I believe it would be irresponsible to ignore emerging information about the contribution of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases to climate change and the potential harm to our environment and health if we do nothing".
Massachusetts v. EPA defined carbon dioxide ( CO2) as an air quality pollutant that should be regulated by the EPA. The 66 page Supreme Court Opinion refers to specific scientific studies and reports documenting the existing and predicted negative impacts from global climate change and ties these changes directly to human activity; specifically the accelerated production of green house gases. Carbon dioxide heads the list of these green house gas emissions.
The EPA defines coal fired electricity generation as the single largest source of CO2 emissions in the USA. Coal fired electricity generation exceeds CO2 emissions from the entire transportation sector.
This permit denial is the first such denial in the nation."We are disappointed with the Secretary's arbitrary and capricious action," said Earl Watkins, Sunflower's president and chief executive officer. Those disappointed with the denial point out the neither the EPA or the State of Kansas include CO2 as a regulated air pollutant. Project partners felt that they had met all environmental and regulatory requirements with their proposal.
This action also changes Sunflower's plans to invest in and advance algae technology that would use carbon dioxide from the power plants. Attempting to address carbon emissions, the project partners completed initial testing for an innovative algae reactor that would use a portion of the carbon dioxide emissions from Holcomb Station to produce biofuels, including ethanol and biodiesel. Funds that would have been earned from the power plant expansion project were expected to be used to finance Sunflower's investment in the commercial algae reactor.
The Next Step
Tri-State's general counsel Ken Reif reported to the G&T's employees, "Naturally we are all disappointed in this action and we are in the process of evaluating our options with Sunflower and our board."
Sunflower’s President and CEO Watkins said, "Politics aside, the 1.5 million cooperative customers still need reliable, low- cost power. We will endeavor to fulfill that mission in the appropriate way, but those customers will be harmed and the economy damaged by the Secretary's decision. Sunflower expects to pursue legal and legislative remedies to this denial."
Talk about Denial
Wholesale power utilities still do not get it. They continue to promote misleading statements regarding global warming or climate change and insist that decisions are being made based on emotion and "politics" rather than science. If it wasn’t for "politics", utilities and consumers would have been paying higher generation rates for decades to account for externalities - pollution etc., caused by fossil fuel electricity generation. Some argue that as soon as electricity becomes expensive enough to be worth saving, energy conservation will finally kick in and become a serious part of demand side management, instead of the token savings that it is inmost homes today.
In any case the Kansas Department of Health and Environment took one of the first steps toward new thinking and new energy solutions. In these interesting times it will be very interesting to see the impact that this permit decision has on other coal fired power plant construction plans across the nation. It will be even be more interesting to see how utilities meet the growing national demand for electricity with limited generation resources and a growing demand for climate change action.
© 2007Mark Daily
Monday, September 3, 2007
RESIDENTIAL ENERGY TAX CREDITS HELP YOU SAVE ENERGY
If you make certain types of energy efficient improvements to your primary home in 2007, you may be able to apply for tax credits to lower your income tax requirements or increase your income tax return for 2007.
The Energy Policy Act of 2005 and its amendments encourage homeowners and renters to install energy efficient home improvements in three major categories; Residential building envelope improvements; Residential heating system improvements, and; Solar energy system additions.
If you qualify for building envelope improvements, you may be able to take a tax credit of 10% of the cost of your “nonbusiness energy property credit” improvements up to a total of $500. The materials referred to in the IRS general instructions for Form 5695 must be new and permanently installed to last at least five years. These improvements can include insulation materials, exterior windows, exterior doors and storm doors and some metal roofing materials. Labor costs for these improvements eligible for the tax credit.
Heating system improvements or “Residential energy property costs” include certain electric heat pumps, ground source or geothermal heat pumps and other space conditioning equipment. Labor costs are eligible for this tax credit which has the same tax credit eligibility of 10% up to a maximum of $500.
Solar energy tax credits are referred to as the “ Residential Energy Efficient Property Credit”. This credit is limited to 30% of your costs including labor up to a maximum credit of $2,000 for qualifying photovoltaic and solar water heating systems.
This article is not a tax consultant article. To make sure these credits apply to you, talk to your tax consultant, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), or refer to IRS Form 5695. The Energy Star website also has more information.
Eligible improvements must be in place by December 31, 2007 and meet other requirements to qualify, so make sure you check it out before buying your improvements.
© Mark Daily, 2007
The Energy Policy Act of 2005 and its amendments encourage homeowners and renters to install energy efficient home improvements in three major categories; Residential building envelope improvements; Residential heating system improvements, and; Solar energy system additions.
If you qualify for building envelope improvements, you may be able to take a tax credit of 10% of the cost of your “nonbusiness energy property credit” improvements up to a total of $500. The materials referred to in the IRS general instructions for Form 5695 must be new and permanently installed to last at least five years. These improvements can include insulation materials, exterior windows, exterior doors and storm doors and some metal roofing materials. Labor costs for these improvements eligible for the tax credit.
Heating system improvements or “Residential energy property costs” include certain electric heat pumps, ground source or geothermal heat pumps and other space conditioning equipment. Labor costs are eligible for this tax credit which has the same tax credit eligibility of 10% up to a maximum of $500.
Solar energy tax credits are referred to as the “ Residential Energy Efficient Property Credit”. This credit is limited to 30% of your costs including labor up to a maximum credit of $2,000 for qualifying photovoltaic and solar water heating systems.
This article is not a tax consultant article. To make sure these credits apply to you, talk to your tax consultant, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), or refer to IRS Form 5695. The Energy Star website also has more information.
Eligible improvements must be in place by December 31, 2007 and meet other requirements to qualify, so make sure you check it out before buying your improvements.
© Mark Daily, 2007
Tuesday, August 21, 2007
Wind Energy Could Be Mainstream Generation Resource Soon
With over 11,000 megawatts of wind energy on line in the USA and 2,000 of it coming on line in 2006 alone, wind stands to be a major contributor to renewable energy generation.
One of the obstacles to the adoption of wind generation as a major electric energy generation source in the Untied States has been the contention by some in the Utility industry that wind energy must be covered by duplicate dispatchable fixed output generation facilities. This argument has been used to down play the importance and usefulness of wind energy to the growing renewable energy moment. The argument goes like this.
Since the wind can stop blowing at any time, coal or other conventional generation resources must be built simultaneously with wind production facilities, just in case the wind stops blowing. While it maybe true that wind is not as reliable as conventional generation, according to a Utility Wind Integration Group ( UWIG) report entitled, “ Utility Wind Generation State of the Art”, studies confirm that wind generation can stand alone as a generation source without the requirement for fossil fuel back up. The anti wind sentiment also dampened the enthusiasm of utility planners to the acceptance of combined cycle gasification technologies and other advance clean coal and clean fossil fuel technologies because they argued that the extra expense of these unproven technologies was not justified if wind generators could kick in any time the wind was blowing hard enough to cover the demand.
While some of you may see a pattern here ( read conspiracy) I think that utilities justifiably and sincerely are concerned about the impact that wind generators might have on a stable energy grid. Restarting a coal fired plant (50% or more of the USA’s generation fuel) is no easy task. Neither is balancing load requirements with available electricity generation facilities. While some may retort that this is not rocket science, I think its pretty close. Keep in mind that terribly expensive things happen to utilities when there is not enough power available to cover the demand from millions of independent homes and businesses. Every kilowatt hour sent to your house or business comes from a system that plans ahead for your equipment to come on even when you haven’t told anyone that you have the equipment.
Utilities have developed sophisticated computer models that use weather forecasts, seasonal business cycle histories and historic residential demand data for the average home in their service area. They are prepared to turn on, ramp up and stoke up generation facilities or turn off, ramp down or slow down every generator in the USA every thirty minutes to an hour 24 hours a day 365 days per year. Just to keep us in “cold beer and toast”, as Amory Lovins says. I think it’s a bit more serious than just cold beer and toast, but a surprising amount of energy is wasted every year.
The UWIG report acknowledges that Wind Generators are a different type of generator but assure planners that wind generation can fit into the existing electricity generation system nationwide, with the proper planning, design and integration.
Electric energy dispatchers rely heavily on weather forecaster’s temperature predictions for scheduling their power delivery. The UWIG report says that weather forecasters are 80% effect at predicting wind speeds and durations. This additional weather data can go a long way towards making wind generators as reliable, predicable and dispatch able as fossil fuel generators.
Recent policy approvals for amendments to the National Energy Policy Act of 2005 lend new support for renewable energy initiatives. This could be the perfect storm that renewable energy needs to get a little help out there. The coal, nuclear and oil industries have subsidies and federal support that has been in place for decades. Now is the time to lend that same support to renewable energy by supporting Renewable Electricity Standards.
California, New Mexico, Minnesota, Oregon, and Colorado – have or are implementing Renewable Portfolio Standards of 20 percent or more. Now is the time to take it nation wide. Contact your congress person today.
What are your energy questions these days? Drop me a note and I'll try to cover your question in a future blog.
© Mark Daily 2007
One of the obstacles to the adoption of wind generation as a major electric energy generation source in the Untied States has been the contention by some in the Utility industry that wind energy must be covered by duplicate dispatchable fixed output generation facilities. This argument has been used to down play the importance and usefulness of wind energy to the growing renewable energy moment. The argument goes like this.
Since the wind can stop blowing at any time, coal or other conventional generation resources must be built simultaneously with wind production facilities, just in case the wind stops blowing. While it maybe true that wind is not as reliable as conventional generation, according to a Utility Wind Integration Group ( UWIG) report entitled, “ Utility Wind Generation State of the Art”, studies confirm that wind generation can stand alone as a generation source without the requirement for fossil fuel back up. The anti wind sentiment also dampened the enthusiasm of utility planners to the acceptance of combined cycle gasification technologies and other advance clean coal and clean fossil fuel technologies because they argued that the extra expense of these unproven technologies was not justified if wind generators could kick in any time the wind was blowing hard enough to cover the demand.
While some of you may see a pattern here ( read conspiracy) I think that utilities justifiably and sincerely are concerned about the impact that wind generators might have on a stable energy grid. Restarting a coal fired plant (50% or more of the USA’s generation fuel) is no easy task. Neither is balancing load requirements with available electricity generation facilities. While some may retort that this is not rocket science, I think its pretty close. Keep in mind that terribly expensive things happen to utilities when there is not enough power available to cover the demand from millions of independent homes and businesses. Every kilowatt hour sent to your house or business comes from a system that plans ahead for your equipment to come on even when you haven’t told anyone that you have the equipment.
Utilities have developed sophisticated computer models that use weather forecasts, seasonal business cycle histories and historic residential demand data for the average home in their service area. They are prepared to turn on, ramp up and stoke up generation facilities or turn off, ramp down or slow down every generator in the USA every thirty minutes to an hour 24 hours a day 365 days per year. Just to keep us in “cold beer and toast”, as Amory Lovins says. I think it’s a bit more serious than just cold beer and toast, but a surprising amount of energy is wasted every year.
The UWIG report acknowledges that Wind Generators are a different type of generator but assure planners that wind generation can fit into the existing electricity generation system nationwide, with the proper planning, design and integration.
Electric energy dispatchers rely heavily on weather forecaster’s temperature predictions for scheduling their power delivery. The UWIG report says that weather forecasters are 80% effect at predicting wind speeds and durations. This additional weather data can go a long way towards making wind generators as reliable, predicable and dispatch able as fossil fuel generators.
Recent policy approvals for amendments to the National Energy Policy Act of 2005 lend new support for renewable energy initiatives. This could be the perfect storm that renewable energy needs to get a little help out there. The coal, nuclear and oil industries have subsidies and federal support that has been in place for decades. Now is the time to lend that same support to renewable energy by supporting Renewable Electricity Standards.
California, New Mexico, Minnesota, Oregon, and Colorado – have or are implementing Renewable Portfolio Standards of 20 percent or more. Now is the time to take it nation wide. Contact your congress person today.
What are your energy questions these days? Drop me a note and I'll try to cover your question in a future blog.
© Mark Daily 2007
Monday, August 13, 2007
Wind Energy Could Be Mainstream Generation Resource Soon
With over 11,000 megawatts of wind energy on line in the USA and 2,000 of it coming on line in 2006 alone, wind stands to be a major contributor to renewable energy generation.
One of the obstacles to the adoption of wind generation as a major electric energy generation source in the Untied States has been the contention by some in the Utility industry that wind energy must be covered by duplicate dispatchable fixed output generation facilities. This argument has been used to down play the importance and usefulness of wind energy to the growing renewable energy moment. The argument goes like this.
Since the wind can stop blowing at any time, coal or other conventional generation resources must be built simultaneously with wind production facilities, just in case the wind stops blowing. While it maybe true that wind is not as reliable as conventional generation, according to a Utility Wind Integration Group ( UWIG) report entitled, " Utility Wind Generation State of the Art", studies confirm that wind generation can stand alone as a generation source without the requirement for fossil fuel back up.
The anti wind sentiment also dampened the enthusiasm of utility planners to the acceptance of combined cycle gasification technologies and other advance clean coal and clean fossil fuel technologies because they argued that the extra expense of these unproven technologies was not justified if wind generators could kick in any time the wind was blowing hard enough to cover the demand.
While some of you may see a pattern here ( read conspiracy) I think that utilities justifiably and sincerely are concerned about the impact that wind generators might have on a stable energy grid. Restarting a coal fired plant (50% or more of the USA’s generation fuel) is no easy task. Neither is balancing load requirements with available electricity generation facilities. While some may retort that this is not rocket science, I think its pretty close. Keep in mind that terribly expensive things happen to utilities when there is not enough power available to cover the demand from millions of independent homes and businesses. Every kilowatt hour sent to your house or business comes from a system that plans ahead for your equipment to come on even when you haven’t told anyone that you have the equipment.
