Idb Presentation by Michael P Totten On Solar & Wind Power and Efficiency, Slides 11-11-2014

SOLAR RESOURCE OF LATIN AMERICA
+
η
+
LEAST-COST-&-RISK LIFECYCLE DELIVERED ENERGY SERVICES

Michael P Totten, Senior Fellow, Rocky Mountain Institute, Nov. 12, 2014
Presentation to the IDB ENE CSF Energy Training Workshop
Summary of Key Points
1. Least-Cost-and-Risk Lifecycle Portfolio of Delivered Energy Services top
priority
2. Risks include intrinsic uncertainties and surprises – climate disruption costs,
price volatilities of fuel, water, pollution and emissions, catastrophic accidents
3. End-use efficiency gains (Eta, η) vast pool capable of delivering 50 to 75% of
new energy services for decades, far cheaper than any supply option –
intelligence/knowledge displacing energy resources & materials.
4. Wind power now cheapest supply option in countries and regions with wind
resources.
5. Solar Photovoltaics (PV) systems now equal to or less than the grid electricity
from other sources in 79 countries. Within 60 months (by 2020) – as the scale
of deployments grows and the costs continue to decline – more than 80%
humanity will live in regions where solar will be competitive with electricity
from other sources.
6. Efficiency, Wind & Solar, once installed, are risk-free from price volatility over
lifecycle give no fuel, virtually no water, no pollution, waste or emissions in
generating and delivering electricity services.
RANKING
LEAST-COST-RISK (LCR)
DELIVERED ENERGY SERVICES (DES)
Latin America Is World's Most Urbanized Region
Nearly nine
out of 10 Latin
Americans will
live in cities by
the year 2050
2030
UN Population Division, World Urban Prospects, 2014,

http://esa.un.org/unpd/wup/Maps/CityDistribution/CityPopulation/CityPop.aspx
m 1.8 percent in the current decade.
Electricity
Figurein31:
Latini America’s
Electricity Generation
in Latin America’sMix – 2008 and
Generation M x 2030
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
2008
10%
2030
0%
-10%
natural oil
coal fuel oil hydro nuclear others
gas products
2008 4.6% 8.4% 22.0% 58.6% 2.8% 2.3% 1.3%
2030 7.9% 3.3% 29.4% 50.0% 4.2% 1.2% 4.1%
Based on Ariel Yepes et al., Meeting the Balance of Electricity Supply and Demand in Latin America and the Caribbean. World Bank 2010, cited in “Latin
America’s Energy Future” by Roger Tissot for the Inter-American Development Bank and the Inter-American Dialogue Energy Working Paper Series, No.
sed on Ariel Yepes et al., Meeting the Balance of Electricity Supply and Demand in Latin Amer
IDB-DP-252, December 2012.
Map of basins with assessed shale oil & shale gas formations, 2013
Argentina 2nd
largest deposits
in world
Installed capacity & hydroelectric share in Latin America
(Left Map 2010, Right Map Amazon Dams Operating & Planned)
Left Map: Carlos Batlle and Juan Roberto Paredes, Analysis of the impact of increased Non- Conventional Renewable Energy generation on Latin American
Electric Power Systems, Tools and Methodologies for assessing future Operation, Planning and Expansion, Discussion paper No. IDB-DP-341, January 2014
Right Map: Dams in Amazonia, http://dams-info.org/en
Hydropower Dam
Cost Overruns
• ex post outcomes of schedule
& cost estimates of
hydropower dams.
• Estimates are systematically &
severely biased below actual
values.
• Projects that take longer have
greater cost overruns; bigger
projects take longer.
• Uplift required to de-bias
systematic cost under-
estimation for large dams is
+99%.
Atif Ansar, Bent Flyvbjerg, Alexander Budzier, Daniel Lun Should we
build more large dams? The actual costs of hydropower megaproject
development. Energy Policy (2014),
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2013.10.069
Hydropower Dam Cost Overruns
“Using the largest and most reliable reference data
of its kind and multilevel statistical techniques
applied to large dams for the first time, we were
successful in fitting parsimonious models to predict
cost and schedule overruns.
…in most countries large hydropower dams will be
too costly in absolute terms and take too long to
build to deliver a positive risk-adjusted return unless
suitable risk management can be affordably
provided.”
“Policymakers, particularly in developing countries,

are advised to prefer agile energy alternatives that
can be built over shorter time horizons to energy
megaprojects.”
Atif Ansar, Bent Flyvbjerg, Alexander Budzier, Daniel Lun Should

we build more large dams? The actual costs of hydropower
megaproject development. Energy Policy (2014),
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2013.10.069
Hydropower Dam GHG Emissions Can be Significant
Some Key Factors Influencing Reservoir GHG Emissions
Net Emissions from Brazilian Reservoirs compared with
Combined Cycle Natural Gas
Emissions: Emissions:
Reservoir Generating km2/ Emissions
DAM Hydro CC Gas
Area Capacity Ratio
MW (MtCO2- (MtCO2-
(km2) (MW) Hydro/Gas
eq/yr) eq/yr)
Tucuruí 24330 4240 6 8.60 2.22 4
Curuá- 2
72 40 0.15 0.02 7.5
Una
Balbina 3150 250 13 6.91 0.12 58
Source: Patrick McCully, Tropical Hydropower is a Significant Source of Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Interim response to the International
Hydropower Association, International Rivers Network, June 2004
Table 1. GHG Emissions from Hydropower Plants
*update
160 to
250 g
CO2eq/
kWh
*update: William Steinhurst, Patrick Knight, and Melissa Schultz, Hydropower Greenhouse Gas Emissions, State of the Research, Synapse, February 14, 2012,
www.synapse-energy.com
Table 1.: Patrick McCully, Fizzy Science, International Rivers Network, November 2006
NOTES for Table 1. GHG Emissions from Hydropower Plants
Notes for Table 1
Blank entries = no data.
* "reservoir net" includes CH4 surface emissions, CO2 from above-water decay of flooded biomass, and degassing emissions from turbines and spillways,
minus pre-reservoir sources and sinks. It does not include CO2 surface emissions (a proportion of these emissions will be produced by the decay of biomass
in the reservoir which had when living consumed atmospheric carbon through photosynthesis in the reservoir). 99% of net CO2 emissions for these projects
are from above-water decay of flooded biomass.
§ Emissions from boreal hydros are calculated from averages across various reservoirs so "reservoir age" is not relevant for these plants. Balbina degassing
emissions are from 2004 (17 years after filling). "Tropical gross excluding degassing" emissions are the average of measurements from two years (1998 and
1999). Petit Saut emissions are an average based on measurements and extrapolations for the 20 years after reservoir filling in 1994.
# CO2 emissions from decay of above-water biomass.
Emissions data given in this table are based on available measurements and calculations for reservoirs for specific years. Emissions for specific reservoirs,
and power generation, will vary widely between years. A full life-cycle assessment would include emissions due to construction, access roads, resettlement,
decommissioning etc. CH4 converted to CO2eq with GWP of 21. Generation figures for boreal reservoirs are estimates based on a 60% load factor.
Generation figures for tropical net reservoirs are actuals. Generation figures for tropical gross reservoirs are estimates based on 50% load factor.
Sources: Boreal - Duchemin (2002). Boreal update (Steinhurst (2012)/ Tropical "reservoir net" - Fearnside (2002) (2004b) (2005a) (2005b). Tropical gross
(including degassing) - Delmas et al. (2005). Generation figure from Ministère de l'Économie (2002). Tropical gross (excluding degassing) - Santos et al.
(2006).
Delmas, R. et al. (2005) ‘Long Term Greenhouse Gas Emissions from the Hydroelectric Reservoir of Petit Saut (French Guiana) and Potential Impacts.’ In
Tremblay et al.
Duchemin, É., et al. (2002) ‘Hydroelectric reservoirs as an anthropogenic source of greenhouse gases,’ World Resource Review 14.
Fearnside, P.M. (2002) ‘Greenhouse Gas Emissions from a Hydroelectric Reservoir (Brazil’s Tucuruí Dam) and the Energy Policy Implications,’ Water, Air,
and Soil Pollution 133:1..
Fearnside, P.M. (2004b) ‘Hydroelectric dams in Amazonia as contributors to global warming: The controversy heats up,’ Anais: III Conferência Científica do
LBA Experimento de Grande Escala da Biosfera- Atmosfera na Amazônia, 27 a 29 de julho de 2004, Academia de Tênis Resort, Brasília-DF, Brasil, p.88.
Fearnside, P.M. (2005a) ‘Brazil’s Samuel Dam: Lessons for Hydroelectric Development Policy and the Environment in Amazonia,’ Environmental
Management 35:1.
Fearnside, P.M. (2005b) ‘Do Hydroelectric Dams Mitigate Global Warming? The Case of Brazil’s Curuá-Una Dam,’ Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for
Global Change 10: 675-691.
Ministère de l’Économie (2002) ‘Programmation pluriannuelle des investissements de production élec- trique.’ Paris, p.71.
Santos, M.A. et al. (2006) ‘Gross greenhouse gas fluxes from hydro-power reservoirs compared to ther- mo-power plants,’ Energy Policy 34:4.
Steinhurst, W., P. Knight, and M. Schultz, Hydropower Greenhouse Gas Emissions, State of the Research, Synapse, February 14, 2012, www.synapse-
energy.com
Table 1.: Patrick McCully, Fizzy Science, International Rivers Network, November 2006
Hydropower Dam GHG Emissions
Bibliographic citations
Kemenes, Alexandre, Bruce R. Forsberg, and John M. Melack, CO2 emissions from a tropical hydroelectric
reservoir (Balbina, Brazil), Journal of Geophysical Research, VOL. 116, G03004,
doi:10.1029/2010JG001465, 2011
Kemenes, A., B. R. Forsberg, and J. M. Melack (2007), Methane release below a tropical hydroelectric
dam, Geophys. Res. Lett., 34, L12809, doi:10.1029/2007GL029479.
Soumis, N.; Lucotte, M.; Canuel, R.; Weissenberger, S.; Houel, S.; Larose, C.; Duchemin, E., Hydroelectric
reservoirs as anthropogenic sources of greenhouse gases. In Water encyclopedia: Surface and agricultural
water; Lehr, J. H., Keeley, J., Eds.; Wiley-Interscience: Hoboken, NJ, 2005; pp 203-210.
St. Louis, V. L.; Kelly, C. A.; Duchemin, E.; Rudd, J. W. M.; Rosenberg, D. M. Reservoir surfaces as sources of
greenhouse gases to the atmosphere: A global estimate. BioScience 2000, 50 (9), 766–774.
Lima, I. B. T.; Ramos, F. M.; Bambace, L. A. W.; Rosa, R. R. Methane emissions from large dams as
renewable energy resources: A developing nation perspective. Mitig. Adapt. Strat. Glob. Change 2008, 13,
193–206.
Delsontro, T.A., McGinnis D.F., Sobek, S., Ostrovsky I. & B. Wehrli, Extreme Methane Emissions from a
Swiss Hydropower Reservoir: Contribution from Bubbling Sediments, Environ. Sci. Technol. 2010, 44:7,
2419–2425.
Abril, G., Guèrin, F., Richard, S., Delmas, R., Galy-Lacaux, C., Gosse, P., Tremblay, A., Varfalvy, L., Dos
Santos, M. A., Matvienko, B. Carbon dioxide and methane emissions and the carbon budget of a 10-year
old tropical reservoir (Petit Saut, French Guiana). Global Biogeochem. Cycles 2005, 9, GB4007.
GHG Emissions Comparison from different Sources
Leakage rates uncertainty

Updated data, Synapse
Wind, Solar, Efficiency
Wind Solar
power power
End-use
Assembled and adapted from multiple sources
Efficiency
2010 COST OF DROUGHT
2010
2005
2014
Worsening Drought All Century Long
2000-2009 2060-2069
2030-2039 2090-2099
Natural Gas fueled Power Plants
Risk!factor:!Fuel!cost!comparisons!
Efficiency
130!
Graph 1
UCS, Gas Ceiling, Assessing the Climate Risks of an Overreliance on Natural Gas for Electricity, Sept. 2013, Union of Concerned Scientsts
Potential NYMEX Henry Hub Prices
$13.80+
+
+
+
+
June+2015+
+
+
+
+
$1.18+
NYMEX&Henry&Hub&Futures& 68%CI& 95%CI& 99%CI&