Utilities have developed suffisticated computer models that use weather forecasts, seasonal business cycle histories and historic residential demand data for the average home in their service area. They are prepared to turn on, ramp up and stoke up generation facilities or turn off, ramp down or slow down every generator in the USA every thirty minutes to an hour, 24 hours a day 365 days per year. Just to keep us in cold beer and toast. Well, I guess it is more than just cold beer and toast.
The UWIG report acknowledges that Wind Generators are a different type of generator but assure planners that wind generation can fit into the existing electricity generation system nationwide, with the proper planning, design and integration.
Electric energy dispatchers rely heavily on weather forecaster’s temperature predictions for scheduling their power delivery. The UWIG report says that weather forecasters are 80% effect at predicting wind speeds and durations. This additional weather data can go a long way towards making wind generators as reliable, predicable and dispatch able as fossil fuel generators.
Recent policy approvals for amendments to the National Energy Policy Act of 2005 lend new support for renewable energy initiatives. This could be the perfect storm that renewable energy needs to get a little help out there. The coal, nuclear and oil industries have subsidies and federal support that has been in place for decades. Now is the time to lend that same support to renewable energy by supporting Renewable Electricity Standards.
Over twenty states including,California, New Mexico, Minnesota, Oregon, and Colorado – have or are implementing Renewable Portfolio Standards of 20 percent or more. Now is the time to take it nation wide.
Have you contacted your legislators to show support for Renewable Energy Standards? I'd like to hear from you one way or the other about this. What are your thoughts on the subject?
© Mark Daily 2007
One of the obstacles to the adoption of wind generation as a major electric energy generation source in the Untied States has been the contention by some in the Utility industry that wind energy must be covered by duplicate dispatchable fixed output generation facilities. This argument has been used to down play the importance and usefulness of wind energy to the growing renewable energy moment. The argument goes like this.
Since the wind can stop blowing at any time, coal or other conventional generation resources must be built simultaneously with wind production facilities, just in case the wind stops blowing. While it maybe true that wind is not as reliable as conventional generation, according to a Utility Wind Integration Group ( UWIG) report entitled, " Utility Wind Generation State of the Art", studies confirm that wind generation can stand alone as a generation source without the requirement for fossil fuel back up.
The anti wind sentiment also dampened the enthusiasm of utility planners to the acceptance of combined cycle gasification technologies and other advance clean coal and clean fossil fuel technologies because they argued that the extra expense of these unproven technologies was not justified if wind generators could kick in any time the wind was blowing hard enough to cover the demand.
While some of you may see a pattern here ( read conspiracy) I think that utilities justifiably and sincerely are concerned about the impact that wind generators might have on a stable energy grid. Restarting a coal fired plant (50% or more of the USA’s generation fuel) is no easy task. Neither is balancing load requirements with available electricity generation facilities. While some may retort that this is not rocket science, I think its pretty close. Keep in mind that terribly expensive things happen to utilities when there is not enough power available to cover the demand from millions of independent homes and businesses. Every kilowatt hour sent to your house or business comes from a system that plans ahead for your equipment to come on even when you haven’t told anyone that you have the equipment.
Utilities have developed suffisticated computer models that use weather forecasts, seasonal business cycle histories and historic residential demand data for the average home in their service area. They are prepared to turn on, ramp up and stoke up generation facilities or turn off, ramp down or slow down every generator in the USA every thirty minutes to an hour, 24 hours a day 365 days per year. Just to keep us in cold beer and toast. Well, I guess it is more than just cold beer and toast.
The UWIG report acknowledges that Wind Generators are a different type of generator but assure planners that wind generation can fit into the existing electricity generation system nationwide, with the proper planning, design and integration.
Electric energy dispatchers rely heavily on weather forecaster’s temperature predictions for scheduling their power delivery. The UWIG report says that weather forecasters are 80% effect at predicting wind speeds and durations. This additional weather data can go a long way towards making wind generators as reliable, predicable and dispatch able as fossil fuel generators.
Recent policy approvals for amendments to the National Energy Policy Act of 2005 lend new support for renewable energy initiatives. This could be the perfect storm that renewable energy needs to get a little help out there. The coal, nuclear and oil industries have subsidies and federal support that has been in place for decades. Now is the time to lend that same support to renewable energy by supporting Renewable Electricity Standards.
Over twenty states including,California, New Mexico, Minnesota, Oregon, and Colorado – have or are implementing Renewable Portfolio Standards of 20 percent or more. Now is the time to take it nation wide.
Have you contacted your legislators to show support for Renewable Energy Standards? I'd like to hear from you one way or the other about this. What are your thoughts on the subject?
© Mark Daily 2007
Friday, July 20, 2007
Here is What you Need to do to lower Your Electricity Demand
Rates are going to continue going up. And, we are responding just like the late comedian Jack Benny in one of his most popular skits. When confronted by a mugger’s demand, "your money or your life". The crowd bursts into laughter when, after a long pause the mugger shoves the gun in Jack’s face, and the notoriously stingy comedian responds, " I’m thinking, I’m thinking".
While each of us as electricity consumers have direct control over our electric bills, as rates continue to rise other choices for how we spend our money become more and more obvious. But, when faced with the choice of spending money on more insulation to cut our air conditioning bills by as much as 10% ; or managing our use of heating and air conditioning energy, we continue to send our money to the utilities instead of taking action. " I’m thinking , I’m thinking". Yet , no one thinks that this is funny. In fact tempers flare as rates climb and consumers almost uniformly blame the utility that supplies their electricity.
Electric Utilities, unlike oil and gas companies, are not making record profits. In fact, some utilities have been brought to the brink of disaster with artificially suppressed rates that came in with state laws adopting deregulation. As these caps come off, its no wonder that rates are climbing. You have to ask yourself, have my fuel costs gone up in the last few years? Of course they have. And, utility fuel costs have also gone up. Electricity as we know it today requires fuel, coal, oil, natural gas, uranium. Increase fuel prices and presto, increased electric rates.
One other factor causing rates to rise is our consumer demand. This demand is outstripping the capacity of existing electricity generation facilities. When this happens, utilities have two choices, turn off the power when demand exceeds supply or make more supply. Making more supply requires new construction and new construction of any kind is expensive. Just ask anyone that has done any major home remodeling lately.
We as consumers have a third choice that puts us in control of our own homes and businesses. We can conserve energy, turn it off, turn it down, get more efficient appliances, get smarter about how and when we use electricity. Of course this is hard work and it is lots easier to repeat, "I’m thinking, I’m thinking".
Many electricity users mistakenly think that if utilities just switched to free power from the sun or wind that their bills would go down. While the US is leading the way in wind power development the magnitude of the demand exceeds what wind and solar power can do to keep up. This has the potential to change, but not without our help. Energy Conservation is the key to reducing demand and the key to making today’s home more able to use the limited amount of power output coming from renewable resources.
So unless you love your electric bill, here’s is what you need to do.
Step One- Find out how much you pay for electricity. What do you pay per kilo-Watt hour
( kWh)? If you don’t know the answer to this question off the top of your head then you are not prepared to deal with the other numbers you need to know to save the world and your money.
2) Get a Kill-a-watt meter or some other device to learn about how much energy your appliances are using. You need to know what contributes to your electric bill. Is it really air-conditioning or is it that old refrigerator? Is it the electric dryer or your stereo system? Some appliance are not easy to sample with a plug I meter and you may have to settle for estimates based on the time it runs and the appliance energy rating. Do your home work and get an answer that you think make sense for every electricity using device in your house that’s lighting, heating, cooling, refrigerating, pumping, entertaining or just sitting there humming.
3) Start shopping around for choices. There are lots of different choices to make so keep going until you are sure you have some reasonably energy efficient choices. You don’t have to rush out and buy them all today, but as they break down, or your needs change, consider energy star and other energy efficiency rated equipment.
Stop thinking, start doing.
"We have meet the enemy, and he is us". Pogo
While each of us as electricity consumers have direct control over our electric bills, as rates continue to rise other choices for how we spend our money become more and more obvious. But, when faced with the choice of spending money on more insulation to cut our air conditioning bills by as much as 10% ; or managing our use of heating and air conditioning energy, we continue to send our money to the utilities instead of taking action. " I’m thinking , I’m thinking". Yet , no one thinks that this is funny. In fact tempers flare as rates climb and consumers almost uniformly blame the utility that supplies their electricity.
Electric Utilities, unlike oil and gas companies, are not making record profits. In fact, some utilities have been brought to the brink of disaster with artificially suppressed rates that came in with state laws adopting deregulation. As these caps come off, its no wonder that rates are climbing. You have to ask yourself, have my fuel costs gone up in the last few years? Of course they have. And, utility fuel costs have also gone up. Electricity as we know it today requires fuel, coal, oil, natural gas, uranium. Increase fuel prices and presto, increased electric rates.
One other factor causing rates to rise is our consumer demand. This demand is outstripping the capacity of existing electricity generation facilities. When this happens, utilities have two choices, turn off the power when demand exceeds supply or make more supply. Making more supply requires new construction and new construction of any kind is expensive. Just ask anyone that has done any major home remodeling lately.
We as consumers have a third choice that puts us in control of our own homes and businesses. We can conserve energy, turn it off, turn it down, get more efficient appliances, get smarter about how and when we use electricity. Of course this is hard work and it is lots easier to repeat, "I’m thinking, I’m thinking".
Many electricity users mistakenly think that if utilities just switched to free power from the sun or wind that their bills would go down. While the US is leading the way in wind power development the magnitude of the demand exceeds what wind and solar power can do to keep up. This has the potential to change, but not without our help. Energy Conservation is the key to reducing demand and the key to making today’s home more able to use the limited amount of power output coming from renewable resources.
So unless you love your electric bill, here’s is what you need to do.
Step One- Find out how much you pay for electricity. What do you pay per kilo-Watt hour
( kWh)? If you don’t know the answer to this question off the top of your head then you are not prepared to deal with the other numbers you need to know to save the world and your money.
2) Get a Kill-a-watt meter or some other device to learn about how much energy your appliances are using. You need to know what contributes to your electric bill. Is it really air-conditioning or is it that old refrigerator? Is it the electric dryer or your stereo system? Some appliance are not easy to sample with a plug I meter and you may have to settle for estimates based on the time it runs and the appliance energy rating. Do your home work and get an answer that you think make sense for every electricity using device in your house that’s lighting, heating, cooling, refrigerating, pumping, entertaining or just sitting there humming.
3) Start shopping around for choices. There are lots of different choices to make so keep going until you are sure you have some reasonably energy efficient choices. You don’t have to rush out and buy them all today, but as they break down, or your needs change, consider energy star and other energy efficiency rated equipment.
Stop thinking, start doing.
"We have meet the enemy, and he is us". Pogo
Monday, July 9, 2007
Top Ten things you can do to save electricity and lower your bill this summer
1.Set your air conditioning system no lower than 80 degrees. If you aren’t comfortable at this temperature you probably need to loose weight.
2. Loose weight. By keeping your refrigerator door closed you are saving money and losing weight which could reduce your air conditioning costs (see #1).
3. Replace incandescent bulbs with compact florescent bulbs. These bulbs last ten times longer and use a quarter of the power for the same amount of light and they give off less heat so you don’t need so much air conditioning.
4. Use or install a ceiling fan and use it in the mornings or cooler times of day instead of turning on the air conditioning. Ceiling fans use a fraction of the electricity that air conditioning uses.
5. Cook outside on the grill or make more microwave meals. Electric and gas ovens and ranges not only take energy, they heat up the house, requiring more AC. Microwave cooking gives off less heat and uses about two-thirds less energy than electric stove top or oven cooking.
6. Install a programable thermostat for your air conditioning system. Program your new thermostat or find the directions to your old one and set the temperature to 80 degrees when you are in the house and 85 when you are gone. This will save you 5% off the air conditioning part of your electric bill.
7. Dry your laundry outside instead of using the dryer. You can knock off $5 to $15 dollars of ourbill just by getting you and your laundry out of the house for a little.
8. Keep the window blinds or shades down on east, west and south facing windows. These windows pick up a lot of heat from the direct sun pouring in unless your eaves or awnings are designed to keep direct sun off your windows. You will save a lot off your air conditioning bill by doing this one.
9. Put entertainment appliances, Televisions, CD players etc. on a light stick or plug bar and switch everything off when you aren’t right there watching or listening. Some electronic equipment, especially electronic equipment that uses a remote control, is always ON even when you think its off.
10. Get a little Kill-A-Watt meter that you can plug into learn the energy appetite of all your appliances and equipment. The key to reducing summer utility bills is knowledge. Find out what uses what at your house, everyone is different.
The best, cheapest and most renewable electricty around is the electricity that you don't use at all.
© Mark Daily
2. Loose weight. By keeping your refrigerator door closed you are saving money and losing weight which could reduce your air conditioning costs (see #1).
3. Replace incandescent bulbs with compact florescent bulbs. These bulbs last ten times longer and use a quarter of the power for the same amount of light and they give off less heat so you don’t need so much air conditioning.
4. Use or install a ceiling fan and use it in the mornings or cooler times of day instead of turning on the air conditioning. Ceiling fans use a fraction of the electricity that air conditioning uses.
5. Cook outside on the grill or make more microwave meals. Electric and gas ovens and ranges not only take energy, they heat up the house, requiring more AC. Microwave cooking gives off less heat and uses about two-thirds less energy than electric stove top or oven cooking.
6. Install a programable thermostat for your air conditioning system. Program your new thermostat or find the directions to your old one and set the temperature to 80 degrees when you are in the house and 85 when you are gone. This will save you 5% off the air conditioning part of your electric bill.
7. Dry your laundry outside instead of using the dryer. You can knock off $5 to $15 dollars of ourbill just by getting you and your laundry out of the house for a little.
8. Keep the window blinds or shades down on east, west and south facing windows. These windows pick up a lot of heat from the direct sun pouring in unless your eaves or awnings are designed to keep direct sun off your windows. You will save a lot off your air conditioning bill by doing this one.
9. Put entertainment appliances, Televisions, CD players etc. on a light stick or plug bar and switch everything off when you aren’t right there watching or listening. Some electronic equipment, especially electronic equipment that uses a remote control, is always ON even when you think its off.
10. Get a little Kill-A-Watt meter that you can plug into learn the energy appetite of all your appliances and equipment. The key to reducing summer utility bills is knowledge. Find out what uses what at your house, everyone is different.
The best, cheapest and most renewable electricty around is the electricity that you don't use at all.
© Mark Daily
Wednesday, July 4, 2007
Time to take Action for Renewable Electric Energy Generation
I’ve seen it before. Last week I saw it again. It was a bumper sticker that said, "If you’re not really pissed off, you are just not paying attention".
June 21st must have been the longest day for the US Senate. On solstice day they passed a version of the new national energy policy that will no doubt anger anyone that is paying attention, except those that believe that the American Auto industry is on the right track.
The highlights of this legislation regarding electric energy and electricity generation are, that two key provisions failed to get into the final version. The $32.1 billion alternative energy tax package got the boot and so did nation wide renewable energy portfolio standards.
Mired down in the gasoline controversy of CAFÉ standards and oil industry subsidies, the Senate had no strength to include these progressive and important issues in the final piece of legislation. The only glimmer of hope for reducing the nation’s non-renewable electric energy appetite were the changes proposed in lighting and appliance standards.
The oil and coal industries killed the Alternative Energy tax subsidies because an increase in Alternative Energy subsides was to be funded by reductions in fossil fuel industry subsidies. The electric industry killed the renewable energy portfolio standards for various reasons. Some argued that they did it to avoid a change in their cozy relationship with the fossil fuel industry - coal mining and natural gas development. Others argued that belectric utilities killed it simply because they didn’t want to change they way that they have done things since the 1930's.
Of course they say the electric utility industry killed it because the system is working the way it is and there is no need to change. Utility executives go on to argue that there is no need to change a system that continues to bring relatively cheap and reliable energy to a growing demand for electricity. They claim, I think rightfully so, that consumers do not want to see drastic increases in their electric bills. Yet the rates can’t help but continue to climb as scarcity principles dictate.
Which argument is correct? Frankly, I am so sick of the way business is conducted in this country that I can’t really think objectively about it and there is the real problem. Analysis paralysis has gripped all of us. We can no longer, if we ever could really , trust the accuracy of the information that we get to make our informed opinions...well ...informed. Absent this assurance that we are getting the facts that matter, it is no wonder that most of the population continues to keep living the way they always have; driving more road miles every year regardless of price and environmental damage; using increasing amounts of electricity regardless of price and environmental damage.
So what will this new legislation do to help us be smarter and make better use of the energy that we all agree is disappearing and getting more expensive? Wading through 464 pages of legislation to find out is hard work.
Those of us that can’t stand to read through all of that, should simply contact their elected representatives and tell them you want them to vote to take away the oil and coal industry subsidies that have been in place for decades and give those subsidies to the new guys and the little guys- the solar, wind, and energy conservation industries. It’s the fair thing to do. Don’t give it to the bio-fuels industry. Creating Bio fuels takes more regular fuel to make than the bio-fuel it produces. There is no objective study that says otherwise. Why would we want to support legislation that makes us run out of gasoline faster? I know, Ed Abbey claimed he drove a Cadillac just to hasten the end of the fossil fuel era. So now Governors and the rest think we could be saving the world by driving more metal. Are you paying attention?
If you want more renewable energy used to generate your electricity, if you want the future to harness, clean and renewable technologies instead of replacing one destructive fuel with a different destructive fuel, we must all take action.
Come on, make that call.
June 21st must have been the longest day for the US Senate. On solstice day they passed a version of the new national energy policy that will no doubt anger anyone that is paying attention, except those that believe that the American Auto industry is on the right track.
The highlights of this legislation regarding electric energy and electricity generation are, that two key provisions failed to get into the final version. The $32.1 billion alternative energy tax package got the boot and so did nation wide renewable energy portfolio standards.
Mired down in the gasoline controversy of CAFÉ standards and oil industry subsidies, the Senate had no strength to include these progressive and important issues in the final piece of legislation. The only glimmer of hope for reducing the nation’s non-renewable electric energy appetite were the changes proposed in lighting and appliance standards.
The oil and coal industries killed the Alternative Energy tax subsidies because an increase in Alternative Energy subsides was to be funded by reductions in fossil fuel industry subsidies. The electric industry killed the renewable energy portfolio standards for various reasons. Some argued that they did it to avoid a change in their cozy relationship with the fossil fuel industry - coal mining and natural gas development. Others argued that belectric utilities killed it simply because they didn’t want to change they way that they have done things since the 1930's.
Of course they say the electric utility industry killed it because the system is working the way it is and there is no need to change. Utility executives go on to argue that there is no need to change a system that continues to bring relatively cheap and reliable energy to a growing demand for electricity. They claim, I think rightfully so, that consumers do not want to see drastic increases in their electric bills. Yet the rates can’t help but continue to climb as scarcity principles dictate.
Which argument is correct? Frankly, I am so sick of the way business is conducted in this country that I can’t really think objectively about it and there is the real problem. Analysis paralysis has gripped all of us. We can no longer, if we ever could really , trust the accuracy of the information that we get to make our informed opinions...well ...informed. Absent this assurance that we are getting the facts that matter, it is no wonder that most of the population continues to keep living the way they always have; driving more road miles every year regardless of price and environmental damage; using increasing amounts of electricity regardless of price and environmental damage.
So what will this new legislation do to help us be smarter and make better use of the energy that we all agree is disappearing and getting more expensive? Wading through 464 pages of legislation to find out is hard work.
Those of us that can’t stand to read through all of that, should simply contact their elected representatives and tell them you want them to vote to take away the oil and coal industry subsidies that have been in place for decades and give those subsidies to the new guys and the little guys- the solar, wind, and energy conservation industries. It’s the fair thing to do. Don’t give it to the bio-fuels industry. Creating Bio fuels takes more regular fuel to make than the bio-fuel it produces. There is no objective study that says otherwise. Why would we want to support legislation that makes us run out of gasoline faster? I know, Ed Abbey claimed he drove a Cadillac just to hasten the end of the fossil fuel era. So now Governors and the rest think we could be saving the world by driving more metal. Are you paying attention?
If you want more renewable energy used to generate your electricity, if you want the future to harness, clean and renewable technologies instead of replacing one destructive fuel with a different destructive fuel, we must all take action.
Come on, make that call.
Monday, April 23, 2007
Chicago Green Fest Addresses Electricity Generation
The first ever Spring Green Festival hosted by Co-op America just wrapped up Sunday, April 22. Judging by the elbow to elbow crowds shuffling by the endless rows of green products and the standing room only attendance at most of the presentations by "green" speakers, I’d say the event was a success. Held at the McCormick Place convention center in downtown Chicago, Chicagoans and a few misplaced green people from across the nation turned out to support the event and learn more about green living.
Of course, unless you are a frog, you can’t be green without some consideration to the source of power that runs your home and your computer and lets you keep up with blogs about green things.
Alisa Gravits, executive director for Co-op America talked about their 12 step program. What is it about 12 steps? Can’t we do anything without 12 steps? Gez. Anyway, Alisa laid out the 12 steps that we all need to take according to her, to save the world. Well, now that you put it that way, if we can save the world in just twelve steps , why not give it a try. Alisa’s presentation on April 21st in Chicago had a few changes to the 12 steps posted on their website, but five out of the twelve steps on both lists deal with electric energy production.
Step 6- Increase Solar Energy capacity by 700 times what it is today. Since solar or photovoltaic electricity production is estimated to be less than .05 % of today’s electricity generation mix, this will be a big step. The biggest step here includes changes in lifestyles. As the old saying about successful marriage goes, "low expectations" will be the key here. Business, homeowners and renters will have to build their awareness and skill at reducing energy use. As one speaker gleefully noted in another session, "its like tax free savings".While the Solar cheerleaders brag about the Navajo Nation’s emergence into the 21st century due to solar energy, the difference between a 1,000 square foot hogan and the rest of the housing market is substantial. It’s a good thing that Co-op America plans to take 40 years to get there. One benefit of attending the Green Festival was that solar vendors did a good job demonstrating that solar energy can make a contribution to house hold energy demands in almost every part of the nation. They displayed many examples of homes in the Midwest that where using net metering and going solar, proving that solar energy is not just a sun belt phenomenon.
Step 7 - Increase wind power by 75 times current output. This is also a big one. Questions about interfacing, scheduling and dispatch-ability, still haunt this option. Is the wind blowing hard enough to make money, or just annoy the locals. What fills in the blanks on the quiet days and how will it be scheduled? The utility industry rightfully worries that winds reputation for functioning at a 25% reliability factor does not meet the industry standards for reliability that are now enforced by FERC. Will broad adoption of wind energy even out these load supply problems? Only time will tell, but for now, utilities will still feel that they must meet demand with base load generation that is in the 85 to 95 percent reliability range. So far wind can’t do that. This means that customers maybe paying for duplicate facilities every time new wind generation facilities come on line.
Steps 8 and 9 - Phase out coal fired power plants altogether and Replace 1,400 coal plants with natural gas fired plants. Alisa implied that this option could be done by converting existing plants to natural gas fired facilities. Aside from the engineering issues, I thought we were running out of natural gas. Natural gas price increases have nearly doubled in the last five years and increases are still predicted for the future. During her presentation Alisa was very emphatic about the nation being able to do this for as little as "an extra 1 cent increase" at the retail level. She said we must resist the "scare tactics" and "foot stomping" from the utility industry. She may be right, but expect some foot stomping anyway. Most utilities are predicting annual rate increases in the 4 to 10 percent range all across the nation. A four to ten percent increase on 8 cents/kWh means rates will rise $0.0032 to $0.004. While this sounds easy enough to take, remember that doing this every year for the next ten years means that your rates will be three point two to four cents more per kWh. This sounds like a small price to pay to save the world, yet the electric utility industry will still complain. Why? Because they really believe that all the customer wants is the cheapest electricity possible. And, for most of the nation they will be right, unless we can all change our attitudes about the cost of electricity.
Step 10 - Increase Coal plant Efficiency from 32% to 60 %- Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle (IGCC)generation maybe able to do just that. Yet the utility industry still worries that this is an unproven technology. Today, they are right. Despite the hype, only three IGCC plants are providing commercial production today. While the environmental advocates decry the utility foot dragging on this issue, the fact is that very few of us drive experimental automobiles and even fewer fly experimental aircraft. There is of course a logical reason for this that has not been lost on utility executives and investors across the nation.
All in all I had a great time at the first Annual Chicago Green Festival and I hope they do it again. Its nice being surrounded by like minded people expressing support for causes that are important to the long term health of the earth and humankind. If my late father in law had witnessed this gathering, he would have said, "Jesus, do all these people vote?". Sadly, I would guess not.
Of course, unless you are a frog, you can’t be green without some consideration to the source of power that runs your home and your computer and lets you keep up with blogs about green things.
Alisa Gravits, executive director for Co-op America talked about their 12 step program. What is it about 12 steps? Can’t we do anything without 12 steps? Gez. Anyway, Alisa laid out the 12 steps that we all need to take according to her, to save the world. Well, now that you put it that way, if we can save the world in just twelve steps , why not give it a try. Alisa’s presentation on April 21st in Chicago had a few changes to the 12 steps posted on their website, but five out of the twelve steps on both lists deal with electric energy production.
Step 6- Increase Solar Energy capacity by 700 times what it is today. Since solar or photovoltaic electricity production is estimated to be less than .05 % of today’s electricity generation mix, this will be a big step. The biggest step here includes changes in lifestyles. As the old saying about successful marriage goes, "low expectations" will be the key here. Business, homeowners and renters will have to build their awareness and skill at reducing energy use. As one speaker gleefully noted in another session, "its like tax free savings".While the Solar cheerleaders brag about the Navajo Nation’s emergence into the 21st century due to solar energy, the difference between a 1,000 square foot hogan and the rest of the housing market is substantial. It’s a good thing that Co-op America plans to take 40 years to get there. One benefit of attending the Green Festival was that solar vendors did a good job demonstrating that solar energy can make a contribution to house hold energy demands in almost every part of the nation. They displayed many examples of homes in the Midwest that where using net metering and going solar, proving that solar energy is not just a sun belt phenomenon.
Step 7 - Increase wind power by 75 times current output. This is also a big one. Questions about interfacing, scheduling and dispatch-ability, still haunt this option. Is the wind blowing hard enough to make money, or just annoy the locals. What fills in the blanks on the quiet days and how will it be scheduled? The utility industry rightfully worries that winds reputation for functioning at a 25% reliability factor does not meet the industry standards for reliability that are now enforced by FERC. Will broad adoption of wind energy even out these load supply problems? Only time will tell, but for now, utilities will still feel that they must meet demand with base load generation that is in the 85 to 95 percent reliability range. So far wind can’t do that. This means that customers maybe paying for duplicate facilities every time new wind generation facilities come on line.