Figure!3:!Using!implied!volatility!levels!and!option!premiums!to!determine!future!natural!gas!price!
ranges!at!68%,!95%,!and!99%!confidence!intervals!
Using&implied&volaKlity&levels&and&opKon&premiums&to&determine&future&
natural&gas&prices&ranges&at&68%,&95%&and&99%&confidence&intervals.&
RISK+DISTRIBUTION+
UKlity^Scale&Wind&and&Natural&Gas&VolaKlity:&Uncovering&the&Hedge&Value&of&Wind&for&UKliKes&and&Their&
Customers,&2012
Water!&!CCS!impact!by!power!plant!
Water and Carbon Capture Impact
Estimated Water Consumption Increase with
1.0 CO2 Capture and Compression
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
gal/ 0.5
kWh 0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
Subcritical Supercritical IGCC – Dry IGCC –
NGCC
pc pc Feed Slurry Feed
No Capture 0.52 0.45 0.30 0.31 0.19
With Capture 0.99 0.84 0.48 0.45 0.34
% Increase 91 87 61 46 76
Source: Gerdes, K.; Nichols, C. Water Requirements for Existing and Emerging Thermoelectric Plant Technologies; DOE/NETL Report
pc=!pulverized!coal;!IGCC=!integrated!gasificaAon!combined!cycle!coal!plant;!!
402/080108; U.S. Department of Energy National Energy Technology Laboratory: Morgantown, WV, 2009.
NGCCZ!natural!gas!combined!cycle!
Gerdes,!K.;!Nichols,!C.!Water!Requirements!for!ExisAng!and!Emerging!Thermoelectric!Plant!Technologies;!DOE/NETL!
Report!402/080108;!U.S.!Department!of!Energy!NaAonal!Energy!Technology!Laboratory:!Morgantown,!WV,!2009.! 150!
ys became
plays were
ogical
ovement
expensive
l not perform
nal reservoirs.
on high
rilling &
enormous.
admill never
h decline
n will limit
herefore, the
nventional “Shale plays are not a renaissance or a
revolution. This is a retirement party.”
Arthur Berman, U.S. Shale Gas: Magical Thinking & The Denial of Uncertainty, Jan. 12, 2012, presentaton at Duke Univ. Nicholas School of the Environment
Current and Future Technologies for NGCC Power Pl
Exhibit ES-8 CO2 emission rates
1100
CO2 Emissions (lb/MWhnet)
1000 Power&e
generaKon&flet &goal&in&2025& CO2 Emissions (lb/MWhgross)
900
800 780.2
XX's&goal&is&to& 760.3 752.8

734.5 714.7
698.8 686.5
CO2 Emissions (lb/MWh)

700 672.4
reduce& 600
CO2&emissions& 500
intensity&to& 400
VS&
0.45&tons&(990& 300 Least^risk&opKons&–&two&already&
compeKKve&with&natural&gas&
lbs.)&per& 200
CCS No&fuels,&near^zero&emissions,&near^
MWh&by& 100
89.5
81.6
88.1
80.7
85.7
78.6
84.5
zero&water&
77.8
80.8
74.6 use&
79.7
73.9 77.0
71.5
76.3
71.1
2025.&& 0
7FA.05 7FA.05 CCS 7FA.05 CCS H-frame
GE&7FA.05& & EGR Endûse& H-frame
CCS
H-frame
CCS EGR
J-frame J-frame CCS J-frame CCS AdvFuture
Solar& PV& Large& EGR wind&
AdvFuture AdvFuture
CCS CCS EGR
F&frame& efficiency&Source: NETL turbine&
11
2& 8%&
RaKo&of&GHG&emissions&of&gas&over&coal&
Leakage&rate&(%&of&total&producKon)&
7%&
6%&
1.5&
5%&
4%&
3%&
1&
2%&
1%&
0.5&
0&
0& 25& 50& 75& 105&
Global&Warming&PotenKal&(GWP)&for&methane&
Very&few&Years&Away&from&Reaching&&
2°C&Carbon&Budget&
113!
UNCERTAINTY&
Lost!opportuniAes!from!
inacAon!in!reducing!CO2!
emissions!are!esAmated!to!
incur!hundreds!of!trillions!of!
dollars!in!future!economic!
value!foreclosed;!
in!addiAon!to!hundreds!of!
trillions!of!dollars!in!economic!
losses!caused!by!increased!
destrucAon!from!extreme!
weather!catastrophes.!
Source:!UK!Met!Office,!Hadley!Centre,! 115!
h- p://www.metoffice.gov.uk/climateZguide!!
Cost&is&an& Risk&is&an&
essenKal&but&not& essenKal&and&
sufficient& imperaKve&
decision^making& decision^making&
criterion& criterion&as&well&
Power Grid Disruption Risks & Threats
Human or Technical Error, Cyberattacks, Military Attacts or Terrorism,
Climate Disruption & Natural Disasters
SECURING THE U.S.

ELECTRICAL GRID
THE HONORABLE THOMAS F. McLARTY III
&
THE HONORABLE THOMAS J. RIDGE
PROJECT CO-CHAIRS
Energy Surety Microgrid

U.S. Military bases mandated to be “islandable”
– capable of operating even if grid collapses
“We don’t have a robust energy system, and the costs are significant. The cost
today is measured in the billions. Over the coming decades, it will be in the
trillions. You can’t just put your head in the sand anymore.” U.S. Dept. of Energy
Official Jonathan Pershing, 2013
Hurricane Sandy, 2012
RENEWABLE INVESTMENT COMPARED TO GROSS
FOSSIL-FUEL INVESTMENT, 2008–2013 ($BN)
350
307 309
Fossil fuel 303
293
300
270
260
254
250 234
213
200 192
Renewable energy
144 147
150
Global Trends
100 in Renewable
Energy
Investment
50 2014
0
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Note: Renewable energy total excludes large hydro. Fossil fuel is gross investment on coal, gas and oil capacity and
assumes retired fossil capacity is replaced. We assume capacity retirement of 3.3%/year for coal, 4%/year for gas Source: Bloomberg New Energy Finance;
and 2.5%/year for oil. UNEP
11 Global Trends in Renewable Energy Investment, 2014

Global New Investment in Renewable Energy by Technology
Developed & Developing Countries, 2013
Renewables 2014 Global Status Report, REN21

GLOBAL NEW INVESTMENT IN RENEWABLE ENERGY
BY REGION, 2004–13 ($BN)
114.8
Europe
102.4
United States Europe 112.3 86.4
73.4 75.3
101.3
53.4 61.8
79.9
China
59.6
72.9 74.7 48.4 56.3
39.7 39.1 51.9
United States
35.9 34.7 35.8 29.4
61.7
66.6
33.6
28.2 19.7 China
38.4 37.1 36.7
23.5 54.8 54.7
29.4
11.7 19.6 24.9
'04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09 '10 '11 '12 '13 40.0
5.5 34.5 36.2 34.6 36.0
15.8 37.2
28.2 10.1
23.3
'04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09 '10 '11 '12 '13 Global Trends '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09 '10 '11 '12
2.4
5.8 25.0
11.9 15.8
5.7 in Renewable Middle East & Africa 10.2'07 '08 '09 '10 '11 '12 '13
'04 '05 '06
5.8
2.6
'04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09 '10 '11 '12
Energy Middle East & Africa
'04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09 '10 '11 '12
Investment
AMER (excl. US & 2014
AMER (excl. US &
Brazil) ASOC
ASOC (excl.
(excl. China
China &&
Brazil) 10.4 9.0 IndiaIndia India)
India)
Brazil
Brazil 0.5 0.5 0.9 1.6
2.3 1.4 4.3 3.2
11.5 43.3
5.0 3.5
0.6 0.6 1.2 1.7 2.7 1.7
'04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09 '10 '11 '12 '13 29.0
29.5
23.8
'04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09 '10 '11 '12 25.3
11.5 18.1
8.3 9.5 20.7
5.0 5.6 5.9 11.0 11.5 13.2
1.4 3.4 3.4 11.5 12.4 6.7 8.3 8.9 11.4 12.9
8.7 9.9 13.0 8.2 9.0 10.9
3.3 3.2 4.9 5.8 6.1 8.78.7
12.6 6.8
1.4 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09 '10 '11 '12 5.5 6.3 6.3
5.2 5.4 6.5
7.2 6.1
4.4 4.2
12.5
10.312.2 2.5 2.9 4.4
2.4 3.2 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09 '10 '11 '12
11.0 7.9 7.9 8.6 5.4
'04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09 '10 '11 '12 '13 4.2 7.8 7.7 9.7 6.8 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09 '10 '11 '12 '13
0.5 2.2 4.6 3.1 '04 '05
'04 '06
'05 '07 '08 '08
'09 '09
'10'10'11'11'12
0.6 2.6 '06 '07 '12 '13
'04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09 '10 '11 '12
'04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09 '10 '11 '12 '13
Note: New investment volume adjusts for re-invested equity. Total values include estimates for undisclosed deals. Source: Bloomberg New Energy Finance;
This comparison does not include small-scale projects. UNEP
9 Global Trends in Renewable Energy Investment, 2014

Bloomberg New
BNEF levelized cost Energy
of electricitFinance
y, H2 2014 (BNEF) Levelized Cost of Electricity (LCOE) 2014
Efficiency
Marine - wave 1037
Marine - tidal 844
STEG- LFR
*
STEG- parabolic trough
STEG- tower & he-
liostat w/ storage
Wind - of shore
PV - c-Si tracking
PV - c-Si
PV - thin fi lm
Biomass - gasifi cation
Geothermal -
binary plant
Wind - onshore
Municipal
solid waste
Biomass - incineration
Geothermal -
fl ash plant
Landfi ll gas
Large hydro
Biomass - anaerobic
digestion
Small hydro
Nuclear
CHP
Natural gas CCGT
Coal fi red
0 100 200 300 400 500
Regional scenarios H12014 central H2 2014 central
Fossil technologies: US China Europe Australia

STEG LFR - Solar Thermal-Electric Generation Linear Fresnel Reflector
FIRST SOLAR Utility-Scale Solar PV
2013 LCOE $0.07-0.15/kWh*
Cents/kWh
*2013 data, costs depending on irradiance levels, interest rates, and other factors, e.g.
development costs, http://www.firstsolar.com/en/solutions/utility-scale-generation
Solar PV rooftop
system installed
costs vary several-
fold from country
to country, state
to state,
depending on
practices and
policies.
*Permitting, inspection, and interconnection costs

** Includes installer and integrator margin, legal fees,
professional fees, financing transactional costs, O+M costs,
production guarantees, reserves, and warranty costs.
Jesse Morris et al, REDUCING SOLAR PV SOFT COST,

A FOCUS ON INSTALLATION LABOR, Rocky Mountain
Instiitute, 2013, www.rmi.org/
Global Residential-Scale Solar PV
System Economics
2014 2025
Bloomberg New Energy Finance, 2030 Market Outlook: Solar, June 27, 2014
Solar PV Generation parity proximity in countries analyzed
Reference price
(US$ per MWh)
Required tariff
(US$ per MWh)
David Perez et al, PV GRID PARITY MONITOR, Utility-scale 1st issue Eclareon, 2014
Latin American & Caribbean nations
Latin American & Caribbean nations
Commercial building energy efficiency supply curve
by end use, 2050
Area to Power 100% of U.S. Onroad Vehicles
Solar-battery
Wind turbines
ground footprint
Wind-battery
turbine spacing
Cellulosic ethanol
Corn ethanol
Solar-battery and Wind-battery refer to battery storage of these intermittent renewable

resources in plug-in electric driven vehicles
COMPARISON OF LAND NEEDED TO POWER VEHICLES

Mark Z. Jacobson, Wind Versus Biofuels for Addressing Climate, Health, and Energy, Atmosphere/Energy Program, Dept. of Civil & Environmental Engineering, Stanford University, March 5,
2007, http://www.stanford.edu/group/efmh/jacobson/E85vWindSol
Latin America Surges from Potential to Power, Wind Power Monthly, 31 July 2014 by Shaun Campbell,
http://www.windpowermonthly.com/article/1305164/latin-america-surges-potential-power
Wind Power bids made up 34GW in
Brazil autumn 2014 auctions
Combined cycle gas projects totaling 20.61GW

Solar photovoltaic projects totaling 16.9GW.
TUNNELING THROUGH TO LOW-E
HVAC
0.59 Trane, Singapore
0.49 Infosys, Bangalore, India

Sources: LEE Eng Lock, Trane, Singapore; Punit Desai, Infosys, Bangalore, India; Tom Hartman, TX, http://www.hartmanco.com/
mprovement Over Time
Improvement ininASHRAE
Improvement Standard
ASHRAE Standard 90.1
90.1 (Year (1975-2013)
1975-2013)
110
18.5%
14%
100
90-1975 90A -1980 12.3%
Normalized EUI (1975 Use = 100)
4.5% 0.5% 18.5%

90
90.1-1989
80 4.5%
90.1- 90.1-2001
1999 6~8%
70
90.1-2004
90.1-
60 2007
50 90.1-
2010
90.1-
2013
40
30
20
10
0
1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030
Year
PNNL, Building Codes Commercial Landscape, PNNL-SA-103479, June 2014
Interrelationships
Interrelationships Building Energy Commercial Codes
ASHRAE 90.1
ASHRAE 189.1
IECC adopts 90.1 by reference – designer choice which to use but cannot ‘pick and choose’, must use one or the other only
IgCC adopts the IECC by reference but adds criteria to address additional items not covered in the IECC or increases
stringency of the IECC
IgCC adopts 189.1 by reference – designer choice which to use but cannot ‘pick and choose’, must use one or the other only
ASHRAE 189.1 adopts 90.1 by reference but adds criteria to address additional items not covered by 90.1 or increases
stringency of 90.1
ASHRAE Standard
ASHRAE 90.1 90.1
Standard Projections
Projections to 2030
Heating and cooling use index based on weighted equipment efficiency

requirement changes; Envelope based on typical medium office steel frame wall
and window areas with U-factor changes; Lighting power based on building area
allowances weighted
PNNL, Building for U.S. building
Codes Commercial floorPNNL-SA-103479,
Landscape, area; Overall Standard 90.1 progress 11
June 2014
based on PNNL’s analysis.
Typical Chiller Plant -- Needs Improvement
(1.2 kW per ton)
Source: LEE Eng Lock, Singapore

High Performance Chiller Plant (0.56 kW/t)

HOW? Bigger pipes, 45° angles, Smaller chillers

Big Pipe, small pumps
! Making pipes just 50% fatter reduces friction by 86%
Pipe%
Dia%
in% Flow%
in% Velocity% Head% loss%
inch% GPM% Ft%
/sec% S /100S %
6% 800% 8.8% 3.5%
10% 800% 3.2% 0.3%
Punit Desai, Environmental Sustainability at Infosys Driven by values, Powered by

innovation, InfoSys, presentation to RMI, Sept 15, 2014
Simple Guide to retrofit success
1. Ask for 0.60

0.50 kW/RT or better for chiller plant.
2. Ask for performance guarantee backed by clear

financial penalties in event of performance shortfall.
3. Ask for accurate Measurement & Verification system
of at least +-5% accuracy in accordance to
international standards of ARI-550 & ASHRAE guides
14P & 22.
4. Ask for online internet access to monitor the plant
performance.
5. Ask for track record.