Steps 8 and 9 - Phase out coal fired power plants altogether and Replace 1,400 coal plants with natural gas fired plants. Alisa implied that this option could be done by converting existing plants to natural gas fired facilities. Aside from the engineering issues, I thought we were running out of natural gas. Natural gas price increases have nearly doubled in the last five years and increases are still predicted for the future. During her presentation Alisa was very emphatic about the nation being able to do this for as little as "an extra 1 cent increase" at the retail level. She said we must resist the "scare tactics" and "foot stomping" from the utility industry. She may be right, but expect some foot stomping anyway. Most utilities are predicting annual rate increases in the 4 to 10 percent range all across the nation. A four to ten percent increase on 8 cents/kWh means rates will rise $0.0032 to $0.004. While this sounds easy enough to take, remember that doing this every year for the next ten years means that your rates will be three point two to four cents more per kWh. This sounds like a small price to pay to save the world, yet the electric utility industry will still complain. Why? Because they really believe that all the customer wants is the cheapest electricity possible. And, for most of the nation they will be right, unless we can all change our attitudes about the cost of electricity.
Step 10 - Increase Coal plant Efficiency from 32% to 60 %- Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle (IGCC)generation maybe able to do just that. Yet the utility industry still worries that this is an unproven technology. Today, they are right. Despite the hype, only three IGCC plants are providing commercial production today. While the environmental advocates decry the utility foot dragging on this issue, the fact is that very few of us drive experimental automobiles and even fewer fly experimental aircraft. There is of course a logical reason for this that has not been lost on utility executives and investors across the nation.
All in all I had a great time at the first Annual Chicago Green Festival and I hope they do it again. Its nice being surrounded by like minded people expressing support for causes that are important to the long term health of the earth and humankind. If my late father in law had witnessed this gathering, he would have said, "Jesus, do all these people vote?". Sadly, I would guess not.
Wednesday, April 4, 2007
Supreme Court Message Makes Energy Conservation Hit Home
by Mark Daily
If the recent US Supreme Court decision on CO2 and Greenhouse gas regulation is as serious as everyone says it is, energy conservation just got a huge boost. Sarah Kessinger, writing for the Harris News Service reports that the April 3rd US Supreme Court decision labeling CO2 as an air quality component will have long term planning and financial impacts on the members of the Sunflower Generation and Transmission Cooperative. That could be the understatement of the year. This impact will be felt by all generation and transmission companies as well as distribution utilities across the nation.
While several states including California and Vermont have passed laws regulating CO2 and other green house gaze emissions, the EPA and most states have refused to accept that these gases should be a part of air quality regulation. Now the verdict is in. By a 5-4 vote the US Supreme Court majority opinion from Justice Stevens says, "Under the clear terms of the Clean Air Act, EPA can avoid taking further action only if it determines that greenhouse gases do not contribute to climate change or if it provides some reasonable explanation as to why it cannot or will not exercise its discretion to determine whether they do."
The auto industry tipped the feds hand by challenging several states regulation of automobile emissions and CAFÉ mileage standards. Reminds me of the old saying, “ be careful what you ask for, you might just get it”. While the next move is clearly the EPA’s, executives in the electric utility industry as well as the auto industry are noticeably shaken by the ruling. With over 200 coal fired power plants on the drawing boards or in the regulatory and planning pipeline, the implications are that any company producing CO2 or any of the identified green house gases must now factor in new costs. These costs will certainly expand from energy conservation and demand side management programs to carbon sequestration, carbon taxes and power plant system modifications. For the nation as a whole and for consumers specifically, this means utility bills are going up.
Some expect the increase to hit pocket books gradually as new regulations trickle into efinto effect. Others worry that the 5-4 ruling will have an immediate impact on financing for investments and construction throughout all industries related to fossil fuels. Amory Lovin’s "Negawatt" campaign may finally get that push over the top to make energy conservation and energy management the mainstream tools saving corporate as well as home owner budgets.
So, now, what will you do? Will you get that energy audit now, or wait until your rates climb faster than today. Have your rates gone up? Do you know for sure? Why not? Experts estimate that simply becoming more aware of your home energy use will knock off 4% from your bill. So, you don’t necessarily have to buy anything. All you have to do is read, decide and act. Well, of course its not that easy is it? Otherwise we would have all done it already. The best and cheapest way to reduce greenhouse gas and CO2 production is to avoid energy use. The only way to avoid energy use is to turn whatever it is that is using energy off or find similar equipment that uses less energy. There really are no other answers, no magic boxes or potions. Reducing CO2 and green house gas production requires action. Since we as a nation tend to avoid difficult decisions until failing to act becomes more expensive than acting, this will be a difficult time for everyone.
My advice is to get smart fast. Find out what eats energy at your house. You don’t have to make changes or take action or buy new appliances or burn down your house. Just, start learning about your home’s energy appetite. Find out how many kilowatt hours (kWh) hours per month and per year are used at your house. If you use gas, find out how many gallons of propane or therms or CCF’s of natural gas your house uses. Call your utility company if you don’t keep your own records. Utility companies always keep the last six months of energy use data and many of them keep longer records. Home energy auditors typically check out the last three years of energy use data before they make their report. So, try to find three years worth of data. You look at three years of data to smooth out mistakes in management (e.g. someone left the heater on and the windows open during spring break vacation last year) or unusually cold or hot seasonal temperatures. Convert your three years of data into monthly averages. This then, becomes your performance yard stick.
Now with your total average monthly electricity and gas use numbers in hand find out what appliances and equipment eat that energy. Go room by room and make an energy use inventory. List gas appliances as well as electricity using appliances. Start in the kitchen since that usually makes the longest list of energy using devices. Then hit the laundry or utility room, to get the water and space heating equipment. Then inventory the main living or family room where all of the gadgets and entertainment equipment live. Now you are almost home free. Bedrooms and bathrooms generally don’t have much to list .
Get everything. If you have a six bulb vanity light in the master bathroom check to see if all six bulbs are the same wattage and list the total watts for that appliance. Don’t worry about how much total monthly energy these pieces of equipment use just yet. Simply make a list. Why just the list? Two reasons. Figuring out how much energy things use per month can be a real pain in the neck and you don’t want to give up before you make a list of everything in the house, and you can use the same list for your insurance company if you ever have to prove what was stolen or burned up.
Once you have your list, find a comfortable chair with good lighting, grab a calculator and put on about two hours worth of your favorite music. Hey, if this was easy we would have done it during the last rate increase.
Now you have to figure out how long each piece of equipment is on in a typical month. I actually like to do this on a computer spreadsheet, even though it uses energy, just because I like to play with the numbers. I like to see what might happen if I changed every 100 watt incandescent bulb in the house to a comparable light output 25 watt compact fluorescent bulb. Or, check to see how much difference it makes if the kids watch one hour of TV instead of twenty - things like that.
Lots of equipment goes on and off without you doing anything. It is hard to estimate costs for some of these appliances. Web sites offer handy averages for a family of four or "typical" energy use figures for many of these standard appliances. Refrigeration, water wells, computer equipment, heating systems, and water heaters are just some of the more challenging appliances to quantify.
So, now add them up. If your total electricity or gas use is more than ten percent off your totals, look at your list again and see if you made any obvious mistakes, like forgetting to convert watts to kilowatts or minutes to hours. If you used a spreadsheet, you can sort by your estimated kWh, gallons, or CCF to get the big users at the head of the list. See if you agree. If that closet light bulb that is never on, ends up at the top of the list, see what you did wrong, fix it and re-sort. Keep going like this until you are in that 10 percent range. If you still aren’t there, look at those appliance for which you used national averages. If those averages are for a family of four and its just you and your cat, cut those numbers down by three quarters. If you used average family of four numbers and you live with all of your relatives in the same house, do a head count and adjust the family of four numbers to make sense to your situation. Now, look at the total again. You should be close.
I have been in hundreds of homes and always came up with an inventory number that fits the energy bill records in a way agreeable to the home owner. So, keep trying.
The reward is that you now have a feel for what you really pay for in energy use. Now you can start making informed management decisions about your house and how you use energy.
Maybe you can quit yelling at the kids to turn the lights off and start yelling at your spouse to quit turning up the heat. Or, maybe you don’t really need to keep your Arc Welder on stand buy to make that quick repair. Do you have something like a hot tub or a engine block heater or a stock tank heater that could be put on a timer? Now you can estimate your savings for every hour that you keep something off.
Don’t forget to check out your building's insulation package. Insulation levels, window and door quality and weatherstripping all determine how many hours your heater runs. The DOE recently announced grants available for weatherizing your home.
If you can’t stand the thought of your neighbors accusing you of being green or a liberal, you can defend your actions under recent homeland security issues. Or, maybe you can say you are supporting the troops by trying to avoid foreign wars over energy. It really doesn’t matter what your political or religious convictions are, the money you save could go towards anything you like, you get to chose. But, if you don’t do anything, the US Supreme Court decision means that more and more of your hard earned money is going to utility companies.
If the recent US Supreme Court decision on CO2 and Greenhouse gas regulation is as serious as everyone says it is, energy conservation just got a huge boost. Sarah Kessinger, writing for the Harris News Service reports that the April 3rd US Supreme Court decision labeling CO2 as an air quality component will have long term planning and financial impacts on the members of the Sunflower Generation and Transmission Cooperative. That could be the understatement of the year. This impact will be felt by all generation and transmission companies as well as distribution utilities across the nation.
While several states including California and Vermont have passed laws regulating CO2 and other green house gaze emissions, the EPA and most states have refused to accept that these gases should be a part of air quality regulation. Now the verdict is in. By a 5-4 vote the US Supreme Court majority opinion from Justice Stevens says, "Under the clear terms of the Clean Air Act, EPA can avoid taking further action only if it determines that greenhouse gases do not contribute to climate change or if it provides some reasonable explanation as to why it cannot or will not exercise its discretion to determine whether they do."
The auto industry tipped the feds hand by challenging several states regulation of automobile emissions and CAFÉ mileage standards. Reminds me of the old saying, “ be careful what you ask for, you might just get it”. While the next move is clearly the EPA’s, executives in the electric utility industry as well as the auto industry are noticeably shaken by the ruling. With over 200 coal fired power plants on the drawing boards or in the regulatory and planning pipeline, the implications are that any company producing CO2 or any of the identified green house gases must now factor in new costs. These costs will certainly expand from energy conservation and demand side management programs to carbon sequestration, carbon taxes and power plant system modifications. For the nation as a whole and for consumers specifically, this means utility bills are going up.
Some expect the increase to hit pocket books gradually as new regulations trickle into efinto effect. Others worry that the 5-4 ruling will have an immediate impact on financing for investments and construction throughout all industries related to fossil fuels. Amory Lovin’s "Negawatt" campaign may finally get that push over the top to make energy conservation and energy management the mainstream tools saving corporate as well as home owner budgets.
So, now, what will you do? Will you get that energy audit now, or wait until your rates climb faster than today. Have your rates gone up? Do you know for sure? Why not? Experts estimate that simply becoming more aware of your home energy use will knock off 4% from your bill. So, you don’t necessarily have to buy anything. All you have to do is read, decide and act. Well, of course its not that easy is it? Otherwise we would have all done it already. The best and cheapest way to reduce greenhouse gas and CO2 production is to avoid energy use. The only way to avoid energy use is to turn whatever it is that is using energy off or find similar equipment that uses less energy. There really are no other answers, no magic boxes or potions. Reducing CO2 and green house gas production requires action. Since we as a nation tend to avoid difficult decisions until failing to act becomes more expensive than acting, this will be a difficult time for everyone.
My advice is to get smart fast. Find out what eats energy at your house. You don’t have to make changes or take action or buy new appliances or burn down your house. Just, start learning about your home’s energy appetite. Find out how many kilowatt hours (kWh) hours per month and per year are used at your house. If you use gas, find out how many gallons of propane or therms or CCF’s of natural gas your house uses. Call your utility company if you don’t keep your own records. Utility companies always keep the last six months of energy use data and many of them keep longer records. Home energy auditors typically check out the last three years of energy use data before they make their report. So, try to find three years worth of data. You look at three years of data to smooth out mistakes in management (e.g. someone left the heater on and the windows open during spring break vacation last year) or unusually cold or hot seasonal temperatures. Convert your three years of data into monthly averages. This then, becomes your performance yard stick.
Now with your total average monthly electricity and gas use numbers in hand find out what appliances and equipment eat that energy. Go room by room and make an energy use inventory. List gas appliances as well as electricity using appliances. Start in the kitchen since that usually makes the longest list of energy using devices. Then hit the laundry or utility room, to get the water and space heating equipment. Then inventory the main living or family room where all of the gadgets and entertainment equipment live. Now you are almost home free. Bedrooms and bathrooms generally don’t have much to list .
Get everything. If you have a six bulb vanity light in the master bathroom check to see if all six bulbs are the same wattage and list the total watts for that appliance. Don’t worry about how much total monthly energy these pieces of equipment use just yet. Simply make a list. Why just the list? Two reasons. Figuring out how much energy things use per month can be a real pain in the neck and you don’t want to give up before you make a list of everything in the house, and you can use the same list for your insurance company if you ever have to prove what was stolen or burned up.
Once you have your list, find a comfortable chair with good lighting, grab a calculator and put on about two hours worth of your favorite music. Hey, if this was easy we would have done it during the last rate increase.
Now you have to figure out how long each piece of equipment is on in a typical month. I actually like to do this on a computer spreadsheet, even though it uses energy, just because I like to play with the numbers. I like to see what might happen if I changed every 100 watt incandescent bulb in the house to a comparable light output 25 watt compact fluorescent bulb. Or, check to see how much difference it makes if the kids watch one hour of TV instead of twenty - things like that.
Lots of equipment goes on and off without you doing anything. It is hard to estimate costs for some of these appliances. Web sites offer handy averages for a family of four or "typical" energy use figures for many of these standard appliances. Refrigeration, water wells, computer equipment, heating systems, and water heaters are just some of the more challenging appliances to quantify.
So, now add them up. If your total electricity or gas use is more than ten percent off your totals, look at your list again and see if you made any obvious mistakes, like forgetting to convert watts to kilowatts or minutes to hours. If you used a spreadsheet, you can sort by your estimated kWh, gallons, or CCF to get the big users at the head of the list. See if you agree. If that closet light bulb that is never on, ends up at the top of the list, see what you did wrong, fix it and re-sort. Keep going like this until you are in that 10 percent range. If you still aren’t there, look at those appliance for which you used national averages. If those averages are for a family of four and its just you and your cat, cut those numbers down by three quarters. If you used average family of four numbers and you live with all of your relatives in the same house, do a head count and adjust the family of four numbers to make sense to your situation. Now, look at the total again. You should be close.
I have been in hundreds of homes and always came up with an inventory number that fits the energy bill records in a way agreeable to the home owner. So, keep trying.
The reward is that you now have a feel for what you really pay for in energy use. Now you can start making informed management decisions about your house and how you use energy.
Maybe you can quit yelling at the kids to turn the lights off and start yelling at your spouse to quit turning up the heat. Or, maybe you don’t really need to keep your Arc Welder on stand buy to make that quick repair. Do you have something like a hot tub or a engine block heater or a stock tank heater that could be put on a timer? Now you can estimate your savings for every hour that you keep something off.
Don’t forget to check out your building's insulation package. Insulation levels, window and door quality and weatherstripping all determine how many hours your heater runs. The DOE recently announced grants available for weatherizing your home.
If you can’t stand the thought of your neighbors accusing you of being green or a liberal, you can defend your actions under recent homeland security issues. Or, maybe you can say you are supporting the troops by trying to avoid foreign wars over energy. It really doesn’t matter what your political or religious convictions are, the money you save could go towards anything you like, you get to chose. But, if you don’t do anything, the US Supreme Court decision means that more and more of your hard earned money is going to utility companies.
Thursday, March 22, 2007
Electricity Power Generation Is Not Cheaper at Night
Let me say this again. Electricity Generation is NOT cheaper at night. It doesn’t matter who tells you that it is. Let me say it again. Electricity is not cheaper at night. Yet, this lie continues to be passed around as fact. As one current administration has found, the way to make a lie true, is just to keep repeating the lie over and over again. So this lie is now fact.
The March 20th, 2007 "Backstory" of the Christian Science Monitor picked up and repeated this often heard lie as though it were true. You would think that a prestigious newspaper like the Monitor would do some fact checking, but the myth that they repeated has become so prevalent that the true story I am about to relate to you may seem hard to believe. Honest it is true, I was there.
The repeated lie was blurted out in an otherwise inspiring article about electric cars and their ability to reduce harmful emissions as well as reduce owner operating costs by charging batteries at night. Correspondent Frank Kosa wrote, " Cars are usually charged at night when electricity is cheapest". His statement is only true for those customers that sign up for special rates with Southern California Edison which serves the Santa Monica California area.
Here is the true story. It happened when I used to work for an electric utility. One of my customer service representatives buzzed me on the intercom one afternoon saying she had an angry customer on the phone demanding to speak to a manager about their electric bill. Since I was the employee’s supervisor, it was my job to work with the angry customer. I took a deep breath, consulted my handy wallet size helper " How to deal with angry customers" and pushed the phone button. " I am being ripped off by you people and I want you to make an adjustment on my bill", the angry voice shouted through the phone.
Step One, left the customer speak. He continued, "I read in the paper where its cheaper to use electricity at night and exactly thirty days before the end date of this bill, I started making sure that all of my electricity was used during those hours posted in the paper for night time rates". And , the voice said with a quick gasp for air, "my bill was just the same this month as it has always been. You need to do something".
Step Two - Make sure you really understand the details. "So", I said calmly. "I can tell that you are really upset. Just let me ask you a few questions to make sure that I really understand your situation". " For over thirty days you made sure that you used electricity only between the night time hours by turning off your breakers and equipment during the day. After doing this you expected your electric bill to go down, is that correct?" "Your damned right", he jumped back.
"OK. I understand", I assured him. "When our customer service representative told me that you were on the line, I pulled up your billing record and I can see that you are right, your bill really is about the same as it was last month". "I also see that you are on our general service residential rate".
I went on to explain that our general service electric rate, like most every residential rate in the nation, charged the same amount per kilowatt hour (kWh) no matter which time of day he used electricity. I continued to explain that in order to get cheaper rates at night the customer needed to sign up for a special Time of Use or Off Peak Rate and have a special residential meter installed that could keep track of when electricity was being used at his location.
So for all of you that have been watching the clock and maddly flipping power switches on or off at appointed times please stop and make sure that your efforts will be rewarded. It is not and never has been a matter of just using the juice at night. If you are not on a time of use or off peak rate you are wasting your time. Here is how it works, more or less.
Electric Utility Transmission and Generation Companies (G&T’s) or wholesale power suppliers, gain incredible efficiencies and therefore save big bucks when they can keep their power generation plants running at a constant medium speed. If they have to ramp things down for low load periods they loose money. Like wise, when they have to ramp things up or buy spot market generation to meet higher than expected loads they also loose money.
Steady as she goes provides the optimal operating cost environment when it comes to power generation. The problem is, that is not how we use electricity. When you look at your utility’s line graph of power or kilowatt hour (kWh) sales in 24 hour increments, you will always see ups and downs. And, if you compare consecutive 24 hour periods you will see a pattern of energy use that generally repeats itself day after day all year long. There may be some changes seasonally in cold or hot climates but even those peaks and valleys have a pattern. How else do you think the G&T’s know how much coal or gas to buy and when to pour it on the fire? Utility executives call this dispatch-able power.
This is one reason that many utilities seem opposed to Renewable power generation facilities connected to their systems. They are never real sure when the wind will blow. And, they are pretty sure that the solar panels will go down with the sun, just when they need that evening peak power as you get home from work. That’s why they call these two renewable energy sources non-dispatch-able.
G&T’s usually bill their distribution companies, that’s the folks you buy your power from, two ways. They bill on the total kilowatt hours used during the billing period, called total kWh or "energy". And, they bill on the highest peak energy of Kilowatt demand for the month , called Peak KW or "demand". That peak demand almost always occurs during the same time as the daily peaks for energy use that season. So, if your utlitity can shave the size of the KW peak at that time, they save money. As an insentive to get their customers to help them shave that peak, they offer Time of Use or Off peak rates hoping that you will sign up and help them cut their power bill. If it works they can pass the savings on to you.
But, BIG BUT, you have to sign up for the rate. These are special rates and you need to sign up for two reasons. One, you will need a more sophisticated and expensive meter that can document the kWh used during the Off Peak time as well as the kWh used during the On Peak time. Sometimes this means you must pay a higher minimum monthly service charge so don’t forget to factor that into your calculations. Two, you probably need to agree to pay a penalty or higher rate for kWh used during the On peak time. If they don’t offer a real incentive to get you to use your power Off Peak, why bother?
For example in Santa Monica Southern Cal Edison has a Time of Use rate for homes where most electricity is used between 6:00 PM and 10:00 AM. Other utilities may offer two off peak times during the day depending on their daily load profile. Southern Cal Edison also offers a special rate for electric vehicles for homes where qualifying electric vehicles are charged..
Customers that have automated equipment to turn their equipment on and off have lower bills than customers that try to match the Off Peak times on their own manually. People forget or get sick or take holidays. Programmed time clocks and equipment are well worth the expense if your lifestyle can handle the restrictions of your local utility’s special rates. The best thing to do is call and talk to them about your plans ahead of time. Make sure that your hard work and money will be rewarded with real cost savings on your utility bill.
I repeat "electricity is not cheaper at night", unless your utlity has a special rate and you and your house are signed up for it.
The March 20th, 2007 "Backstory" of the Christian Science Monitor picked up and repeated this often heard lie as though it were true. You would think that a prestigious newspaper like the Monitor would do some fact checking, but the myth that they repeated has become so prevalent that the true story I am about to relate to you may seem hard to believe. Honest it is true, I was there.
The repeated lie was blurted out in an otherwise inspiring article about electric cars and their ability to reduce harmful emissions as well as reduce owner operating costs by charging batteries at night. Correspondent Frank Kosa wrote, " Cars are usually charged at night when electricity is cheapest". His statement is only true for those customers that sign up for special rates with Southern California Edison which serves the Santa Monica California area.
Here is the true story. It happened when I used to work for an electric utility. One of my customer service representatives buzzed me on the intercom one afternoon saying she had an angry customer on the phone demanding to speak to a manager about their electric bill. Since I was the employee’s supervisor, it was my job to work with the angry customer. I took a deep breath, consulted my handy wallet size helper " How to deal with angry customers" and pushed the phone button. " I am being ripped off by you people and I want you to make an adjustment on my bill", the angry voice shouted through the phone.
Step One, left the customer speak. He continued, "I read in the paper where its cheaper to use electricity at night and exactly thirty days before the end date of this bill, I started making sure that all of my electricity was used during those hours posted in the paper for night time rates". And , the voice said with a quick gasp for air, "my bill was just the same this month as it has always been. You need to do something".
Step Two - Make sure you really understand the details. "So", I said calmly. "I can tell that you are really upset. Just let me ask you a few questions to make sure that I really understand your situation". " For over thirty days you made sure that you used electricity only between the night time hours by turning off your breakers and equipment during the day. After doing this you expected your electric bill to go down, is that correct?" "Your damned right", he jumped back.
"OK. I understand", I assured him. "When our customer service representative told me that you were on the line, I pulled up your billing record and I can see that you are right, your bill really is about the same as it was last month". "I also see that you are on our general service residential rate".
I went on to explain that our general service electric rate, like most every residential rate in the nation, charged the same amount per kilowatt hour (kWh) no matter which time of day he used electricity. I continued to explain that in order to get cheaper rates at night the customer needed to sign up for a special Time of Use or Off Peak Rate and have a special residential meter installed that could keep track of when electricity was being used at his location.
So for all of you that have been watching the clock and maddly flipping power switches on or off at appointed times please stop and make sure that your efforts will be rewarded. It is not and never has been a matter of just using the juice at night. If you are not on a time of use or off peak rate you are wasting your time. Here is how it works, more or less.
Electric Utility Transmission and Generation Companies (G&T’s) or wholesale power suppliers, gain incredible efficiencies and therefore save big bucks when they can keep their power generation plants running at a constant medium speed. If they have to ramp things down for low load periods they loose money. Like wise, when they have to ramp things up or buy spot market generation to meet higher than expected loads they also loose money.
Steady as she goes provides the optimal operating cost environment when it comes to power generation. The problem is, that is not how we use electricity. When you look at your utility’s line graph of power or kilowatt hour (kWh) sales in 24 hour increments, you will always see ups and downs. And, if you compare consecutive 24 hour periods you will see a pattern of energy use that generally repeats itself day after day all year long. There may be some changes seasonally in cold or hot climates but even those peaks and valleys have a pattern. How else do you think the G&T’s know how much coal or gas to buy and when to pour it on the fire? Utility executives call this dispatch-able power.
This is one reason that many utilities seem opposed to Renewable power generation facilities connected to their systems. They are never real sure when the wind will blow. And, they are pretty sure that the solar panels will go down with the sun, just when they need that evening peak power as you get home from work. That’s why they call these two renewable energy sources non-dispatch-able.
G&T’s usually bill their distribution companies, that’s the folks you buy your power from, two ways. They bill on the total kilowatt hours used during the billing period, called total kWh or "energy". And, they bill on the highest peak energy of Kilowatt demand for the month , called Peak KW or "demand". That peak demand almost always occurs during the same time as the daily peaks for energy use that season. So, if your utlitity can shave the size of the KW peak at that time, they save money. As an insentive to get their customers to help them shave that peak, they offer Time of Use or Off peak rates hoping that you will sign up and help them cut their power bill. If it works they can pass the savings on to you.
But, BIG BUT, you have to sign up for the rate. These are special rates and you need to sign up for two reasons. One, you will need a more sophisticated and expensive meter that can document the kWh used during the Off Peak time as well as the kWh used during the On Peak time. Sometimes this means you must pay a higher minimum monthly service charge so don’t forget to factor that into your calculations. Two, you probably need to agree to pay a penalty or higher rate for kWh used during the On peak time. If they don’t offer a real incentive to get you to use your power Off Peak, why bother?
For example in Santa Monica Southern Cal Edison has a Time of Use rate for homes where most electricity is used between 6:00 PM and 10:00 AM. Other utilities may offer two off peak times during the day depending on their daily load profile. Southern Cal Edison also offers a special rate for electric vehicles for homes where qualifying electric vehicles are charged..
Customers that have automated equipment to turn their equipment on and off have lower bills than customers that try to match the Off Peak times on their own manually. People forget or get sick or take holidays. Programmed time clocks and equipment are well worth the expense if your lifestyle can handle the restrictions of your local utility’s special rates. The best thing to do is call and talk to them about your plans ahead of time. Make sure that your hard work and money will be rewarded with real cost savings on your utility bill.
I repeat "electricity is not cheaper at night", unless your utlity has a special rate and you and your house are signed up for it.
Friday, March 9, 2007
Is Your Electricity Subsidized?
While the term "subsidy" has taken on derogatory implications, the fact is that in spite of our so called free market economy, most of the things we buy, including electricity have some financial help from Uncle Sam. It may be a simple adjustment in federal taxes or tax credits available for certain industries, it may be federal funding of research and development, it maybe discounted loan programs. What ever it is, from automobiles to grapefruit, there is something that someone can call a "Subsidy". Investor owned utilities(IOU’s), municipal owned utilities (MUNI’s), and member owned utilities (COOPS) all get subsidized in some way. So, get over it.
The question you should ask is not who gets a subsidy , but rather who benefits from the subsidy and do those subsidies support industries that are good for the long term health of the nation and the World? In the case of electricity generation, they do, if you believe that price is all that matters. Our electric rates nation wide would be higher, maybe much higher, if it were not for the maze of tax incentives and benefits available to those making electricity.