ELECTRIC MOTOR SYSTEMS
Now use 1/2 global power

30-50% efficiency savings achievable w/ high ROI
Increasing(temperatures(“load(the(
dice”(
Source:((Adapted(from(a(graph(made(originally(by(the(University(of((
Arizona,(Southwest(Climate(Change(Network(
Copyright(Jonathan(Koomey(2014( 7(
Climate change as an entrepreneurial challenge, Jonathan Koomey, Research Fellow, Steyer-Taylor Center for Energy Policy and Finance, Stanford
University, jgkoomey@stanford.edu hFp://www.koomey.com Lawrence Berkeley NaLonal Laboratory October 21, 2014
The)New)Climate)Dice:)Public)Percep=on)of)
Climate)Change
Climate change as an entrepreneurial challenge, Jonathan Koomey, Research Fellow, Steyer-Taylor Center for Energy Policy and Finance, Stanford
University, jgkoomey@stanford.edu hFp://www.koomey.com Lawrence Berkeley NaLonal Laboratory October 21, 2014
You’re Tl l ing Me
n o A E
Ea Pwe r Pl nt
e Is Just Like A Fossil Power Plant? e
.
• Yes, and it’s lss expensive,
removes more pollutants,
and saves water
• Answer these questions to
build an EE power plant:
– How many MW and MWh?
– When and where?
– Quantity of tons needed to
be removed?
Building Energy Efficiency Power Plants: Cutting Through the Fog or Why EE Advocates Should Engage Air Regulators, Christopher
James, Principal, Regulatory Assistance Project (RAP), ACEEE Summer Study, August 2014
Figure 1. Ozone design values 2009-11. Source: EPA 2014b
Opportunities to Include Energy Efficiency in Clean Air Act Requirements
The EE community can help spur the inclusion of EE in new and revised air quality rules,
Reducing Greenhouse Gases and Improving Air Quality Through Energy Efficiency Power Plants: Cutting Through the Fog to Help Air Regulators “Build" EPPs,
andColburn,
Chris James and Ken promote EE’sAssistance
Regulatory role in helping states
Project Chris Nemeand airGrevatt,
and Jim pollution sources
Energy comply
Futures Group, with
ACEEE suchStudy,
Summer rules, in two
August 2014
What Might an Efficiency Power Plant Look Like?
EE Power Plant Output by Month
EE Power Plant for a July Day
MWh Savings
Building codes and appliance standards accounted for just over half of the savings and
the remainder came from utility-administered efficiency programs. In recent years,
savings from efficiency measures have accelerated from 582 GWh in 1998 to more
than 5,000 GWh in 2010 as the level of investment continued to increase, bringing
the overall electricity savings to more than 60,000 GWh
Building Energy-Efficiency Best Practice Policies and Policy Packages, Mark Levine, Stephane de la Rue de Can, Nina Zheng, Christopher Williams, Lawrence Berkeley
National Laboratory, Jennifer Amann, American Council for Energy-Efficient Economy, Dan Staniaszek, Sustainability Consulting Ltd., LBNL 6006E, October 2012
Energy efficiency (EE) programs are air quality control measures. The
accumulated benefits of programs such as appliance standards, updated
building codes, and more efficient manufacturing have been responsible for
significant air quality improvements achieved by the United States since the
1970s (Laitner 2009).
“Looking only at productivity gains in electricity consumption, we estimate

that deployment of semiconductor technologies—whether in consumer
goods, industrial operations, or the production of alternative energy
resources— hasgenerated a net savings of about 775
billion kilowatt-hours (kWh) of electricity in the year
2006 alone. This is on the order of a 20 percent savings for the entire
U.S. economy. A large 600 megawatt coal-fired power plant might generate
just over 4 billion kWh in a year’s time. So stated differently, our national
economy might have required the construction and operation of 184 large
electric generating power plants “but for” the widespread use of
semiconductor technologies.”
Reducing Greenhouse Gases and Improving Air Quality Through Energy Efficiency Power Plants: Cutting Through the Fog to Help Air, Regulators “Build" EPPs, Chris
James and Ken Colburn, Regulatory Assistance Project Chris Neme and Jim Grevatt, Energy Futures Group, ACEEE Summer Study Proceedings 2014.
Efficiency Power Plant (EPP) Calculator
Efficiency Power Plant (EPP) calculator, Regulatory Assistance Project, http://www.raponline.org/featured-work/cutting-

through-the-fog-to-build-energy-efficiency
Carbon displacement at
kg CO2, displaced per 2007 dollar
various efficiency costs/kWh

3¢
4¢
Keystone high nuclear cost scenario

TUNNELING THROUGH TO LOW-E
Lighting
LIGHT FACTORY -- Retinal Rods and Cones
Cone
top-down view
Rod
Cone Rod
SEM oF ROD (blue) and CONE (green) cells of the retina. ROD cells are sensitive to low
light levels and produce low-clarity black and white vision. CONE cells are sensitive to
higher levels of light and produce sharp, high-clarity trichromatic color
Retinal Sensitivity
Retinal Sensitivity
RODs CONEs
Mesopic Vision
RODs & CONEs
3 types of light-sensitive CONE cells create TRI-CHROMATIC (or

TRI-STIMULUS) color – blue, green & red – or short-wavelength,
medium-wavelength and long wavelength sensitivity,
respectively. ROD cells mediate no color vision.
Our visual system consists
of a 2-receptor system:
CONE cells providing vision

in bright light
(PHOTOPIC vision)
ROD cells providing vision

in very low levels of light
(SCOTOPIC vision)
RODS & CONES function

together at times like dusk
(MESOPIC vision).
3 types of CONE cells, red,

green & blue (TRI-
STIMULUS), provide wide
range color perception in
bright light.
MESOPIC region is
where both the rods
and cones are
functioning.
The lower light level

allows the ROD to
replenish the light
sensitive rhodopsin
and begin functioning.
The TRI-STIMULUS
CONE receptors still
have enough light to
provide some
amounts of color
vision.
SCOTOPIC region
occurs in very dim
light like viewing
grass in a moonless
night.
Here only the RODS

are functioning.
The chemicals in the

CONES no longer
have enough light to
respond, thus we no
longer see color.
Luminous Intensity
= 1 Candela (Candela per sq meter)
PHOTOPIC, MESOPIC
& SCOTOPIC together
allow us to see over a
wide range of lighting
levels with about 1 or
2 billion times (109,
nine orders of
magnitude) range
from the dimmest to
the brightest image
we can see.
BETTER LIGHTING METRICS
Reliance on the lumen (lm) as the sole
measure of lighting benefits (lm/m2 and
lm/W) can unnecessarily waste energy,
increase costs, and reduce safety, security
and visibility.
Utilization of analogous benefit metrics in

lighting standards that characterize
human visual responses would increase
the value of lighting for many applications.
Opportunities with LEDs for Increasing the Visual Benefits of Lighting Mark S. Rea,
Lighting Research Center, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy NY
Photopic luminous efficacy (lm/W)
Adding Unified Illuminance and Brightness Illuminance
Lumens represent the spectral sensitivity of just 2 of 5 known photoreceptors in human retina, and only
1 of many neural channels supporting visual perception and other responses to light on the retina. LEDs
are uniquely and readily able to maximize the visual benefits of lighting. Solid state lighting systems
provide degrees of freedom more difficult to achieve with discharge or thermal based lighting systems.
Photopic Lum Eff Scotopic Lum Eff Unified Illuminance Brightness Iilluminance
Photopic luminous efficacies (lm/W) of four common light sources used in outdoor lighting applications
together with the relative electric power levels, compared to HPS, needed to deliver equal visual benefits
according to the design concepts of unified illuminance and of brightness illuminance. The values
highlighted in pink (darker shade) indicate more electric power would be required to deliver the same
visual benefit as HPS while less would be required for those highlighted in green (lighter shade).
Opportunities with LEDs for Increasing the Visual Benefits of Lighting Mark S. Rea, Lighting Research Center, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy NY
NOTES ON LUMINOUS EFFICACY
By using the lumen as the benefit metric for
parking lots, we unnecessarily waste a great
deal of electric energy at night.
V( ) – photopic luminous efficacy function - only represents the

(achromatic) spectral weighting function of the Next
humanGeneration Streetlights
fovea for such
The Case for LEDs
tasks as reading or threading a needle.
Figure 2 - San Jose comparison of LPS and dimmable LED streetlights at 100% a
V( ) is an inappropriate characterization of the light stimulus for off-axis LED
(peripheral retina) detection of hazards. V( ) is based upon the spectral
100%the fovea is
sensitivity of the two types of photoreceptors in fovea, but 75%
relatively unimportant for detecting potential hazards seen by the

peripheral retina, as is important for driving a car.
V( ) cannot be used to accurately characterize

12 | the visual stimulus that
evokes subjective impressions of scene brightness. Perceptions of
brightness are dominated by short- wavelength radiation, but the fovea
does not contain any of the retina’s short-wavelength-sensitive
photoreceptors.
A person’s sense of personal security in a parking lot at night is

directly related to subjective impressions of scene brightness.
HPS
Lighting Landscape
Sectors
Residential Commercial Industrial Outdoor
Submarkets
General Low / Street / Building

Decorative Directional Linear Parking Exterior
Service High Bay Roadway
Technologies
Incandescent
Incandescent Halogen Halogen Reflector CFL
Reflector
CFL Reflector CFL Pin T5 T8 T12
High Pressure
Metal Halide Mercury Vapor LED Lamp LED Luminaire
Sodium
Energy Savings Forecast of Solid-State Lighting in General Illumination Applications, U.S. Department of Energy August 2014
BR=Bulged Reflector MR=Multifaceted Reflector PAR=Parabolic Aluminized Reflector
Comparing Products & Performance
https://performance.nrel.gov/
RESULTS (259)
U.S. Lighting Service Forecast 2013 to 2030
(Trillions of Lumen-hours)
CFLs
LED Luminaires
High-Intensity
Discharge (HID)
Fluorescent LED lamps
LEEP - Lighting Energy Efficiency in Parking Campaign
LED parking lamps last 5 times longer than traditional outdoor lights, with rapid
paybacks by cutting energy costs up to 70% and maintenance costs up to 90%.
Million Square Feet Installed or Planned

LED XLamp XP-G White Arriving at L70
I 1000 mA
six tim
6,000 es the
hours 10,800(ahours
of testing that lly
nd optiona the10,000
LEDs hours
have ) at three junction te
Data Set 10 11 12 actually
selected bybeen
the mates tedcturer.
nufa to, as can
(Note:be sJeen in the
unction table ture, the internal
tempera
Tsp
Sample Size
Gauging the Lifetime of
Test Dura on
55°C
20 an LED
10,080 hrs
Smart LEDs are Long-Lasting Assets !
85°C
20
10,080 hrs
105°C
20
6,048 hrs
and g
fixture israph
periodically
to the
an indica
. P
torleof
leas e
ft. the
re
Note:
fer to
quaTlity
his data is updated
of a system
http://www.cree.com/
’s thermal management, a
can significantly affect LED light output and lifetimes.) L70 is then extrap
products
extra polated/pdf/LM-80_R
value becausees ults.pdf
actua for the
l testing mos
would tatke
up-
years longer than a
In addition to kWh savings, LEDs accumulate O&M savings
-4.219E-06
be doubly sure to request the9.847E-01
1.284E-06
1.016E+00
underlying data and make sure
5.561E-06
10,000 hours, capping the maximum rating to 36,000 to 60,000 hours. If you see claims in excess of those numbers,
1.007E+00
it is from a reputable source.
obs olete before
to-date inform testing
ation.is complete. (For example, a 50,000-hour test wou
Calculated Life me <0; see Reported Life me L70(10k) = 290,000 hours L70(6k) = 65,500 hours The useful lifetime ratings for LEDs range from 36,000 to 60,000 hours,
ReportedforLife
compa
me from avoided relamping & labor maintenance costs
ring the vaL70(10k)
rying lifetime ratings
> 60,500 of LEDs.L70(10k)
hours Here is an
> example of TM-21L70(6k)
60,500 hours data: > 36,300 hours
Table 1: TM-21 data for a Cree XP-GLED run at