Our collective sense of things is that the big guys, king coal, nuclear power and natural gas get bigger subsidies then the little guys like wind, solar, energy conservation and bio fuels. And, if you thought that, you, would be right. In a year 2000 Federal Report (Number SR/OIAF/2000-02 http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/servicerpt/subsidy1/index.html ); the numbers show that in 1999 base load generation from fossil fuels was supported 2.2 times more than energy conservation and 15.35 times more than renewable technologies.
According to the executive summary of the 2000 report, "Federal subsidies for transformation and end-use activities are estimated to be $2.2 billion in fiscal year 1999, a decline of about 10 percent in real terms from the total found for similar items in fiscal year 1992 (Table ES1 and Figure ES1).execsummary_fnotes.htmlIt is estimated that direct subsidies--the sum of direct expenditures and tax expenditures--totaled $1.8 billion in fiscal year 1999, of which direct expenditures totaled $1.4 billion. R&D subsidies accounted for the remainder, just over $0.45 billion."
The 2005 Energy Act promises to promote energy conservation and renewables, yet so far the amount of support and subsidy still weighs in heavier for coal(big emphasis on clean coal technologies) and nuclear energy than it does for conservation and renewables.
Meeting the electric energy needs of this nation will require subsidies on a more even playing field that will help fledgling industries compete against the old timers decades of federal support. Clean coal, safe nuclear generation, hydro- electric production, and renewables must all be evaluated for the contribution that they can make to meet the needs without creating long lasting environmental programs. But, this wont be cheap.
Residential electricity rates across the nation have increased faster than the Consumer Price Index for many years.
Consumer Price Index Increase - All Urban Areas
2003 -1.9%
2004 -3.3%
2005 - 3.4%
2006 - 2.5%
Four Year Annual Avg
2.8%
US Department of Labor Statistics ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/special.requests/cpi/cpiai.txt
Average Retail Price of Electricity to Consumer
Year Cents/kWh Percent increase
2003 8.72 3.32%
2004 8.98 2.98%
2005 9.46 5.35%
2006 10.46 10.57%
Four Year Annual Avg.
5.55%
Source: Energy Information Administration http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/epa/epat7p4.html#_ftn2
Get used to rising rates. There is no way we can move into an era of less dependence on fossil fuels without paying more at the meter.
Recent claims of victory by environmental groups over the apparent retreat of TXU investors over plans to build 11 new coal generation facilities, could be hollow chest thumping, if other generation sources don’t surface to meet the need. Sure, TXU may have over-estimated load growth, just to look like good guys when they agreed to stop plans for 8 coal plants, but some day load will exceed supply if current trends continue.
Changing the paltry contribution of renewables to the nation’s generation fuel mix will take a lot more than chasing off coal plant investors.
The question you should ask is not who gets a subsidy , but rather who benefits from the subsidy and do those subsidies support industries that are good for the long term health of the nation and the World? In the case of electricity generation, they do, if you believe that price is all that matters. Our electric rates nation wide would be higher, maybe much higher, if it were not for the maze of tax incentives and benefits available to those making electricity.
Our collective sense of things is that the big guys, king coal, nuclear power and natural gas get bigger subsidies then the little guys like wind, solar, energy conservation and bio fuels. And, if you thought that, you, would be right. In a year 2000 Federal Report (Number SR/OIAF/2000-02 http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/servicerpt/subsidy1/index.html ); the numbers show that in 1999 base load generation from fossil fuels was supported 2.2 times more than energy conservation and 15.35 times more than renewable technologies.
According to the executive summary of the 2000 report, "Federal subsidies for transformation and end-use activities are estimated to be $2.2 billion in fiscal year 1999, a decline of about 10 percent in real terms from the total found for similar items in fiscal year 1992 (Table ES1 and Figure ES1).execsummary_fnotes.htmlIt is estimated that direct subsidies--the sum of direct expenditures and tax expenditures--totaled $1.8 billion in fiscal year 1999, of which direct expenditures totaled $1.4 billion. R&D subsidies accounted for the remainder, just over $0.45 billion."
The 2005 Energy Act promises to promote energy conservation and renewables, yet so far the amount of support and subsidy still weighs in heavier for coal(big emphasis on clean coal technologies) and nuclear energy than it does for conservation and renewables.
Meeting the electric energy needs of this nation will require subsidies on a more even playing field that will help fledgling industries compete against the old timers decades of federal support. Clean coal, safe nuclear generation, hydro- electric production, and renewables must all be evaluated for the contribution that they can make to meet the needs without creating long lasting environmental programs. But, this wont be cheap.
Residential electricity rates across the nation have increased faster than the Consumer Price Index for many years.
Consumer Price Index Increase - All Urban Areas
2003 -1.9%
2004 -3.3%
2005 - 3.4%
2006 - 2.5%
Four Year Annual Avg
2.8%
US Department of Labor Statistics ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/special.requests/cpi/cpiai.txt
Average Retail Price of Electricity to Consumer
Year Cents/kWh Percent increase
2003 8.72 3.32%
2004 8.98 2.98%
2005 9.46 5.35%
2006 10.46 10.57%
Four Year Annual Avg.
5.55%
Source: Energy Information Administration http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/epa/epat7p4.html#_ftn2
Get used to rising rates. There is no way we can move into an era of less dependence on fossil fuels without paying more at the meter.
Recent claims of victory by environmental groups over the apparent retreat of TXU investors over plans to build 11 new coal generation facilities, could be hollow chest thumping, if other generation sources don’t surface to meet the need. Sure, TXU may have over-estimated load growth, just to look like good guys when they agreed to stop plans for 8 coal plants, but some day load will exceed supply if current trends continue.
Changing the paltry contribution of renewables to the nation’s generation fuel mix will take a lot more than chasing off coal plant investors.
Thursday, February 22, 2007
Electricity Generation Requires a New Way to Talk and Listen
We could save the Universe if we just learned how to talk to each other. In 2002 Adam Kahane wrote a wonderful article called "Changing the World by Changing How We Talk and Listen". Mr. Kahane lays out a compelling argument for why so many of our most complicated world problems never get solved. Not only do they never get solved, but some problems never seem to change. The vitriolic arguments use the same words and phrases over and over again until all sides are red in the face with frustration. While his article draws from his experience mediating factions during the Guatamala’s peace vision, his principles apply well to any area of conflict. He clearly shows why frustration grows and how to resolve it.
Today frustration is growing in the great debate about how to power our modern society. And, this debate is now officially mainstream as of last night. Last night I saw a REMAX Real Estate television commercial with a sharp looking couple cheerfully telling their wonderful REMAX real estate agent that they wanted a home powered by solar and wind energy and maybe even bio- gases. Then the mythical wife wrinkles her nose as pictures of dairy cows swirl by while she says, "Well, maybe not methane gas".
Living technicolor proof that what Carl Sagan said long ago is true now more than ever. "We live in a society exquisitely dependent on science and technology, in which hardly anyone knows anything about science and technology."
One solution may be to follow Adam Kahane’s prescription for talking and listening. He claims that there are "four distinct conversational modes". Every discussion, whether it focuses on how to stop the genocide of pregnant women stacked like cord wood in a mass grave or how to create electric energy reliability without green house gases, must go through each of these four distinct conversational modes. These modes are "Downloading, Debating, Reflective Dialogue and Generative Dialogue". No long term solutions to any serious problems have ever occurred without the stake holders or effected players getting together and working through all four of these modes in order. You can’t skip any of the steps and you can’t change the order of the progression without destroying trust. And trust, is the foundation of any problem’s solution. It can only be obtained if each mode is played out in order.
Today the electric industry, environmental groups, and your average electricity customer are stuck somewhere between Downloading and Debating. Downloading occurs when stakeholders repeat facts about their solution over and over again. They list the reasons their special solution is the only answer to the problem and they repeatedly dismiss anyone else’s solution as unrealistic. In our current debate, this is why utility executives fight tooth and toe nail against renewable portfolio standards and why environmental groups continually deride, coal, nuclear and large hydro power projects. Downloading keeps everyone stuck in a constant shouting match about potential solutions while one side accuses the other side of not understanding the real problem and not have the sense or vision to propose a real world solution. While we must go through this part of the discussion, Downloading offers nothing new. All sides get stuck in their own self confidence believing they have the solution while belittling other solutions. We don’t need more facts about fuels. We need to go beyond downloading facts to come up with a radical new solution. This is not an argument to wait until technology saves us with a magic energy pill. It is a plea for us to get the objective facts on the table and move to the next step.
Downloading "facts" as both sides see it, sets up the second mode of communication - Debating. Here we see more of what "is" but offer no new solutions to the problem. We talk about more coal or add the concept of clean coal. We talk about more solar and add Concentrating Solar Power. We throw acronyms around like CSP and IGCC. The discussion logjams into talking heads and dueling experts with the consumer shaking their heads in disgust as they head for the fridge for another cold beer. Debating fosters winners and losers, without getting to the real understanding of other solutions or the role of all solutions in solving the problem. This won’t happen until debating ends and understanding begins to dawn on all of the players.
This is where Reflective dialogue comes into play. It’s the light bulb going on when the person realizes," Oh yeah, I see now that a photovoltaic system will not meet my energy needs if I continue to demand this level of power". Or, it’s the utility executive that really begins to see that some of his customers are bailing from central station grids, changing their life styles to allow small scale wind and solar systems to meet their energy needs. Its making realistic assessments about the role of energy conservation. Its getting into each other’s heads and gaining empathy for the real world situation that the other person is coming from. Reflective Dialogue will not produce the answers to the puzzle, but it will set up the trust and understanding that is vital to getting to what Steven Covey calls the "Third Alternative". That is the solution that makes everyone pretty happy without making anyone feel terribly mad. It makes all stake holders winners because through Reflective dialogue they finally understand why that crazy SOB thinks the way that they think. It begins to give validity to multiple solutions and sets the foundation for the next mode of dialogue, Generative Dialogue.
According to Kahane, Generative Dialogue produces a "deeper unity of purpose". The big light bulb finally gets lit in each and every stake holder and every one realizes that the only way to stop the atrocities of war or save the world from energy related side effects , or power civilization without destroying it, is to come together and work together on that "Third Alternative" . The alternative that makes every stake holder look like a hero to their constituents. It’s the solution that allows everyone to go home with their heads held high taking rightful credit for solving the problem without sacrificing their sense of what is right.
This is where we as a nation and a world need to go when it comes to deciding our energy future. When history is written describing how this generation met the challenges of our time and produced a workable and healthy energy solution to power the future, the record will show that we went through each of these "four distinct conversational modes".
We must keep this conversation going until we can all collectively make it through all four modes. As the Guatemalans found during their peace initiative, the stakes are way too high to do anything else. Does this mean that all we have to do is go through the four steps and like the addict finishing the twelve step rehabilitation program all problems are solved? Of course not. There will be good days and bad days. There will still be debates and downloading, setbacks and discouragement. Clearly, the methods being used to solve the problem today are not working. Its time to try something different. "Insanity is repeating the same behavior and expecting a different result," said Werner Erhart.
It is time to stop the insanity.
Today frustration is growing in the great debate about how to power our modern society. And, this debate is now officially mainstream as of last night. Last night I saw a REMAX Real Estate television commercial with a sharp looking couple cheerfully telling their wonderful REMAX real estate agent that they wanted a home powered by solar and wind energy and maybe even bio- gases. Then the mythical wife wrinkles her nose as pictures of dairy cows swirl by while she says, "Well, maybe not methane gas".
Living technicolor proof that what Carl Sagan said long ago is true now more than ever. "We live in a society exquisitely dependent on science and technology, in which hardly anyone knows anything about science and technology."
One solution may be to follow Adam Kahane’s prescription for talking and listening. He claims that there are "four distinct conversational modes". Every discussion, whether it focuses on how to stop the genocide of pregnant women stacked like cord wood in a mass grave or how to create electric energy reliability without green house gases, must go through each of these four distinct conversational modes. These modes are "Downloading, Debating, Reflective Dialogue and Generative Dialogue". No long term solutions to any serious problems have ever occurred without the stake holders or effected players getting together and working through all four of these modes in order. You can’t skip any of the steps and you can’t change the order of the progression without destroying trust. And trust, is the foundation of any problem’s solution. It can only be obtained if each mode is played out in order.
Today the electric industry, environmental groups, and your average electricity customer are stuck somewhere between Downloading and Debating. Downloading occurs when stakeholders repeat facts about their solution over and over again. They list the reasons their special solution is the only answer to the problem and they repeatedly dismiss anyone else’s solution as unrealistic. In our current debate, this is why utility executives fight tooth and toe nail against renewable portfolio standards and why environmental groups continually deride, coal, nuclear and large hydro power projects. Downloading keeps everyone stuck in a constant shouting match about potential solutions while one side accuses the other side of not understanding the real problem and not have the sense or vision to propose a real world solution. While we must go through this part of the discussion, Downloading offers nothing new. All sides get stuck in their own self confidence believing they have the solution while belittling other solutions. We don’t need more facts about fuels. We need to go beyond downloading facts to come up with a radical new solution. This is not an argument to wait until technology saves us with a magic energy pill. It is a plea for us to get the objective facts on the table and move to the next step.
Downloading "facts" as both sides see it, sets up the second mode of communication - Debating. Here we see more of what "is" but offer no new solutions to the problem. We talk about more coal or add the concept of clean coal. We talk about more solar and add Concentrating Solar Power. We throw acronyms around like CSP and IGCC. The discussion logjams into talking heads and dueling experts with the consumer shaking their heads in disgust as they head for the fridge for another cold beer. Debating fosters winners and losers, without getting to the real understanding of other solutions or the role of all solutions in solving the problem. This won’t happen until debating ends and understanding begins to dawn on all of the players.