1000mA with a solder point temperature of 55º,
TM21 Lifetime
TM-21 Lifetime Report report
85º, and 105º Crespectively. As can be clearly
seen in the 85º Ccase, the calculated life is well
XLamp® XP-G LEDs over 250K hours but the reported lifetime is only
LED XLamp XP-G White
110 I 1000 mA
six times the 10,800 hours that the LEDs have
Data Set 10 11 12 actually been tested to, as can be seen in the table
105 Tsp 55°C 85°C 105°C and graph to the left. Note: This data is updated
Sample Size 20 20 20
periodically. Please refer to http://www.cree.com/
100 Test Dura on 10,080 hrs 10,080 hrs 6,048 hrs
-4.219E-06 1.284E-06 5.561E-06
products/pdf/LM-80_Results.pdf for the most up-
9.847E-01 1.016E+00 1.007E+00 to-date information.
95 Calculated Life me <0; see Reported Life me L70(10k) = 290,000 hours L70(6k) = 65,500 hours
Reported Life me L70(10k) > 60,500 hours L70(10k) > 60,500 hours L70(6k) > 36,300 hours
90
% Luminous Flux
85 55°C (LM-80)
85°C (LM-80)
80 110
105 105°C (LM-80)

75 100
55°C (TM-21)
95
70
90 85°C (TM-21)
% Luminous Flux
65 85 55°C (LM-80)
105°C (TM-21)
85°C (LM-80)
80
60 75
105°C (LM-80)
55°C (TM-21)
70
55 85°C (TM-21)
65
Incandescents last 1k to 10k hrs!

105°C (TM-21)
50 60
55
1,000 10,000 100,000 1,000,000
50
1,000 10,000
Time (hours)
100,000
Time (hours) 1,000,000 CFLs/HIFs last 10k to 20k hrs!
LEDs last 50k to 250k hrs
This document is provided for informational purposes only and is not a warranty or a specification. For product specifications,
HIDs last 20k to 30k hrs
This document is provided for informational purposes only and is not a warranty or a specification. For product specifications,
please see the data sheets available at www.cree.com.
thelogodata sheets
and XLamp available
are registered at ofwww.cree.com.
trademarks Cree, Inc. an LED was not standardized, meaning that each vendor performed thes
Copyright © 2011 Cree, Inc. All rights reserved. The information in this document is subject to change without notice. Cree, the
please see Cree
Unlike fluorescents, there are no ON/OFF cycling limitations for
Copyright © 2011 Cree, Inc. All rights reserved. The information in this document is subject to change without notice. Cree, the LED light
lifetime sources,
ratings because
claims tha frequent
t varied widely switching
among vendors, does not
leading to an un
Cree logo and XLamp are registered trademarks of Cree, Inc.
impact the useful life of an LED. So, when LEDs are integrated industria with occupancy and/or daylight harvesting sensors, and are
l consumers.
cycled on and off more frequently, useable lifespan is being extended because they are being turned off when not needed.!
The question then becomes: Can LED useful lifetime ratings be compared, on an apples-to-apples basis, to the lifetime
ratings of incandescent lamps, which are based on MTBF? The short answer is yes. If incandescent lifetime ratings were
Forextrapola
systems with
ted to their incandescent,
corresponding HIDwould
L70 values, the lamps and HIF
fail (e.g light
., exceed sources,
MTBF) engineers
well before they reached these typically over-light space to account for rapid initial
70 ca lculation.
thresholds (see Figure 1).
lumen depreciation. This adds to up-front costs and lifetime energy can becosts ofthe
used in incandescent, HIF & HID
extrapolation formula lighting
based on theapplications.
sample size, numb
The question then becomes: Can LED useful lifetime ratings be compatempera red, onture an apples-to-apples basis, toIt the
(ambient, high ambient). alsolifetime
creates an upper limit to th
fluorescent lightbulbs to solid-state lighting—all connected to an energy grid thr
variety of last-mile access technologies (see Figure 1).
Moving from “Traditional” to “Intelligent” Lighting Networks
Figure 1. Moving from “Traditional” to “Intelligent” Lighting Networks.
Source: Philips and Cisco, 2012

sour
ce :Th e Tim eIs RightforC on
nec
te
dPu
blicL
ig
htin
gWith
inS
mar
tCitie
s,C
IS
CO&P
hilip
s,O
cto
ber2
012
SMART LED DIVERSITY OF A19
/Standard
LIGHTING APPLICATIONS Replacement

PARS
Lamps
amp technologies have been categorized as displayed below in Figure 2-1. The categories are
MR16
on those used in the 2001 LMC, the categories used in the various data sources, as well as input
LED Lighting
members of the technical review committee. Descriptions of each lamp technology can be found
Market Candelabras
pendix A. LED Replacement of: /Globes/
Luminaire Decorative
Luminaires
Incandescent Fluorescent
General Service - A-type LFT
T5
General Service - Decorative
T8 less than 4 foot
Reflector
T8 4 foot
Miscellaneous A-type - Incandescent lamps
T8 greater than 4 foot © 2012 Strategies Unlimited
Halogen June13, 2012 PA RS- parabolic aluminized reflector lamps
T8 less than 4 foot 27
MR16 - multifaceted reflector halogen bulbs
General Service T8 4 foot LFT- Linear Fluorescent tubes
Reflector T8 greater than 4 foot
Low Voltage Display T8 U-shaped
Miscellaneous T12 U-shaped
Miscellaneous
Compact Fluorescent
General Service – Screw
General Service – Pin High Intensity Discharge
Reflector Mercury Vapor
Miscellaneous Metal Halide
Other High Pressure Sodium
LED Lamp Low Pressure Sodium
Miscellaneous
Efficacy of Various Light Sources
Smart LEDs (tunable color spectrum)
Incandescent
Tungsten Halogen
Halogen Infrared Reflecting
Mercury Vapor
Compact Fluorescent Lamp (CFL) (5-26 watts)
CFL (27-40 watts)
Hi-Wattage CFL (55-200 watts)
Fluorescent (full-size & U-tube)
Electrodeless fluorescent
Metal halide
High-Pressure Sodium (HPS/HID)
White Sodium
Low-Pressure Sodium (yellow-orange color)
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2
Lumens per Watt !

(lamp plus ballast)
Smart LED Advantages!
Higher Lumens & lower Watts from Fewer lamps
Smart!
LED
Luminaire
1!
80 watt!
LED
100k hrs 20k hrs 2k hrs
10k to 20k hrs
Smart LED other benefits - longer lifespan, no mercury, fully

dimmable, instant start/restart, less heat, tunable colour spectrum
Smart LEDs are Tunable !
Along Color Spectrum
Making the Art of Building Simulation Accessible
http://designadvisor.mit.edu/design/
Arena Amazônia
Leed Silver World Soccer Stadium 2014
Manaus, Brazil
• Brazil ranks among the world’s top 5 countries with LEED-certified projects.
• 30 million ft2 of LEED-certified space.
• Six were certified for use in the 2014 World Cup Soccer Championships.
• Arena Amazônia used a fraction of the steel (5,700 tons) compared to
conventional sports and entertainment venues.
Arena Amazônia
State-of-the-art lightweight roof based on the principle of a horizontally oriented spoked wheel. The circular roof structure is
comprised of high-strength cables connecting inner “tension rings” at the center of the circle to an outer rim, or “compression ring.”
The cable “spokes,” which are allocated at the inner edge of the roof, are tightened between the outer compression ring and the
tension rings. This creates a lightweight, almost floating roof. A secondary steel structure serves as a frame to support the
polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE)-coated high-strength resilient fiberglass membrane cladding. The roof elements also serve as gutters to
collect the large amounts of water expected during the rainy seasons. The design of the gutters facilitates rainwater collection to be
used in the arena’s plumbing systems.
Although Title 24 is considered the most stringent t
energy code in the country, California allows for local
adoption of more stringent codes contingent upon
approval by the CEC. As of May 2010, eleven cities and
five counties had adopted—and the CEC approved—
more stringent requirements than those in the 2008
Standards. Many Title 24 specifications are
performance-based, offering flexibility in building
design. Although California allows builders to use either
a prescriptive or a performance approach to comply
with Title 24, the performance approach is used much
more widely. As of 2003, more than 90% of the new
homes were built to comply with performance
standards
In January 2011, California became the first state to require new
buildings—residential and non- residential—to comply with
mandatory green building standards. The 2010 California Green
Building Standards Code (CALGREEN)55 requires a 20% reduction in
indoor water use, a separation of water meters for indoor and
outdoor water use (for commercial buildings), diversion of 50
percent of construction waste from landfills, mandatory inspections
of energy systems in commercial buildings larger than 9290 square
meters, and the use of low-emissions interior finishes (e.g., paints,
carpets, vinyl flooring, and particle board), among other provisions.
The California Air Resources Board estimates that the mandatory
provisions of CALGREEN will reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 3
million metric tons in 2020, helping California meet its state goal of
33% reduction in GHG emissions from 2010 to 2020.
In addition to the state’s formal code requirements, California has
established goals for zero net energy new construction. Announced by
the California Public Utility Commission (CPUC) in 2008 as part of the
state’s Big Bold Energy Efficiency Strategies, the goals call for all new
residential construction in California to be zero net energy by 2020,
and for all commercial new construction to meet the same goal by
2030. The CPUC defined a zero net energy building as one that
“employs a combination of energy- efficiency design features, efficient
appliances, clean distributed generation, and advanced energy
management systems to result in no net purchases of energy from the
grid.” The zero net energy goals serve as aspirational targets to inspire
residents and engage market actors to work toward a clear and
aggressive, yet achievable goal.
Unlike many states, California allows utilities to
claim credit for savings associated with codes
and code- related activities. Since 2000, utility
involvement has increased in the development
and implementation of codes and standards.
Over the 2006–2008 program cycle, the
investor-owned utilities (IOUs) spent more
than $8 million on codes and standards
activities; and for the first time they were able
to claim savings attributable to these activities.
Total savings from the IOU codes and
standards activities account for 8% to 9% of
electricity savings goals, 11% to 12% of
demand reduction goals, and 9% to 17% of gas
savings goals
Mandatory building
energy efficiency codes
(BEECs), when
practically formulated,
continuously updated,
and actually enforced,
are both effective and
economic in overcoming
persistent market
barriers and delivering
more energy-efficient
buildings.
Institute for Market Transformation. (2011b). Rating and Disclosing the Energy Performance of Buildings: A Market-Based Solution to Unlock
Commercial Energy Efficiency Opportunities. Washington, DC: Institute for Market Transformation.
W
ith climate protection and energy security issues at the forefront of global politics,
improving the energy efficiency of existing buildings is emerging as a central goal for
policymakers. In the United States, buildings account for nearly 40% of greenhouse
gas emissions,1 about half of which are from existing commercial buildings.
For better or worse, the buildings of tomorrow are mostly here. According to statistics from the
U.S. Department of Energy, only a quarter of existing commercial buildings were built in the past
10 years, while 40 percent are more than 30 years old. In New York City, where commercial and
multifamily buildings account for 80 percent of city greenhouse gas emissions and $15 billion
each year in energy costs, 85 percent of buildings standing today will still be around in 2030.2
Our ability to make meaningful reductions in building energy consumption depends on unlocking
efficiencies in existing buildings. But how do we do this?
Figure 1: Rating and Disclosure Cycle of Improvement
Performance
ratings for all
Efficiency of buildings Ratings disclosed
existing building to market
stock continuously
improves
Owners compete to Market compares

improve building building
efficiency performance
Market favors energy-
efficient buildings
An emerging solution is to comparatively rate and disclose the energy performance of buildings.
Rating and disclosure policies can unleash the market’s ability to encourage efficiency
improvement by increasing building energy transparency. In the auto industry, consumer
demand has sparked fierce competition among automakers to build smaller, fuel-efficient
vehicles. But imagine if consumers didn’t have miles-per-gallon efficiency data. Demand for
fuel-efficient vehicles would likely be much less.
Right now, commercial real estate consumers – including tenants, investors and lenders – aren’t
beingTransformation.
Institute for Market given building energy
(2011b). performance
Rating and Disclosing theinformation. Theyof Buildings:
Energy Performance can’t compare the energy
A Market-Based Solution to Unlock
Commercial Energy Efficiency Opportunities. Washington, DC: Institute for Market Transformation.
1
Energy Information Administration. Emissions of Greenhouse Gases in the United States 2008. Table 6
2
utilities in California are investing more than ever in programs targeting the buildings sector. From 1998
to 2008, IOU investment alone increased from about $210 million to more than $1 billion. Publicly-
owned utilities (POUs) are also ramping up their efficiency budgets: expenditures grew from less than
$60 million in 2006 to $166 million in 2010 (Martinez, Wang, & Chou, 2010).
Error! Reference source not found. summarizes recent utility expenditures on residential and
ommercial sector energy efficiency.
$2000
$1800
$1600
$1400
Million ($)
Investments Combined
$1200
Load Management
million $
$1000
Other
$800 Commercial & Industrial
$600 Low-Income
$400 Residential*
$200
$0
1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
* General residential programs not including programs targeted to low-income customers.
Figure 6-4. California’s Utility Efficiency Program Expenditures