This is where Reflective dialogue comes into play. It’s the light bulb going on when the person realizes," Oh yeah, I see now that a photovoltaic system will not meet my energy needs if I continue to demand this level of power". Or, it’s the utility executive that really begins to see that some of his customers are bailing from central station grids, changing their life styles to allow small scale wind and solar systems to meet their energy needs. Its making realistic assessments about the role of energy conservation. Its getting into each other’s heads and gaining empathy for the real world situation that the other person is coming from. Reflective Dialogue will not produce the answers to the puzzle, but it will set up the trust and understanding that is vital to getting to what Steven Covey calls the "Third Alternative". That is the solution that makes everyone pretty happy without making anyone feel terribly mad. It makes all stake holders winners because through Reflective dialogue they finally understand why that crazy SOB thinks the way that they think. It begins to give validity to multiple solutions and sets the foundation for the next mode of dialogue, Generative Dialogue.
According to Kahane, Generative Dialogue produces a "deeper unity of purpose". The big light bulb finally gets lit in each and every stake holder and every one realizes that the only way to stop the atrocities of war or save the world from energy related side effects , or power civilization without destroying it, is to come together and work together on that "Third Alternative" . The alternative that makes every stake holder look like a hero to their constituents. It’s the solution that allows everyone to go home with their heads held high taking rightful credit for solving the problem without sacrificing their sense of what is right.
This is where we as a nation and a world need to go when it comes to deciding our energy future. When history is written describing how this generation met the challenges of our time and produced a workable and healthy energy solution to power the future, the record will show that we went through each of these "four distinct conversational modes".
We must keep this conversation going until we can all collectively make it through all four modes. As the Guatemalans found during their peace initiative, the stakes are way too high to do anything else. Does this mean that all we have to do is go through the four steps and like the addict finishing the twelve step rehabilitation program all problems are solved? Of course not. There will be good days and bad days. There will still be debates and downloading, setbacks and discouragement. Clearly, the methods being used to solve the problem today are not working. Its time to try something different. "Insanity is repeating the same behavior and expecting a different result," said Werner Erhart.
It is time to stop the insanity.
Sunday, February 4, 2007
Stop Building Power Plants- Get Smart
While CEO’s scurry around making grand plans to build more power plants and so called environmentalists lecture about the need for sustainable and renewable power, everyone is missing the point. Why Amory Lovins hasn’t gotten farther with his "Negawatts" concept is easy to see. When energy conservation meets your electricity needs, nobody makes the big bucks. And, it requires you to take action instead of blaming our energy problems on utilities, governments, or embryonic industries.
Many Western and Southern home owners could and are harnessing the sun. Plains and coastal states are harnessing the wind. Agricultural states could expand bio-fuels. Any place with garbage could do a better job making bio-gas. In many cases these technologies could be employed by home owners to power their homes, today; no waiting; no government action; no utility action. Yet, these solutions will take a big bite out of your wallet and require you to be the "utility company". The main problem is everyone wants to make sure that they have a wall street style payback and they want juice at the flip of the switch; without learning about battery storage levels or wind speeds. The other problem is that our homes and lifestyles are not built to conserve energy. The housing industry continues to confuse size and space with imagination. And, no one seems to be able to find south until after the house is built. So what’s a Boy Scout to do? It is still possible to conserve energy no matter what your house is like. The key is to learn what uses energy at your place and resolve to take action.
Enough free or low cost actions could be taken, that, when combined across the nation would have a real impact on our national energy appetite. The web has a plethora of sites devoted to energy audits and check lists for saving energy in the typical American home. If you haven’t visited them, this cold winter might be the time to start looking for ways you can save on your energy bill. If you are too lazy to do that, at least read this.
There really is no such thing as a typical American home. Size matters and so does construction, number of occupants, number of teenagers and the number and kind of appliances. Having said that, there are "typical" things that we know about homes.
The largest percentage of energy use in the American home goes to space heating. When it comes to space heating expenses, there are variables that you can so something about for a reasonable price and there are variables that you can’t touch unless you burn your house down and start over. This article focuses on simple non-flammable ideas.
The thermostat is a quick and easy way to cut costs. If you don’t have a programmable setback thermostat, you can save energy and pay for the cost of the new thermostat in about three winter months of heating or about four summer months of cooling. You can do this setback ritual by hand, but the only customer that I’ve known to pull this off was a Professor of Mathematics at a four year college. Even he got tired of it after several years. You save one percent off the heating part of your bill for every degree of set back you practice for ten hours or more a day. Other simple things that you can do to save on space heating costs include adding more air tight layers to windows ( plastic, glass, plexiglass) with more than 1/4 inch and less than 11/2 inches of space between each layer. One really simple thing you can do to lower heating costs is to take the screens off your south facing windows. This allows up to ten percent more of the sun’s heat to warm the inside of your house for free. Leaving drapes open during the day and closing them at night also helps. Leaving drapes closed on the south side is a really bad idea unless you just like sending money to your utility company. One other simple thing that you can do to cut heating costs is to caulk cracks and holes. I’ve read that 40 percent of a typical homes heating expense comes from air infiltration. When in, doubt caulk every inside joint where different construction materials meet. Or, better yet get a blower door test and find out exactly where the holes are. Many electric utilities offer a free or reduced cost blower door test service.
Water heating is the next biggest utility expense. Here again the thermostat is the first place to look. Most utilities have been recommending that water heater thermostats be set no higher than 120 degrees for years. On electric water heaters, you must make sure that both thermostats are set at the same temperature. There are almost always two thermostats on an electric water heater so keep looking until you find both. Adding an insulating blanket is the next best thing to do, unless your water heater warranty says, "no". Gas water heaters can also be insulated, but you must make sure that the installation meets all, and I mean all, safety requirements listed in your owners manual.
After that, doing all your laundry with cold water, installing low flow fixtures for showers and faucets and politely asking people to take shorter showers are about your only choices. There are some tips to getting good quality low flow fixtures. The styles that say "aerated" or "jet air" or something like that make the water travel a little faster and make you feel like you are getting more water. This is especially helpful for shower heads. If the box doesn’t brag about some special feature like this it probably means that the low flow is achieve by just choking off the water. This makes for wimpy showers.
Next on the energy evil doers list for the typical home is refrigeration. Unless you have to have rock hard ice cream and milk so cold it makes your teeth hurt, you can save some money here. You will need a thermometer to do this right. Most refrigerators have useless dials that say "colder" or "warmer". Obviously warmer is less expensive to run than colder but the Colorado State Health Department requires commercial coolers to be 40 Fahrenheit degrees plus or minus two degrees and freezing happens at 32 degrees Fahrenheit, so a thermometer works best. Here again you save one percent off the refrigeration part of your bill for every degree of setback you do. Two other easy saving tips for refrigerators include keeping the fridge full but not too full and keeping the back and bottom of the outside clean and dust free. Many homeowners keep a half full freezer in the garage, just incase they bring home some road kill. If its getting close to empty, stick the rest of it in your half empty freezer compartment of your regular fridge and unplug the freezer.
Then next biggest bite on your energy bill are your appliances. Unless you have a welding machine in the garage, this part of your bill is usually small. Lately news media have been fussing over "phanton loads" and blame today’s high tech "always on" appliances for this expense. The cost and the energy use for phantom loads are small. The only real way to find "phantom loads" and determine how much of a chunk they take out of your wallet is to get an appliance meter and check them. I got a Kill-O-Watt meter for Christmas several years ago and I like to experiment. My stereo has a remote control that powers it up and changes features and volume. As far as I can tell, it only uses electricity when the power is on. Somehow it hibernates very efficiently and draws zero power. My television on the other hand uses 8 watts all the time, even when it is turned off. This adds up to a whopping 69 cents per month. Some recent articles claim that you should install a light stick for these appliances and turn them off. You can spend $10.00 for a simple light stick and in fourteen months you will start saving 69 cents per month. You may also have to reprogram equipment when you kill the power. Only you can decide which way to go.
Lighting is one area that deserves attention. Its not that there are big savings to be had here, but its easy and it works. Fluorescent lighting offers more light per watt than regular incandescent or halogen bulbs. New LED lighting can offer even more savings, but the systems are harder to find and more expensive. There are also some fiber optic lights on the market that can save money over incandescent or halogen bulbs, but they are expensive to install.
In your home, compact fluorescent lights can take the place of any incandescent bulb as long as it fits into the fixture - some can’t. Always measure before you buy. A 16 watt compact fluorescent bulb can save you $36 dollars a year if you replace a 60 watt incandescent bulb that’s on 24 hours a day every day. Compact fluorescent bulbs last ten times as long making them ideal replacements for hard to reach places or commercial applications. Some compact fluorescent bulbs have a hard time starting in cold weather so use caution in outdoor applications. Having said that, I’ve used a 60 watt GE capsule compact fluorescent bulb on my front porch north of Gunnison, Colorado for years without problems. It protests a little when its below zero, but it always gets going after a few minutes.
The key to energy and cost savings in your home is self education. Knowing which pieces of equipment to keep an eye on is the best way to save money and avoid surprises. The following formula is the foundation to that education. Your electric bill equals watts divided by 1000, times Time times the rate per kWh. Or, $ = kW X T X $/kWh. While this is absurdly simple, the challenge of accurately filling in the blanks can drive you crazy. However, if you are serious about saving the universe, putting a halt to global climate change and saving your hard earned cash, you have to bite the bullet and learn this. New appliances and equipment usually have a label near the power cord that lists watts and amps or Kilowatts (KW) and amps. If you know kilowatts (KW) all you have to do is figure out Time, or how many hours a month it runs. Multiply KW times Time to get kWh. Then all you have to do is multiple by the rate. The national average must be up to $0.09 per kWh by now, but rates range from $0.08 to $0.14. That little difference makes a big difference on your bill, so find one of your old bills and get your kWh rate. If you know watts, divide by 1000 to get KW and then multiply by the rate.
For example, my television is so old (1988) that I can’t find anything on it to tell me how much power it uses, but I know it uses 74 watts when its on. I used my handy dandy Kill-O-Watt meter to get the number. If I watch two hours of television per day, in thirty days I use 4,440 watt hours of electricity. Dividing by 1,000 I come up with 4.44 kWh. Multiple that by the average rate of $0.09 and I can expect to pay 40 cents per month to watch television.
Larger appliances like baseboard electric heaters use more power. The watts of power for baseboard heaters is usually labeled on the front on a shiny silver tag. For a 1,000 watt heater that’s on six hours a day, the calculation looks like this:
1,000/1,000 X 6 X $0.09 X 30 days = $16.20 per month.
OK all you watt busters, mount up and ride. It doesn’t matter if you like Nuclear Power or Pulverized Coal or Integrated Combined Cycle Gasification, or Concentrated Solar Power, or Hydro-power or Wind power. New construction of any kind in this day and age will drive up your rates and your bill. Finding "Negawatts" could scare off some of these new power plant plans and keep your energy dollars in your wallet at the same time.
© Mark Daily
Many Western and Southern home owners could and are harnessing the sun. Plains and coastal states are harnessing the wind. Agricultural states could expand bio-fuels. Any place with garbage could do a better job making bio-gas. In many cases these technologies could be employed by home owners to power their homes, today; no waiting; no government action; no utility action. Yet, these solutions will take a big bite out of your wallet and require you to be the "utility company". The main problem is everyone wants to make sure that they have a wall street style payback and they want juice at the flip of the switch; without learning about battery storage levels or wind speeds. The other problem is that our homes and lifestyles are not built to conserve energy. The housing industry continues to confuse size and space with imagination. And, no one seems to be able to find south until after the house is built. So what’s a Boy Scout to do? It is still possible to conserve energy no matter what your house is like. The key is to learn what uses energy at your place and resolve to take action.
Enough free or low cost actions could be taken, that, when combined across the nation would have a real impact on our national energy appetite. The web has a plethora of sites devoted to energy audits and check lists for saving energy in the typical American home. If you haven’t visited them, this cold winter might be the time to start looking for ways you can save on your energy bill. If you are too lazy to do that, at least read this.
There really is no such thing as a typical American home. Size matters and so does construction, number of occupants, number of teenagers and the number and kind of appliances. Having said that, there are "typical" things that we know about homes.
The largest percentage of energy use in the American home goes to space heating. When it comes to space heating expenses, there are variables that you can so something about for a reasonable price and there are variables that you can’t touch unless you burn your house down and start over. This article focuses on simple non-flammable ideas.
The thermostat is a quick and easy way to cut costs. If you don’t have a programmable setback thermostat, you can save energy and pay for the cost of the new thermostat in about three winter months of heating or about four summer months of cooling. You can do this setback ritual by hand, but the only customer that I’ve known to pull this off was a Professor of Mathematics at a four year college. Even he got tired of it after several years. You save one percent off the heating part of your bill for every degree of set back you practice for ten hours or more a day. Other simple things that you can do to save on space heating costs include adding more air tight layers to windows ( plastic, glass, plexiglass) with more than 1/4 inch and less than 11/2 inches of space between each layer. One really simple thing you can do to lower heating costs is to take the screens off your south facing windows. This allows up to ten percent more of the sun’s heat to warm the inside of your house for free. Leaving drapes open during the day and closing them at night also helps. Leaving drapes closed on the south side is a really bad idea unless you just like sending money to your utility company. One other simple thing that you can do to cut heating costs is to caulk cracks and holes. I’ve read that 40 percent of a typical homes heating expense comes from air infiltration. When in, doubt caulk every inside joint where different construction materials meet. Or, better yet get a blower door test and find out exactly where the holes are. Many electric utilities offer a free or reduced cost blower door test service.