Source: (Martinez, Wang, & Chou, 2010) and (CEE, 2010)
Program Portfolio
The utilities have developed robust program portfolios to meet their efficiency goals. In addition to
support for state building codes and appliance standards, discussed above, a wide array of programs
target end-use consumers as well as trade allies (e.g., architects, builders, engineers, contractors,
improvements in commercial buildings, including the ENERGY STAR Buildings platform, as well as high
efficiency equipment upgrades), and a broader range of customers including hard-to-reach or
underserved market segments. Program offerings for the 2010–2012 program cycle are summarized in
Table 6-3.
Table 6-3. Sample California Utility Program Portfolio, 2010–2012
Program Type Sample Offerings
Residential Retrofit Appliance and consumer electronics rebates
HVAC rebates and quality control/maintenance
Home energy audits and information
Direct installation of energy efficiency measures
Comprehensive whole-house retrofits
Upstream programs
Residential New Construction Single-family, multi-family and manufactured housing
Green building practices
Non-Residential Retrofit Rebates and other financial incentives
Technical assistance and energy audits
Direct installation of energy efficiency measures
Continuous energy savings
Benchmarking
On-bill financing
Upstream programs
Non-Residential New Construction Design assistance
Owner and designer team incentives
Green building practices
Emerging Technologies Increase adoption and supply of new energy-saving technologies
Codes and Standards Code/standards proposal development and advocacy
Code compliance assistance
Local Government and Higher Education Retrofits
Partnerships Benchmarking
Financing
Workforce, Education and Training Training
Needs assessments
Marketing, Education and Outreach Statewide/local/multi-lingual marketing and rural education
Integrated program outreach and central web portal
School education programs
Competitive Solicitations Innovative technologies and programs
Harder-to-reach markets and specialized programs
Pilot Programs Exploration of new programs and technologies to expand portfolio scope
and comprehensiveness
56
A resource hacquisition approach f cuses on t e “generation of energy savings which are sufficiently reliable, predictable, and
o
measurable to replace supply-side options in the planning process” (Eto, Prahl, & Schlegel, 1996). The most common resource
acquisition activity is customer rebates. A market transformation approach focuses on strategic interventions in a market to
Figure 1. Ozone design values 2009-11. Source: EPA 2014b
Opportunities to Include Energy Efficiency in Clean Air Act Requirements
The EE community can help spur the inclusion of EE in new and revised air quality rules,
and promote EE’s role in helping states and air pollution sources comply with such rules, in two
principal areas. First, the EE community should assure that EPA rules explicitly include EE as a
compliance option. Because many states are expressly prohibited by their state constitutions
Reducing Greenhouse Gases
fromand Improving
adopting Air Quality
rules more Through Energy
stringent thanEfficiency Power Plants: Cutting
federal requirements, EPAThrough the and
guidance Fog to Helpmust
rules Air Regulators “Build"
EPPs, Chris James and Ken Colburn, Regulatory Assistance Project Chris Neme and Jim Grevatt, Energy Futures Group, ACEEE Summer Study 2014
explicitly include language that promotes EE. Ot herwise, it will not be adopted by the states.
Reducing Greenhouse Gases and Improving Air Quality Through Energy Efficiency Power Plants: Cutting Through the Fog to Help Air Regulators “Build"
Per Capita Electricity Sales (not including self-generation)
(kWh/person) (2005 to 2008 are forecast data)
14,000
12,000
2005 Differences
10,000 = 5,300 kWh/yr
= $165/capita
8,000
6,000
4,000
2,000
California
United States
0
1960
1962
1964
1966
1968
1970
1972
1974
1976
1978
1980
1982
1984
1986
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
2004
2006
2008
9 Arthur H. Rosenfeld, Commissioner California Energy Commission, Successes of Energy Efficiency: The United States and California, National
Environmental Trust, May 2, 2007
Annual Energy Savings from Efficiency Programs and Standards
45,000
~15% of Annual Electricity Use in California in 2003

40,000
35,000
30,000
25,000 Utility Efficiency

GWh/year
Programs at a cost of
~1% of electric bill
20,000
15,000
Building Standards
10,000
5,000 Appliance Standards
0
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
14
Arthur H. Rosenfeld, Commissioner California Energy Commission, Successes of Energy Efficiency: The United States and California, National
Arthur H. Rosenfeld, Commissioner California Energy Commission, Successes of Energy Efficiency: The United States and California, National
Temperature and Smog Formation
Transition Zone
EPA Compliance Std = 75
Source: Maryland Commission on Climate Change
124
White roofs, cool-colored roofs save
money and can even avoid the need to
OLD air condition NEW
AC savings ≈≈ 15%
AC savings 15%
flat, white
AC savings ≈ 5%
pitched, cool & colored
AC savings≈≈10%
ACsavings 10%
pitched, white
125
A Real-World
Example of Cooling
The whitewashed
greenhouses of
Almeria, Spain have
cooled the region by
0.8 degrees Celsius
each decade compared
to surrounding regions,
according to 20 years
of weather station data.
Source: Google Earth

126
Progress in energy efficiency standards
• In 2005, California’s “Title 24” energy efficiency

standards prescribed white surfaces for low-sloped
roofs on commercial and large residential buildings
(apartments, hotels, etc.). Several hot states are
following.
• In 2008, California prescribed “cool colored” surfaces
for steep residential roofs in its 5 hottest climate
zones, but not yet Los Angeles.
• Other U.S. states & all countries with hot summers
ought to follow.
127
Recent cool roof progress (2005 – 2012)
• 2005
– California Title 24 – “Flat roofs shall be white” (15 out of 16 climate zones). Walmart
adopts white roofs for all stores.
– EPA ENERGY STAR lists cool roof materials
• 2010
– June 1st, 2010 – Memo from U.S. Energy Secretary Steven Chu
calls for all DOE Buildings to have white roofs, if cost-effective
– June 16th, 2010 – Marine Corp follows suit, Pentagon GSA following.
– June 19th, 2010 – RetroFIT Philly announces winner of “coolest block” contest to
white-coat black roofs of row houses.
• 2011-12
– 100 Cool Cities launched – see www.GlobalCoolCities.org
– 2012--US launched, at G20 Energy Ministers meeting, a voluntary Cool Roofs
Working Group, and offers technical assistance to “charter” developing countries:
India, Japan, Mexico, & US joined (further discussions with Brazil, China, South Africa)
– New York City and Chicago adopt “If it’s flat it shall be white or green”
128
Built-Up Roofs consist of a base sheet, fabric reinforcement layers, and a protective surface layer
that is traditionally dark. The surface layer can be made in a few different ways, and each has
cool options. One way involves embedding mineral aggregate (gravel) in a flood coat of asphalt.
By substituting reflective marble chips or gray slag for dark gravel you can make the roof cool.
Resources on the web

A second way built-up roofs are finished is with a mineral surfaced sheet. These can be made
cool with reflective mineral granules or with a factory-applied coating. Another surface option
involves coating the roof with a dark asphaltic emulsion. This type can be made cool by applying
a cool coating directly on top of the dark emulsion.
Modified Bitumen Sheet Membranes are composed of Figure 6:

one or more layers of plastic or rubber material with Two Cool Roof Installations
reinforcing fabrics, and are surfaced with mineral granules
LBNL – Heat Island Group or with a smooth finish. A modified bitumen sheet can
also be used to surface a built- up roof, and this is called a
HeatIsland.LBL.gov “hybrid” roof. Modified bitumen
e surfaces can b pre-
coated at the factory to make them cool.
Global Cool Cities Alliance
Spray Polyurethane Foam roofs are constructed by
www.GlobalCoolCities.org mixing two liquid chemicals together that react and
expand to form one solid piece that adheres to the roof.
Cool Roofs and Cool PavementsSince foams are highly susceptible to mechanical,
Toolkit moisture, and UV damage, they rely on a protective
coating. These coatings are traditionally reflective and
www.CoolRoofToolkit.org offer cool roof performance.
Art Rosenfeld’s website Steep Sloped Roofs
Shingled Roofs consist of overlapping panels made from
www.ArtRosenfeld.org any of numerous materials. F iberglass asphalt shingles,
commonly used on homes, are coated with granules for
protection. Cool asphalt shingles are use specially coated
granules that provide better solar reflectance. While it is
possible to coat existing asphalt shingles to make them
cool, this is not normally recommended or approved by
shingle manufacturers. Other shingles are made from
wood, polymers, or metals and these can be coated at the
factory or in the field to make them more reflective. Metal A cool coating is applied to a dark roof
(top), and a cool single-ply membrane
shingles are described in the Metal Roofs section that roof is unrolled (bottom). Image Source:
follows. DIY Advice
1
time
use
In the USA, cities and residences cover 56 million hectares.
Every kWh of current U.S. energy requirements can be met simply by
applying photovoltaics (PV) to15% 7% of existing urban area—
on roofs, parking lots, along
c highway walls, on sides of buildings, and
in dual-uses. aRequires 93% less water than fossil fuels.
Experts s y we wouldn’t p
h ve to apr opriate a single
e ar e of n w
land to make PV our primary energy source!
WIND AND WATER POWER PROGRAM
2013 Wind Technologies

Market Report
Ryan Wiser and Mark Bolinger

Report Summary
Lawrence Berkeley
August 2014
National Laboratory
1
Energy Efficiency
Program Name or &Ancillary
RenewableTextEnergy 1
eere.energy.gov
U.S. Lagging Other Countries in Wind As a
Wind as Percentage
Percentage of a Country’s Consumption
of Electricity Electricity Consumption
Note: Figure only includes the countries with the most installed wind
power capacity at the end of 2012
Wind PPA Prices Have Reached All-Time

Lows
Interior (18,178 MW, 192 contracts)
$120
West (7,124 MW, 72 contracts)
Levelized PPA Price (2013 $/MWh)
Great Lakes (3,044 MW, 42 contracts)

$100 Northeast (1,018 MW, 25 contracts)
150 MW 50 MW
Southeast (268 MW, 6 contracts)
$80
$60
$40
$20
75 MW
$0
Jan-96
Jan-97
Jan-98
Jan-99
Jan-00
Jan-01
Jan-02
Jan-03
Jan-04
Jan-05
Jan-06
Jan-07
Jan-08
Jan-09
Jan-10
Jan-11
Jan-12
Jan-13
Jan-14
PPA Execution Date
U.S. Wind Power LCOE PPA in 2013 2.5¢/kWh
Global
that the turbine scaling Wind
and other PowertoLCOE
improvements in 2013
turbine efficiency 6.5¢/kWh
described in Chapter 4 have
more than overcome these headwinds to help drive PPA prices lower.
6¢/kWh
4¢/kWh
2¢/kWh
Source: Berkeley Lab
Figure 46. Generation-weighted average levelized wind PPA prices by PPA execution date and region
Figure
Ryan 46 also
Wiser &shows
Marktrends in the generation-weighted
Bollinger, average levelized
2013 Wind Technologies MarketPPA price over
Report, time
Lawrence
among four of the five regions broken out in Figure 30 (the Southeast region is omitted from
Berkeley,
Figure 46 August
owing to 2014
its small sample size). Figures 45 and 46 both demonstrate that, based on our
data sample, PPA prices are generally low in the U.S. Interior, high in the West, and in the
Relative Competitiveness of Wind Improved

in 2013: Comparison to Wholesale Prices
100
Wind project sample includes projects
90 with PPAs signed from 2003-2013
80
70
2013 $/MWh
60
50
40
30
20
Nationwide Wholesale Power Price Range (by calendar year)
10
Generation-Weighted Average Levelized Wind PPA Price (by year of PPA execution)
0
PPA year: 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Contracts: 9 13 17 30 26 39 49 48 38 13 18
MW: 570 547 1,643 2,311 1,781 3,465 4,048 4,642 3,980 970 2,761
• Wholesale price range reflects flat block of power across 23 pricing nodes across the U.S.
• Recent wholesale prices reflect low natural gas prices, driven by weak economy and shale gas
Recent Wind Prices Are Hard to Beat:

Competitive with Expected Future Cost of
Burning Fuel in Natural Gas Plants
100
Range of AEO14 gas price projections
90 AEO14 reference case gas price projection
80 Wind 2011 PPA execution (3,980 MW, 38 contracts)
70 Wind 2012 PPA execution (970 MW, 13 contracts)
2013 $/MWh
Wind 2013 PPA execution (2,761 MW, 18 contracts)

60
50
40
30
20
10
0
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
2036
2037
2038
2039
2040
Price comparison shown here is far from perfect – see full report for caveats
Turbine Nameplate Capacity, Hub Height,

and Rotor Diameter Have All Increased
Significantly Over the Long Term
Photovoltaic System
Pricing Trends
Historical, Recent, and Near-Term

Projections
2014 Edition
David Feldman1, Galen Barbose2, Robert

Margolis1, Ted James1, Samantha Weaver2, Naïm
energy.gov/sunshot September 22, 2014 Darghouth2, Ran Fu1, Carolyn Davidson1, Sam
NREL/PR-6A20-62558 Booth1, and Ryan Wiser
1
2
National Renewable Energy Laboratory
energy.gov/sunshot
2Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
Tracking the Sun VII
An Historical Summary of the Installed Price of
Photovoltaics in the United States from 1998 to 2013
Galen Barbose, Samantha Weaver and Naïm Darghouth

Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
— Report Summary —
September 2014
This analysis was funded by the Solar Energy Technologies Office, Office of Energy
Efficiency and Renewable Energy of the U.S. Department of Energy under Contract No.
DE-AC02-05CH11231.
Preliminary Price Trends for Systems Installed
in H1 2014 from a Subset of State Markets
$8
Installed Price (2013$/WDC)
Residential & Commercial PV: AZ, CA, MA, MD, NJ, NY

2013 2014 (H1)
(Median Values)
$6
$4
$2
$4.74 $4.50 $4.36 $3.97 $3.99 $3.52

$0
10-
n=32,517 (2013) n=5,851 (2013) n=912 (2013)
n=12,902 (H1 2014) n=2,372 (H1 2014) n=314 (H1 2014)
Note: The 2013 and H1 2014 values in this figure are based on data from a smaller set of states than elsewhere in this section, and thus the 2013
values differ from the national median values cited previously.
Installations in a number of the larger PV incentive programs and state markets have
shown continued price declines into H1 2014
Median reported prices fell by roughly $0.24-0.48/W (5-12%) during the first half of
2014, relative to 2013, across the three size ranges shown.
9
energy.gov/sunshot
Variation in Reported Price by State:
$7
Systems >100 kWDC Installed in 2013
$6 (Median and 20th/80th Percentiles)
Installed Price (2013$/WDC)
$5
$4
$3
$2
$1
$2.54 $2.65 $3.40 $3.54 $3.78 $4.26 $5.32
$0
NC CO MA NJ NY CA AZ
79 37 117 261 29 404 186
State (Sample Size)
Note: Numbers in parentheses below each state indicate the number of observations; median installed prices are shown only if 15 or more
observations are available for a given state.
Median reported prices also vary widely across states for large commercial systems
(i.e., a difference of $2.79/W between the lowest- and highest-priced states), though
some caution is warranted given small sample sizes for individual states
Variation across states reflect the same kinds of factors cited on prior slide (e.g.,
preponderance of large ground-mounted systems in NC, non-profit 12
and public agency projects in CA, etc.). energy.gov/sunshot
Installed Prices for Residential PV: United States vs. Germany
$5
Sales Tax/VAT (2013$/WDC)
Installed Price, Excluding
$4
$3
$2
$1
$4.40 $3.52 $3.29 $2.05
$0
U.S. Reported Price U.S. Modeled Price U.S. Modeled Price Germany Reported Price
(Installed in 2013) (Quoted Q4 2012) (Quoted Q4 2013) (Quoted in 2013)
Note: The German data are based on price quotes for roughly 2,300 individual PV systems obtained by EuPD through its quarterly survey of
German installers and provided to LBNL.
Installed prices in the United States are high compared to many other major
international PV markets; the disparity is particularly stark in comparison to Germany
Hardware costs are fairly similar across countries; thus the gap in total installed prices
must reflect differences in soft costs (including installer margins)
Suggestive of a potential for near-term installed price reductions in the United States.
24
energy.gov/sunshot
Analyst Estimates (2012- and Projections
(2014– of Global Average System Price
Distributed Systems Utility-Scale Systems
$5 $5
Historic Projection Historic Projection
$4 Range of Analyst Range of Analyst

$4
System Price (2013 $/WDC)
System Price (2013 $/WDC)

Projections Projections
$3 $3
$2 $2
$1 $1
$0 $0
2012 2013 2014P 2015P 2016P 2012 2013 2014P 2015P 2016P
Analysts expect the system prices of both utility-scale and distributed systems to
continue to fall in the near future
Distributed systems are expected to reach between $1.50/W - $3.00/W by 2016
Utility-scale systems are expected to reach between $1.30 - $1.95/W by 2016.
Note: P = projection. Data represent the max. and min. figures from: Bloomberg New Energy Finance (05/15/14);
27
Cowen & Company (04/24/14); Deutsche Bank (04/23/14, 05/06/14, 05/08/14); Stifel Nicolaus (03/20/14). Inflation energy.gov/sunshot
adjusted 2013-14: EIA, AEO, Table 20, Gross Domestic Product, August 2012.
Range of Analyst Expectations of Long-term
System Price
$5.0
$4.0
Utility-scale PV Range of Analyst
Projections Analysts expect pricing in all PV markets to
$3.0 continue to decrease in the long-term
$2.0 Low-end of analyst projections get very
PV Installed Cost (2010 $/W)
$1.0 close to SunShot target by 2020-2030

$0.0 High-end still approximately $1.00-
2015P 2020P 2025P 2030P 2035P 2040P
$1.50/W above targets, though these
$5.0
Commercial-scale PV estimates align with some of today’s
$4.0 modeled prices
$3.0
Current analyst projections are far lower
$2.0 than projections made in recent past
$1.0 2020 price projections are
$0.0 approximately ½ of what same
2015P 2020P 2025P 2030P 2035P 2040P
analysts projected 5-10 years ago.
$5.0
$4.0
Residential-scale PV
Sources: Greenpeace/EREC, “Energy Revolution,” May 2014 (utility-scale only);
$3.0 International Energy Agency, “World Energy Outlook 2013,” November 2013 (
New Policy & 450 Scenarios for utility-scale & commercial-scale); Bloomberg
New Energy Finance, Q2 2014, “PV Market Outlook” (05/15/14); U.S. Energy
$2.0 Information Administration, Annual Energy Outlook 2014 ER (December 2013).
In years where projection was not made, most recent projection used.
$1.0
$0.0 28
2015P 2020P 2025P 2030P 2035P 2040P
energy.gov/sunshot
Common Utility Sector View
Embedded Cost Perspective
• Only the short-run avoided
operating cost should be credited.
• At minimum, customer should
u
pay distribution costs.
DG cs tomerh “uses” te grid
and should pay for it;
Solution: High monthly

fixed charges for grid service.
Jim Lazar, The Regulatory Assistance Project, Status of Distributed Generation Installation and Rate Making In the US, American Public Power Association
Workshop, Jan. 13, 2014 10
Net-Metering: Almost Universal in the US
Net Metering.
www.dsireusa.org / July 2013
43 states,
+ Washington DC
& 4 territories,have
adopted a net
metering policy.
Note: Numbers indicate individual system capacity limit in kilowatts. Some limits vary by customer type, technology and/or application. Other limits might also apply.
This map generally does not address statutory changes until administrative rules have been adopted to implement such changes.
Jim Lazar, The Regulatory Assistance Project, Status of Distributed Generation Installation and Rate Making In the US, American Public Power Association Workshop, Jan. 13, 2014
Where Did Net-Metering Come From?
• Simple.
• “Infant-industry”
subsidies are
common.
• Unresolved issues
over the
v “a lue” of
distributed
generation.
Jim Lazar, The Regulatory Assistance Project, Status of Distributed Generation Installation and Rate Making In the US, American Public Power Association Workshop, Jan. 13, 2014 8
Common Utility Sector View
Embedded Cost Perspective
• Only the short-run avoided
operating cost should be credited.
• At minimum, customer should
u
pay distribution costs.
DG cs tomerh “uses” te grid
and should pay for it;
Solution: High monthly

fixed charges for grid service.
10
How Did High Monthly Fixed Charges
Work Out For the Telephone Industry?
Switched Access Lines X 1,000
11
Typical DG Advocate View
Marginal Cost Perspective:
• Value of distributed resource is greater than the than retail
rate;
• Net-metering results in subsidy to the grid from innovators.
12
RMIV
Sr vey O
f “ alue o
of S l ar” Studies:
u Average: $.1672/kWh
Low-Cost Utilities
Value of Solar vs. Average Retail Rate
14
Carl Linvill, John Shenot, Jim Lazar, Designing Distributed Generation Tariffs Well: Fair Compensation in a Time of Transition, Regulatory Assistance Project, November 2013, www.raponline.org
The New Power Plant
example of a networking kit capable of running the industrial Internet-of-Things (IoT)

IPv6
Internet Protocol version 6
Key advantage of IPv6 over IPv4 is large address space. IPv6 address length is
128 bits vs. 32 bits in IPv4. The address space therefore has 3.4×1038
addresses, or 314 trillion trillion trillion addresses (sextillion). This would be
about 100 addresses for every atom on the surface of the earth.
REMOTE SUPPLY END-USE-ORIENTED
SMART SYSTEM INTELLIGENCE ATTRIBUTES
INTERNET-OF-EVERYTHING
IP Cloud Controlled
Wireless Smart Sensor Networks
Centralized production in the mid 80’s Decentralized production of today
District heating and CHP have reduced Denmark’s CO2-emission by 1/5.

Hybrid AC/DC Microgrids
What is a Microgrid?
Household appliances and electronics
PCC
DC Coupled Subsystem
Main
Utility Grid
Microgrid Research Programme – ET – AAU

170
DC Coupled subsystem
What is a Microgrid?
PCC
Main
Utility Grid
Modes of Operation: ISLANDED
PCC
Main
Utility Grid
MicroGrids are defined according to the IEEE Std 1547.4-2011
Guide for Design, Operation, and Integration of DR Island Systems with EPS.
The term DR island systems, sometimes referred to as microgrids, is used for electrical power systems (EPS)
as:
1. Have DR and load
2. Have the ability to disconnect from and parallel with the area EPS include the local EPS and may include
portions of the area EPS, and
3. Include the local EPS and may include
portions of the area EPS, and they are
intentionally planned.
DR island systems can be either

local or area EPS islands
Tertiary Power Import/export from/to the grid.
Control
Secondary Control
f/V Restoration (Island)
Synchronization (Island to grid Connected mode)
Primary Control Modeling + Inner loops + droop Control (P/Q Sharing).
Problem: Harmonics in Microgrids
Possible solutions:
- One DG unit could give more harmonics than
another. (harmonic current sharing)
- Voltage Harmonic Reduction (Control strategies
for HC)
Problem: Unbalances in Microgrids

Possible solutions:
- By means of sec. control, PCC voltage
unbalances can be compensated by control
signals to the primary level.
- Voltage Unbalance Compensation (Control
strategies)
Test and verification that the proposed solutions follow the European
power quality standards IEC 61727 and IEC 61000-3-6.
Distribution network with multiple MG setup
Centralized Control Distributed control

Communication model provided by IEC
61850 & IEC 61400-25 to describe the
physical devices in the network model.
• Study meter-bus technology solutions to

integrate smart meters and data
concentrators according to EN13757.
•Develop different levels of communications
architectures for residential AMI following
IEC61968-9 (interface standard for meter
reading and control).
•Integrate smart meters and data
concentrators in different levels of wireless
and meshed network architectures,
according to EN13757-5 (standard for radio
mesh meter-bus) and EN13757-4 (wireless
meter-bus).
Timbus et Al. Management of DER Using Standarized Communications and modern Technologies
DC Distribution Microgrids
The key application areas for
standardization of dc power use in
buildings include: 24 VDC 380 VDC
✔Interiors and Occupied Spaces

where lighting and control loads
dominate the need for dc electricity
✔Data centers and telecom central
offices with their dc powered
information and communications
technology (ICT ) equipment
✔Outdoor electrical uses, including
electric vehicle charging and
outdoor light-emitting diode (LED )
lighting
✔Building services, utilities, and 380 VDC 24 & 380 VDC
HVAC with variable-speed drive
(VSD ) and electronic dc motorized
equipment.
grid. Each conversion yields a loss, and we estimate1 that these losses, including energy losses in
the building wiring and in the devices themselves, account for 13% of a code-built commercial
Loads & losses in California commercial office buildings
office building’s energy use (Figure 1) in California.
Most loads—computers, consumer