Water heating is the next biggest utility expense. Here again the thermostat is the first place to look. Most utilities have been recommending that water heater thermostats be set no higher than 120 degrees for years. On electric water heaters, you must make sure that both thermostats are set at the same temperature. There are almost always two thermostats on an electric water heater so keep looking until you find both. Adding an insulating blanket is the next best thing to do, unless your water heater warranty says, "no". Gas water heaters can also be insulated, but you must make sure that the installation meets all, and I mean all, safety requirements listed in your owners manual.
After that, doing all your laundry with cold water, installing low flow fixtures for showers and faucets and politely asking people to take shorter showers are about your only choices. There are some tips to getting good quality low flow fixtures. The styles that say "aerated" or "jet air" or something like that make the water travel a little faster and make you feel like you are getting more water. This is especially helpful for shower heads. If the box doesn’t brag about some special feature like this it probably means that the low flow is achieve by just choking off the water. This makes for wimpy showers.
Next on the energy evil doers list for the typical home is refrigeration. Unless you have to have rock hard ice cream and milk so cold it makes your teeth hurt, you can save some money here. You will need a thermometer to do this right. Most refrigerators have useless dials that say "colder" or "warmer". Obviously warmer is less expensive to run than colder but the Colorado State Health Department requires commercial coolers to be 40 Fahrenheit degrees plus or minus two degrees and freezing happens at 32 degrees Fahrenheit, so a thermometer works best. Here again you save one percent off the refrigeration part of your bill for every degree of setback you do. Two other easy saving tips for refrigerators include keeping the fridge full but not too full and keeping the back and bottom of the outside clean and dust free. Many homeowners keep a half full freezer in the garage, just incase they bring home some road kill. If its getting close to empty, stick the rest of it in your half empty freezer compartment of your regular fridge and unplug the freezer.
Then next biggest bite on your energy bill are your appliances. Unless you have a welding machine in the garage, this part of your bill is usually small. Lately news media have been fussing over "phanton loads" and blame today’s high tech "always on" appliances for this expense. The cost and the energy use for phantom loads are small. The only real way to find "phantom loads" and determine how much of a chunk they take out of your wallet is to get an appliance meter and check them. I got a Kill-O-Watt meter for Christmas several years ago and I like to experiment. My stereo has a remote control that powers it up and changes features and volume. As far as I can tell, it only uses electricity when the power is on. Somehow it hibernates very efficiently and draws zero power. My television on the other hand uses 8 watts all the time, even when it is turned off. This adds up to a whopping 69 cents per month. Some recent articles claim that you should install a light stick for these appliances and turn them off. You can spend $10.00 for a simple light stick and in fourteen months you will start saving 69 cents per month. You may also have to reprogram equipment when you kill the power. Only you can decide which way to go.
Lighting is one area that deserves attention. Its not that there are big savings to be had here, but its easy and it works. Fluorescent lighting offers more light per watt than regular incandescent or halogen bulbs. New LED lighting can offer even more savings, but the systems are harder to find and more expensive. There are also some fiber optic lights on the market that can save money over incandescent or halogen bulbs, but they are expensive to install.
In your home, compact fluorescent lights can take the place of any incandescent bulb as long as it fits into the fixture - some can’t. Always measure before you buy. A 16 watt compact fluorescent bulb can save you $36 dollars a year if you replace a 60 watt incandescent bulb that’s on 24 hours a day every day. Compact fluorescent bulbs last ten times as long making them ideal replacements for hard to reach places or commercial applications. Some compact fluorescent bulbs have a hard time starting in cold weather so use caution in outdoor applications. Having said that, I’ve used a 60 watt GE capsule compact fluorescent bulb on my front porch north of Gunnison, Colorado for years without problems. It protests a little when its below zero, but it always gets going after a few minutes.
The key to energy and cost savings in your home is self education. Knowing which pieces of equipment to keep an eye on is the best way to save money and avoid surprises. The following formula is the foundation to that education. Your electric bill equals watts divided by 1000, times Time times the rate per kWh. Or, $ = kW X T X $/kWh. While this is absurdly simple, the challenge of accurately filling in the blanks can drive you crazy. However, if you are serious about saving the universe, putting a halt to global climate change and saving your hard earned cash, you have to bite the bullet and learn this. New appliances and equipment usually have a label near the power cord that lists watts and amps or Kilowatts (KW) and amps. If you know kilowatts (KW) all you have to do is figure out Time, or how many hours a month it runs. Multiply KW times Time to get kWh. Then all you have to do is multiple by the rate. The national average must be up to $0.09 per kWh by now, but rates range from $0.08 to $0.14. That little difference makes a big difference on your bill, so find one of your old bills and get your kWh rate. If you know watts, divide by 1000 to get KW and then multiply by the rate.
For example, my television is so old (1988) that I can’t find anything on it to tell me how much power it uses, but I know it uses 74 watts when its on. I used my handy dandy Kill-O-Watt meter to get the number. If I watch two hours of television per day, in thirty days I use 4,440 watt hours of electricity. Dividing by 1,000 I come up with 4.44 kWh. Multiple that by the average rate of $0.09 and I can expect to pay 40 cents per month to watch television.
Larger appliances like baseboard electric heaters use more power. The watts of power for baseboard heaters is usually labeled on the front on a shiny silver tag. For a 1,000 watt heater that’s on six hours a day, the calculation looks like this:
1,000/1,000 X 6 X $0.09 X 30 days = $16.20 per month.
OK all you watt busters, mount up and ride. It doesn’t matter if you like Nuclear Power or Pulverized Coal or Integrated Combined Cycle Gasification, or Concentrated Solar Power, or Hydro-power or Wind power. New construction of any kind in this day and age will drive up your rates and your bill. Finding "Negawatts" could scare off some of these new power plant plans and keep your energy dollars in your wallet at the same time.
© Mark Daily
Monday, January 8, 2007
Go green Go Nuclear
Are you crazy? Don’t you remember the months of drama surrounding the Three Mile Island melt down? Well, actually I do. Haven’t you seen the pictures of the horribly disfigured victims from the Chernobyl, Russian nuclear explosions and fire - a disaster that is still to this day - twenty years later - producing birth defects of hideous magnitude? Well, yes, actually I have. Haven’t you been paying attention to the conflicts over permanent storage at Yucca Mountain, Nevada? Republican Governor Kenny Guinn doesn’t even want it and Nevada wants everything. Oh yeah, I have read about all of that. And, if that wasn’t enough, now we have people in Iran that in the same year announced the creation of nuclear material and their belief that Israel has no right to exist. Yep, I did notice that as a matter of fact. Then why are you talking about supporting nuclear energy?
Well, Patrick Moore, Co-founder of Green Peace, says we don’t have much of choice, for one thing. And, if renewable energy is such a great idea, why aren’t you living off the grid? Say what you like about the energy situation today. Point your finger in any direction you want. The end result still echos, the cartoon character Pogo, " we have met the enemy ..... and he is us".
According to an April 16th article in the Washington Post (Moore, Washington Post, Sunday, April 16, 2006; Page B01) all of those pesky questions about death and destruction from the promotion of nuclear energy have real world modern solutions. The truth of the matter is that the United States power industry by itself is still producing ten percent of the total global CO2 emissions. Experts estimate that world electric power needs will double in the next twenty years.
"The 600-plus coal-fired plants [in the USA] emit nearly 2 billion tons of CO2 annually - the equivalent of the exhaust from about 300 million automobiles. In addition, the Clean Air Council reports that coal plants are responsible for 64 percent of sulfur dioxide emissions, 26 percent of nitrous oxides and 33 percent of mercury emissions. These pollutants are eroding the health of our environment, producing acid rain, smog, respiratory illness and mercury contamination."(Moore, Washington Post, Sunday, April 16, 2006; Page B01)
According to the Nuclear Energy Institute (http://www.nei.org) there are 104 commercial reactors with operating licenses in 31 states. These reactors supply 20 percent of the electricity in the United States. This website provides a host of information dispelling negative opinions about nuclear energy and the disposal os used nuclear material. Yet, many people still object to the idea of increasing the use of nuclear rules for electricity generation.
Today the United States is having lots of discussion about the "energy situation". Yes, I am aware that there are those that believe the world will be better off with more CO2. My bias is that I am not one of them. I encourage all electricity consumers to read as much as they can about electricity generation from as many sources as possible. Only through open debate and discussion of these complicated issues will we emerge into a sustainable energy future. More people die in one year from mining coal in the United States than have died in any U.S. nuclear plant activities combined, ever. We must overcome our irrational fears of nuclear energy and replace them with facts about all of our energy options.
Everyone from politicians to investment bankers are talking about the realities of electricity generation in the United States. The politicians get it. "Our nation’s future electricity needs cannot be met almost exclusively by natural gas, but must be a reasonable combination of efforts that include energy conservation, energy efficiency, renewable energy, nuclear energy and clean-coal technology."(U.S. Conference of Mayors, Resolution, June 2004)
The investment bankers get it. "The Energy Policy Act of 2005 "provides meaningful incentives for the construction of new nuclear plants and advanced coal generation facilities . . . Fitch,[an investment company], views EPACT’s provisions to spur development of a handful of new nuclear and coal-based facilities as an effective way to mitigate the risks relating to commercialization of the targeted new technologies. Demonstration of successful commercial performance of several such facilities will likely reduce investment costs, shorten the construction cycle for subsequent plants and avoid the need for extraordinary subsidies for follow-on facilities. Thus, these incentives could have far-reaching consequences in the 2015-2020 period, despite few immediate investment effects."(Fitch Ratings Ltd."Energy Policy Act of 2005"August 2, 2005)
Now its time for the rest of us to "get it". Believe me, if there was ever a person more skeptical than me about nuclear power, he would be hard to find. These changes are a challenge to swallow. This may however, be the prescription that the earth needs for its very survival.
For more information, read Moore’s complete article at http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/04/14/AR2006041401209.html or Goggle "Nuclear Power Issues". The Chicago Tribune ran an article December 2006 covering the rising interest in Nulcear Power Generation. http://www.philly.com/mld/philly/news/nation/16342573.htm
As the ancient guardian knight said just before Indiana Jones grabbed the holy grail chalice to face life or death, "choose wisely".
Well, Patrick Moore, Co-founder of Green Peace, says we don’t have much of choice, for one thing. And, if renewable energy is such a great idea, why aren’t you living off the grid? Say what you like about the energy situation today. Point your finger in any direction you want. The end result still echos, the cartoon character Pogo, " we have met the enemy ..... and he is us".
According to an April 16th article in the Washington Post (Moore, Washington Post, Sunday, April 16, 2006; Page B01) all of those pesky questions about death and destruction from the promotion of nuclear energy have real world modern solutions. The truth of the matter is that the United States power industry by itself is still producing ten percent of the total global CO2 emissions. Experts estimate that world electric power needs will double in the next twenty years.
"The 600-plus coal-fired plants [in the USA] emit nearly 2 billion tons of CO2 annually - the equivalent of the exhaust from about 300 million automobiles. In addition, the Clean Air Council reports that coal plants are responsible for 64 percent of sulfur dioxide emissions, 26 percent of nitrous oxides and 33 percent of mercury emissions. These pollutants are eroding the health of our environment, producing acid rain, smog, respiratory illness and mercury contamination."(Moore, Washington Post, Sunday, April 16, 2006; Page B01)
According to the Nuclear Energy Institute (http://www.nei.org) there are 104 commercial reactors with operating licenses in 31 states. These reactors supply 20 percent of the electricity in the United States. This website provides a host of information dispelling negative opinions about nuclear energy and the disposal os used nuclear material. Yet, many people still object to the idea of increasing the use of nuclear rules for electricity generation.
Today the United States is having lots of discussion about the "energy situation". Yes, I am aware that there are those that believe the world will be better off with more CO2. My bias is that I am not one of them. I encourage all electricity consumers to read as much as they can about electricity generation from as many sources as possible. Only through open debate and discussion of these complicated issues will we emerge into a sustainable energy future. More people die in one year from mining coal in the United States than have died in any U.S. nuclear plant activities combined, ever. We must overcome our irrational fears of nuclear energy and replace them with facts about all of our energy options.
Everyone from politicians to investment bankers are talking about the realities of electricity generation in the United States. The politicians get it. "Our nation’s future electricity needs cannot be met almost exclusively by natural gas, but must be a reasonable combination of efforts that include energy conservation, energy efficiency, renewable energy, nuclear energy and clean-coal technology."(U.S. Conference of Mayors, Resolution, June 2004)
The investment bankers get it. "The Energy Policy Act of 2005 "provides meaningful incentives for the construction of new nuclear plants and advanced coal generation facilities . . . Fitch,[an investment company], views EPACT’s provisions to spur development of a handful of new nuclear and coal-based facilities as an effective way to mitigate the risks relating to commercialization of the targeted new technologies. Demonstration of successful commercial performance of several such facilities will likely reduce investment costs, shorten the construction cycle for subsequent plants and avoid the need for extraordinary subsidies for follow-on facilities. Thus, these incentives could have far-reaching consequences in the 2015-2020 period, despite few immediate investment effects."(Fitch Ratings Ltd."Energy Policy Act of 2005"August 2, 2005)
Now its time for the rest of us to "get it". Believe me, if there was ever a person more skeptical than me about nuclear power, he would be hard to find. These changes are a challenge to swallow. This may however, be the prescription that the earth needs for its very survival.
For more information, read Moore’s complete article at http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/04/14/AR2006041401209.html or Goggle "Nuclear Power Issues". The Chicago Tribune ran an article December 2006 covering the rising interest in Nulcear Power Generation. http://www.philly.com/mld/philly/news/nation/16342573.htm
As the ancient guardian knight said just before Indiana Jones grabbed the holy grail chalice to face life or death, "choose wisely".
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