Figure 1. Loads and losses in Californiaelectronics, andbuildings
commercial office other (Ecova
office2012).
equipment—inherently
run on DC electricity, so they must convert the AC electricity provided by the grid. Each
2
The yields
conversion underlying premise
a loss, of considering
including DC distribution
energy losses as an energy
in the building wiringefficiency strategy
and in the devices
is the opportunity to reduce energy losses by consolidating or eliminating power conversion
themselves. account for 13% of a code-built commercial office building’s energy use in
steps. In ZNE buildings, conversion losses are even more significant than standard commercial
California (figureThey
office buildings. above).
are particularly dense with high-tech low-energy technologies, such as
adjustable
Reviving speed Opportunities
the War of Currents: drives fortomotors
Save Energyand LED
with DC drivers,
Distribution both of
in Commercial which
Buildings, operate
Suzanne on DC.
Foster Porter, These types
Dave Denkenberger and Catherine
Mercier, Ecova, Peter May-Ostendorp, Xergy Consulting, Peter Turnbull, PG&E, 2014 ACEEE Summer Study on Energy Efficiency in Buildings
ification steps (a couple of high efficiency DC to DC conversions are typically required to
eve LV required at the end use). Figure 2 illustrates some typical power flow paths for
tricity in today’s AC distribution buildings and the envisioned DC distribution approach.
Reviving the War Figure

of Currents:2.Opportunities
Schematic to Save
ofEnergy
AC with
andDCDC
Distribution in Commercial
distribution Buildings, Suzanne
approaches 3
. Foster Porter, Dave Denkenberger and Catherine
quirements of native DC equipment differ vastly from the standard voltages at which grids
Common AC & DC voltages
pically provide AC power. For example, plug load devices can require anywhere from 5 VDC
r USB products to 48 VDC for certain telecommunications equipment (Figure 3). No one
in high- & low-voltage products
ltage dominates. This creates a challenge for anyone designing a DC distribution system,
cause one must eventually standardize one or two voltages to supply the building’s equipment.
Figure
Reviving 3. Common
the War AC and DC
of Currents: Opportunities voltages
to Save Energy within
DChigh- andinlow-voltage
Distribution products.
Commercial Buildings, Suzanne Foster Porter, Dave Denkenberger and Catherine
integrating DC power into walls, furniture, and floors, in addition to the suspended ceilings
currently included in the standard today. Adding plug load equipment would enable DC
distribution for the majority of office equipment and lighting, and will be a significant step
DC distribution standards
toward cost-effectively realizing possible savings from DC distribution systems.4
Table 1. DC distribution standards

Standard Application(s) Organization(s) Voltage Notes
EMerge Alliance Distribution in data EMerge Alliance and 380 VDC Completed
Data/Telecom centers and telecom EPRI task force in 2012
Standard central offices
ETSI EN 300 132- Telecom distribution European 400 VDC Completed
3-1 - V2.1.1 Telecommunications in 2012
Standard Standards Institute
IEC SG4 Distribution in areas International 400 VDC - Set up in
where LVDC is used Electrotechnical 1500 VDC 2009
Commission (IEC)
USB Power Consumer electronics USB Alliance 5 VDC Completed
Delivery and office equipment in 2014
up to 100 W
Residential DC Residential and small EMerge Alliance Initiated in
Power Initiative commercial 2013
EMerge Occupied Commercial interior EMerge Alliance and 24 VDC Completed
Space Standard infrastructures EPRI task force in 2013
IEEE 802.3 Power over Ethernet IEEE Various Completed
for networked devices in 2003,
revised in
2005 and
2009
Reviving the War of Currents: Opportunities to Save Energy with DC Distribution in Commercial Buildings, Suzanne Foster Porter, Dave Denkenberger and Catherine
Another promising development from the world of plug loads is the USB Power Delivery
An open industry
association
Leading the rapid

adoption of safe DC
power distribution
in commercial
buildings through
the development of
EMerge Alliance
standards
Microgrid Networks Are Emerging
Microgrids are like scalable networks
DC Power
Standards
Benefits:
 Autonomy
 Stability/Reliability
 Compatibility
 Flexibility
 Scalability
 Efficiency
 Economics
 Peer-to-peer connectivity
Controls from a DC Power Perspective, DC – The Power to Change Buildings, Kevin Schader, Executive Director – EMerge Alliance
DC Microgrids Can Help In Buildings
Microgrids are for buildings not just ‘Smart’ grids
DC Power
Standards
Building
Microgrids
New DC Power Standards Are Helping
Industry standards are key DC Power
Standards
There are new standards for generating and

distributing DC power in buildings.
Power Sources
Utility
Battery Fuel Cell
Solar PV Wind Gen Set Meter
Storage Other
Wind 380VDC
MPPT
Contr. Converter
Facility Power Server and Common Distribution / Collector (380VDC

Nom) Bus
Lighting HVAC Electronic ICT

Plug Loads EV Charger Data Center
Loads Loads Loads Desktop
380VDC 380VDC 380VDC
24VDC 380VDC 380/24VDC 24VDC
Electrical Loads
Latin America and Caribbean 9 GW Of Solar
5-Year Cumulative Demand Forecast by Project Status
http://cleantechnica.com/2014/09/30/latin-america-caribbean-region-expected-install-9-gw-solar-5-years/
Latin America and Caribbean PV Demand
Growing 45% Annually Out To 2017
http://www.solarbuzz.com/reports/emerging-pv-markets-report-latin-america-caribbean
Average Retail Grid Rates versus RE Generation Costs
Retail Rates Small Hydro Biomass Solar Wind CHP
$0.25
US$ per kWh (2012)
$0.25
$0.20 $0.20
$0.15 $0.15
$0.10 $0.10
$0.05 $0.05
$0.00 $0.00
NOTES:
Rates are pre-Net Metering, which began in 2013,
providing strong solar PV growth.
Retail rates are national average, while some regional
rates have peak rates far exceeding solar PV LCOE.
Emerging PV Markets Report: Latin America & Caribbean, SolarBuzz

In 2011, Peru had a total
installed capacity of 4.7
MW. By the beginning of
this year it had 90 MW
of installed solar.
Peruvian government is also
attempting to bring electricity to
disparate residents who until now
have not had it, and by 2016 plans to
have installed off-grid solar on
500,000 homes free of charge to raise
electrification rates from 66% to 95%
of the total population.
Software-enabled
Delivery of Smart Services
High Bay LED
replacement for
400W Metal Halide or
High Pressure Sodium
lamps, while using
only 130W of
electricity. 2 year
payback at 14
cents/kWh electricity
price.
Philips Xitanium SR LED Driver provides
foundation for connected lighting systems
LED Drivers now enable every light fixture to be a wireless node,

providing fast, easy and cost-effective way to add intelligence to LED
luminaires and gain access to the data they can provide.
Reaping the rewards of data-driven efficiency: Benefits of LED
lighting go beyond ROI to system-wide data mining, Yolanda Smith,
Digital Lumens, Plant Engineering journal, 09/18/2014
Digital Lumens offers fixtures for commercial and industrial buildings that
take advantage of the inherent controllability of solid-state lighting, by
embedding intelligence and sensors and adjusting consumption based
upon daylight levels, occupancy, and other inputs to drive energy savings
of 90% or more. But along the way to achieving these direct energy cost
reductions, many of their customers find additional benefits from having a
network of data-gathering mini-computers all over their facilities. For
example, manufacturers and warehouse operators who’ve installed Digital
Lumens systems have the ability to generate “heat maps” showing which
locations in their facilities get the most traffic, which allows the facilities
managers to reposition equipment or goods so that less time is wasted by
workers moving around unnecessarily. And now retailers are starting to
leverage the same information to better position higher-margin product
where traffic is highest within their stores.
Rob Day, Your Company’s Energy Data Is an Untapped Resource, HBR Blog Network, Sept. 12, 2014,
http://blogs.hbr.org/2014/09/your-companys-energy-data-is-an-untapped-resource/
• LightRules management software, which integrates with intelligent LED
lighting fixtures and LightRules Power to provide comprehensive
management and reporting capabilities;
• LightRules Insight, a cloud-based solution that integrates data from
multiple facilities into a single dashboard view;
• LightRules Power to measure and monitor energy usage on any piece of
equipment or system in facility, and integrate that information into
LightRules energy reports;
• LightRules Keypad, a wall-mounted device for implementing pre-
programmed lighting profiles across the network; and
• LightRules Monitor, a remote optimization service that leverages Digital
Lumens experts to make optimization recommendations.
CISCO EnergyWise Management Optimization Software
Announcing the new and impr oved Cisco EnergyWise Suit e
See, Measure and Manage
Campus HVAC
Facilities
CRAC (BMS partners)
Printers Lighting Video
Thin Clients Cameras
Macs Access
Desktops Gateways Control
Laptops
Servers Systems
VoIP Phones
Access Points
Policy Based Mainframes Routers Switches Network Based

PDUs
and Automated Core Switches No Agents!
UPSs
Blade
Servers CPUs
Servers Storage
Virtualized
Servers
Data Center
http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/products/switches/energywise-optimization-service/index.html
power mnag ement c o reduce n
overall eer gy costs.
JouleX Energy Monitoring & Optimization Software
Measure Energy Consumption Powerful Energy Intelligence
and Utilization of ALL network- Energy Cost
connected devices and systems:
O R AN Energy Usage
Distributed Office Network: T Energy Reduction
I
PCs, MAC, VoIP phones, access
MON
Carbon Emissions
ALY
points, copiers, printers, etc.
Date/Time
Data Center:
ZE
Location
servers, routers, switches, storage
n
Cost Center
Facilities:
HVAC, Lighting, PDUa
CO
NTROL
Event Based Policy
Rule Based Policy
Energy Use Simulation
ROI Modeling
Device Utilization
Load Adaptive TM Computing
http://www.cisco.com/web/about/ac49/ac0/ac1/ac259/joulex.html
FEATURES
architectural firme [8] represents a new contemporary
interpretation for the Islamic-Arab windcatcher. Both applied
Kensington
the same design Oval
conceptcricket Stadium,
of capturing Barbados
the prevailing wind and
Designed
disperse it around the with traditional Wind Catcher
building.
Fig. 19. Bu
2008 by E
The Sh
projects i
into the
Fig. 17. Kensington cricket ground,
Natural cooling & ventilation design by capturing the prevailing wind ARP Associates [7]
behind th
and dispersing it around the building and exte
ventilate
drawn in
Design with Nature: Windcatcher as a Paradigm of Natural Ventilation Device in Buildings, Dr. Abdel-moniem El-Shorbagy, International Journal of Civil
& Environmental Engineering IJCEE-IJENS Vol:10 No:03, 2010
level) and
http://www.lightingfacts.com/
http://www.gelighting.com/Ligh
tingWeb/na/resources/tools/le
d-system/
Highlighted Products Financial Case Study: Full-Service Bar & Grill
STAN DARD OPTION S:
Desig ned t o Last 50 ,0 0 0 Hours / 5-Year Fixt ure Warrant y Estimated Project Savings*
BA R
W ORK STATION
· $16 ,4 52 tot al lifet im e saving s
TM
LR6 6 ” DOW N LIGHT HOSTESS / RETA IL
· Payb ack w it hin 2 years
· 3,231 t ot al w at t s saved
· 650 lum ens, 10 .5W , 120 V
· 18,817 kW h saved annually
· 9 0 CRI at 270 0 K or 350 0 K
· 57 hours saved relam ping
· Dim m ab le to 20 % ( 120 V)
DINING ROOM
To see how t hese saving s w ere
· Deep recess m od el availab le achieved and t o calculat e

your ow n, p lease visit :
KITCHEN
· 277V m od el also a vailab le CreeLEDLig ht ing .co m / CaseSt ud ies
TM
LBR-30 BR30 LAMP
· 60 0 lum ens, 12W , 120 V
· 94 CRI at 270 0 K
· 25° and 50 ° b eam angles

Project Fixture Options
· Dim m ab le to 20 %
Cree LED Lighting Incumbent Lighting Estimated Total Lifetime Costs
TM (50 ,0 0 0 HOURS)
CR24 2’x4 ’ TROFFER Sym b ol Lum inaire Qt y W at t s To t al W at t s Eq uivalent To t al W at t s $35 ,757
LR6 90 10 .5 945 32W CFL 2,8 80 Lab or

· 220 0 lum ens, 22W
Lam p s $19 ,30 5
LBR-30 12 12 14 4 65W BR30 78 0
· 4 0 0 0 lum ens, 4 4W or 36W Energ y
CR24 (4 0 0 0 L) 12 35 420 9 0 W 3-Lam p T8 1,0 80 Purchase

· 50 0 0 lum ens, 50 W
· 9 0 CRI at 350 0 K or 4 0 0 0 K To t al Pow er ( W ) 1,50 9 4 ,74 0

2 Yr.
Payback
· St ep Dim m ing t o 50 % Energy Savings 6 8% Cree Incum bent
· 0 -10 V Dim m ing t o 5%
· 120 V-277V Univ ersal Driv er *Savings and p ayback are represent at ive of w hat consum ers could exp ect op erat ing in a t yp ical rest aurant environm ent using com p arab le prod uct s.
Rest aurant A p plicat ion & Payb ack
Highlighted Products Financial Case Study: Twelve-Story Hotel
STANDARD FEATURES:
Desig ned t o Last 50 ,0 0 0 Ho urs / 5-Year Fixt ure Warrant y

Estimated Project Savings*
CHECK-IN · $53,362 tot al lifet im e saving s

CR6 TM
6 ” DOW N LIGHT · Payb ack w it hin 9 m ont hs
GUEST ROOMS
ELEVATORS · 8 ,0 37 t ot al w at t s saved
· 575 lum ens, 9.5W , 120 V
· 38,4 0 5 kW h saved annually
· 9 0 CRI at 270 0 K · 187 hours saved relam ping
LOBBY
· Dim m ab le t o 5% To see how t hese saving s w ere

achieved and to calculat e
· Fit s 5” and 6 ” housing s GUEST ROOMS your ow n, p lease visit :
CreeLEDLig ht ing .co m / CaseSt ud ies

CONFERENCE ROOMS
LOUNGE
LR4 TM
4 ” DOW NLIGHT
· 54 0 lum ens, 10 .5W , 120 V
FIRST FLOOR SECOND FLOOR

· 515 lum ens, 11.1W , 120 V
· 9 0 CRI at 270 0 K or 350 0 K
· 15° or 30 ° shield ang les

· Dim m ab le t o 20 %
Sym b ol Lum inaire Qt y W at t s Tot al W at t s Eq uivalent To t al W at t s (50 ,0 0 0 HOURS)

$10 7,9 0 7
CR22 TM
2’x 2’ TRO FFER
CR6 40 3 9.5 3,829 26 W CFL 10 ,478 Lab or
· 320 0 lum ens, 35W , 120 -277V Lam p s $54 ,5 4 5
LR4 25 10 .5 26 3 50 W MR16 1,250
Energ y
· 20 0 0 lum ens, 22W , 120 -277V
CR22 (320 0 L) 16 35 56 0 60 W 2-Lam p T8 960 Purchase
· 9 0 CRI at 350 0 K or 4 0 0 0 K
To t al Pow er ( W ) 4 ,6 51 12 ,6 8 8
· Step Dim m ing to 50 % 9 Mo.
Payback
Energy Savings 6 3% Cree Incum bent
· 0 -10 V Dim m ing t o 5%
*Saving s and p ayback are represent at ive of w hat consum ers could exp ect op erat ing in a t yp ical hotel environm ent using com p arable p roduct s.
Hotel A pplicat ion & Payback
Highlighted Products Financial Case Study: Specialty Clothing Store
STANDARD FEATURES:
Desig ned t o Last 50 ,0 0 0 Ho urs / 5-Year Fixt ure Warrant y

Estimated Project Savings*
W INDOW DISPLAYS
· $4 6 ,0 31 t ot al lifet im e saving s
OFFICE /
LR6 TM
6 ” DOW N LIGHT FITTING
STORAGE
· Payb ack w it hin 3 years
· 9,794 t ot al w at t s saved
· 650 lum ens, 10 .5W , 120 V
· 42,780 kW h saved annually
· 9 0 CRI at 270 0 K or 350 0 K · 122 hours saved relam p ing
· Dim m ab le t o 20 % ( 120 V) To see how t hese saving s w ere

FEATURED
DISPLAY CA SES achieved and t o calculat e
· Deep recess m od el available yo ur ow n, p lease visit :
SA LES RACKS
CreeLEDLig ht ing .co m / CaseSt ud ies
· 277V m od el also availab le
CHECKOUT
LRP-38 TM
PAR LAMP
· 60 0 lum ens, 12W , 120 V
· 94 CRI at 270 0 K
· 4 80 0 CBCP
· 20 ° b eam ang le
· Dim m ab le t o 20 %
Sym b ol Lum inaire Qt y W at t s To t al W at t s Eq uivalent To t al W at t s (50 ,0 0 0 HOURS)
$ 85,531
LR6 68 10 .5 714 75W Incand escent 5,10 0 Lab or

CR22 TM
2’x2’ TROFFER
$39 ,50 0
Lam p s
LRP-38 66 12 79 2 75W PA R38 4 ,950
Energ y
· 320 0 lum ens, 35W , 120 -277V
CR22 ( 320 0 L) 50 35 1,750 60 W 2-Lam p T8 3,0 0 0 Purchase
· 20 0 0 lum ens, 22W , 120 -277V
To t al Pow er ( W ) 3,256 13 ,0 50
· 9 0 CRI at 350 0 K or 4 0 0 0 K 3 Yr.
Payback
Energy Savings 75% Cree Incum bent
· Step Dim m ing to 50 %
· 0 -10 V Dim m ing to 5%

*Saving s and p ayback are rep resent at ive of w hat consum ers could exp ect op erat ing in a t yp ical ret ail environm ent using com parab le p roduct s.
Ret ail A p plicat ion & Payback
http://www.gelighting.com/LightingWeb/na/resources/tools/led-system/
Utility Rebates
Efficiency Standards – Store Refrigerated Cases
New standards will save purchasers of supermarket glass-door refrigerator and freezer cases
more than $500 over the lifetime of a single case. (A typical supermarket has about 60
refrigerated display cases.)
DOE estimates that commercial refrigerators and freezers meeting the new standards sold
over thirty years will reduce U.S. electricity consumption by about 340 billion kilowatt-hours
and save businesses $12 billion. The new standards will also reduce CO2 emissions by 142
million metric tons, which is equivalent to the annual emissions of 30 million cars.
http://www.aceee.org/blog/2014/02/new-refrigeration-efficiency-standard
Artisinal
Productized
Andfew Chen, From

Artisanal to
Integrated: How
Data Is Remaking
the Efficiency
Industry,
GreenTechMedia,
October 10, 2014,
http://www.greente
chmedia.com/article
s/read/How-Data-Is-
Making-Efficiency-
More-
Effective?utm_sourc
e=Efficiency&utm_
medium=Headline&
utm_campaign=GT
MDaily
What really matters to the real estate industry:
owning and operating HIGH-YIELDING ASSETS.
One-time benchmarking exercise or an onsite audit is only a

snapshot of a building’s performance and cannot capture the
dynamic responses of a building.
Therefore, this portfolio management platform must provide

continuous tracking and benchmarking so that profiles are
always up to date as the buildings’ physical systems evolve and
external factors like weather and utility prices change.
Andfew Chen, From
Artisanal to
Integrated: How Data
Is Remaking the
Efficiency Industry,
GreenTechMedia,
October 10, 2014,
http://www.greentech
media.com/articles/re
ad/How-Data-Is-
Making-Efficiency-
More-
Effective?utm_source
=Efficiency&utm_medi
um=Headline&utm_ca
mpaign=GTMDaily
The Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission has estimated that the
U.S. could avoid building 188
gigawatts of power plants, or
approximately $400 billion in
capital investment, through
dynamic peak power controls.
Amit Narayan, Utility and Consumer Data: A New Source of Power in the Energy Internet of Things, GreenTechMedia, Oct 9, 2014,
http://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/Utility-and-Consumer-Data-is-a-New-Source-of-Power-in-the-Energy-Internet-
o?utm_source=Daily&utm_medium=Headline&utm_campaign=GTMDaily
TOYOTA’S I-ROAD
Electric vehicle, 50 km cruising range per charge,

Zero CO2 Emissions
http://www.toyota-global.com/innovation/personal_mobility/i-road/
Keenneth L. Seibert, PE, LEED AP Kenny Stanfield, AIA, LEED AP, Richardsville Elementary The First Net Zero Energy Public School in
the U.S. ARMY Net Zero Energy Installations Conference, January 19, 2012,
Keenneth L. Seibert, PE, LEED AP Kenny Stanfield, AIA, LEED AP, Richardsville Elementary The First Net Zero Energy Public School in the U.S. ARMY Net Zero
Energy Installations Conference, January 19, 2012,
John Boecker, Integrative Energy, Water, and Waste Community Design…from vision and concept to practical Implementation, Army Net-Zero Installations Conference:
19 January 2012
19 January 2012
19 January 2012
19 January 2012
19 January 2012
19 January 2012
19 January 2012
19 January 2012
19 January 2012
19 January 2012
19 January 2012
19 January 2012
19 January 2012
http://www.buildingrating.org/sites/default/files/IMT_USbenchmarking_map_10.27.14.jpg
http://www.buildingrating.org/sites/default/files/Commercial_Benchmarking_Policy_Matrix%20%28cities%29%20-%208.1.14.png
http://www.buildingrating.org/graphic/us-building-area-covered-annually
DPR Construction San Francisco Regional Office – Net Zero Healthy Building
Green Features
Pursuing LEED v4 Platinum certification

Targeting Net-Zero Energy Building (NZEB) certification by the International Living Future Institute (ILFI) through its Living Building Challenge
program
118kW photovoltaic (PV) system to produce renewable energy that will provide power throughout the building
Complete structural renovation and roof replacement to support PV system
Rooftop solar thermal water heating system
Eight solar-powered, automated operable skylights over the atrium
Two large existing skylights were renovated with View Dynamic glazing to control and diffuse natural light
19 Solatubes installed to provide more natural light throughout the open office
12 Big Ass® fans that efficiently promote air flow
Three living walls installed by Habitat Horticulture in addition to a living wine bar
Reclaimed Redwood from deconstructed Moffett Field Hangar One in Mountain View and reclaimed Douglas Fir from piles salvaged from the
San Francisco Transit Center Project
Shared learning lab, fitness center and restrooms with subtenant
Track our progress via Lucid Building Dashboard
PAE Consulting Engineers
LEED Projects
LEED Projects
Total Resource Cost (TRC) Test, Program Administrator Cost (PAC) Test -- Energy
Efficiency Cost-Effectiveness Screening: How to Properly Account for ‘Other Program
Impacts’ and Environmental Compliance Costs, Tim Woolf, William Steinhurst, Erin

Idb Presentation by Michael P Totten On Solar & Wind Power and Efficiency, Slides 11-11-2014

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Idb Presentation by Michael P Totten On Solar & Wind Power and Efficiency, Slides 11-11-2014

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

SOLAR RESOURCE OF LATIN AMERICA

LEAST-COST-&-RISK LIFECYCLE DELIVERED ENERGY SERVICES

UN Population Division, World Urban Prospects, 2014,

“Policymakers, particularly in developing countries,

Atif Ansar, Bent Flyvbjerg, Alexander Budzier, Daniel Lun Should

Tucuruí 24330 4240 6 8.60 2.22 4

Balbina 3150 250 13 6.91 0.12 58

Leakage rates uncertainty

NYMEX&Henry&Hub&Futures& 68%CI& 95%CI& 99%CI&

Exhibit ES-8 CO2 emission rates

XX's&goal&is&to& 760.3 752.8

CO2 Emissions (lb/MWh)

SECURING THE U.S.

Energy Surety Microgrid

11 Global Trends in Renewable Energy Investment, 2014

Renewables 2014 Global Status Report, REN21

9 Global Trends in Renewable Energy Investment, 2014

Fossil technologies: US China Europe Australia

*Permitting, inspection, and interconnection costs

Jesse Morris et al, REDUCING SOLAR PV SOFT COST,

Solar-battery and Wind-battery refer to battery storage of these intermittent renewable

COMPARISON OF LAND NEEDED TO POWER VEHICLES

Combined cycle gas projects totaling 20.61GW

0.49 Infosys, Bangalore, India

4.5% 0.5% 18.5%

Heating and cooling use index based on weighted equipment efficiency

Source: LEE Eng Lock, Singapore

Source: LEE Eng Lock, Singapore

Source: LEE Eng Lock, Singapore

! Making pipes just 50% fatter reduces friction by 86%

6% 800% 8.8% 3.5%

10% 800% 3.2% 0.3%

Punit Desai, Environmental Sustainability at Infosys Driven by values, Powered by

1. Ask for 0.60

2. Ask for performance guarantee backed by clear

Source: LEE Eng Lock, Singapore

Now use 1/2 global power

Opportunities to Include Energy Efficiency in Clean Air Act Requirements

“Looking only at productivity gains in electricity consumption, we estimate

Efficiency Power Plant (EPP) calculator, Regulatory Assistance Project, http://www.raponline.org/featured-work/cutting-

various efficiency costs/kWh

Keystone high nuclear cost scenario

3 types of light-sensitive CONE cells create TRI-CHROMATIC (or

CONE cells providing vision

ROD cells providing vision

RODS & CONES function

3 types of CONE cells, red,

The lower light level

Here only the RODS

The chemicals in the

Utilization of analogous benefit metrics in

V( ) – photopic luminous efficacy function - only represents the

relatively unimportant for detecting potential hazards seen by the

V( ) cannot be used to accurately characterize

A person’s sense of personal security in a parking lot at night is

Residential Commercial Industrial Outdoor

General Low / Street / Building

CFL Reflector CFL Pin T5 T8 T12

Fluorescent LED lamps

Million Square Feet Installed or Planned

Table 1: TM-21 data for a Cree XP-GLED run at

105 105°C (LM-80)

Incandescents last 1k to 10k hrs!