Alternative Energy
Subcommittee Report
Creating a resource efficient and resilient
community for the next 100 years
ctice conservation (reduce consumption); (2), Make efficiencies in
building envelopes and mechanical equipment; and (3), invest in
renewable power generation. This document contains the
consensus of deliberations and major recommendations for locally
applicable alternative energy subcommittee. Major
recommendations were developed using guiding principles in a
ranked hierarchy of importance as follows: (1), pra
ECSC Alternative Energy Subcommittee
4/28/2008
ALTERNATIVE ENERGY SUBCOMMITTEE REPORT CONTENTS
1.
Introduction (Community Challenges and Opportunities) ....................................................................................5
Suburban Nation: The Rise of Sprawl and the Decline of the American Dream........................................................5
Downward spiral to collapse of a community ...........................................................................................................6
Brief Discussion on Demand and Supply ...................................................................................................................6
Transition to sustainable energy supply ................................................................................................................7
Aggressive energy conservation program (demand) .............................................................................................9
Major Recommendations ......................................................................................................................................9
Ordered Hierarchy for Future Energy Needs ...........................................................................................................11
Guiding Principles: (1), Practice conservation (reduce consumption); (2), make efficiencies in building
envelopes and mechanical equipment; and (3), invest in renewable power generation. ..................................11
Goal: reduce consumption through
1) Conservation
2) Energy efficiency ...................................................11
Goal: Increased use of Renewable/Alternative Energy offsetting Fossil Fuels ....................................................11
Job Growth and Economic Development (Create a resource efficient and resilient community) ..........................11
Executive Summary: Energy for buildings, industry & infrastructure (electricity) and transportation (fuel) .........11
Current levels of consumption (kWh, gallons of fuel) **FD ...............................................................................11
Forms of alternative energy (hydro, biomass, solar, wind, geothermal (define, compare and contrast to
ground source heat pump), hydrogen, methane, ocean current) – local feasibility ...........................................12
Relationship between Energy Efficiency and Carbon Reduction – Brief discussion why they are not necessarily
the same thing? .......................................................................................................................................................15
2. Energy for Buildings, Industry and Infrastructure ...................................................................................................16
Detailed discussion of current energy consumption within Alachua County **FD .................................................16
Utility Data and Extrapolation .............................................................................................................................16
Consumption Patterns at Heavy Demand Times .................................................................................................18
Long Term Projections and Observations ............................................................................................................19
Demand: Energy Conservation (Presented in the ordered hierarchy from Guiding Principles)**DA ..................23
Home Insulation and Weatherization ..................................................................................................................23
Behavior change ..................................................................................................................................................23
Energy efficient appliances ..................................................................................................................................25
2
‘NegaWatts’ Conceptual Idea ..............................................................................................................................28
‘NegaGallons’ Conceptual Idea ............................................................................................................................29
Supply: Renewable Local Electricity and Heat Generation ......................................................................................30
Solar Thermal and Photovoltaic and discussion of lifecycle GHG emissions) **TL .............................................30
Biomass (and discussion of lifecycle GHG emissions) ..........................................................................................35
3. Energy for Transportation **TL ...............................................................................................................................37
current liquid fuel consumption within Alachua County .........................................................................................37
NegaGallons .............................................................................................................................................................38
Discussion of projected shortage of oil (peak oil) and increased prices ..................................................................39
Discussion of MTPO study of Peak Oil .....................................................................................................................39
Discussion of Light Rail in Ten Years (see LUAT) ......................................................................................................39
Supply: Alternative Fuel Production **HK .............................................................................................................39
Biodiesel ..............................................................................................................................................................39
Ethanol.................................................................................................................................................................39
Methane/Biogas ..................................................................................................................................................39
Hydrogen .............................................................................................................................................................42
Demand: Alternative Transportation **HK ............................................................................................................42
Walking ................................................................................................................................................................42
Ridesharing ..........................................................................................................................................................42
Park and Ride (see LUAT) .....................................................................................................................................43
Public transportation (bus and light rail, bicycle rental program) .......................................................................43
Biogas powered buses (see WEIS) .......................................................................................................................44
Hybrid vehicles ....................................................................................................................................................44
Electric vehicles ...................................................................................................................................................44
Neighborhood vehicles ........................................................................................................................................46
Rail for Goods and Services (See LUAT) ...............................................................................................................47
4. Economic, employment and political security: Job Opportunities/Economic Benefits **TL ..................................48
Local EMPLOYMENT CREATE a resource efficient and resilient community ...........................................................49
Economic Leverage: keeping local economy strong (Tom’s example of $1 recycled 5x through the economy) ....49
3
Economic development and local employment ......................................................................................................49
Berkeley Model for Alachua County **CF ...........................................................................................................49
Description of the California, Berkeley Model.....................................................................................................50
Programmatic Goals for Alachua County Model (Scope and Scale) ....................................................................51
Financing Mechanisms ........................................................................................................................................53
Application and Administration of Funds ............................................................................................................53
Appendices ..................................................................................................................................................................54
Renewable Portfolio Standards ...............................................................................................................................54
Photovoltaic Power Stations ....................................................................................................................................55
Current power generation & existing base **FD ....................................................................................................57
4
1.
INTRODUCTION (COMMUNITY CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES)
To what end does this Subcommittee make recommendations?
What are its guiding principles?
“Though I do not believe that a plant will spring up where no seed has been planted, I have faith in a seed. Convince
me that you have a seed there, and I am prepared to expect wonders.” Henry David Thoreau
Benjamin Franklin is credited with the phrase “A penny saved is a penny earned.” There is probably not a better
phrase to address our need to conserve resources. Be it time, money, water or energy. In particular, in a time
where we experience skyrocketing prices for energy, be it energy in buildings (electricity) or energy in
transportation (fuel), and thus causing prices for products and services to increase it is time to step back and
rethink how we organize our life and whether there are better and less wasteful options.
No individual, family, business or community can be wasteful with its resources indefinitely. Our wasteful patterns
of consumption are not only a function of personal behavior but also of structural issues. Be it poor housing stock
or too many cars on the streets leading to traffic congestions.
Nothing could be more important for the welfare and future of our or any other community than this statement.
As we close in or already have passed “peak oil” the moment where the daily production of oil reaches its peak
output, it would be a mistake to ask “How can we sustain our way of doing things” but rather “what standard of
living is sustainable?”
Los Angeles destruction of public transportation system
We are building cities for cars and not for people. The documentary Subdivided (isolation and community in
America) states that the collective move to suburbs created nothing but isolation in a landscape of big box stores
and freeways.
http://www.subdivided.net/dvd/
James Kunstler: suburbs are the greatest misallocation of resources in the history of the world
http://www.kunstler.com/
http://www.kunstler.com/spch_petrocollapse.html
Sprawl leads to more time in traffic in last 25 years, more miles driven, more time lost
Andres Duany
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rwd4Lq0Xvgc
SUBURBAN NATION: THE RISE OF SPRAWL AND THE DECLINE OF THE AMERICAN DREAM
The authors, who lead a firm that has designed more than 200 new neighborhoods and community revitalization
plans, challenge nearly half a century of widely accepted planning and building practices that have produced
sprawling subdivisions, shopping centers and office parks connected by new highways. These practices, they
contend, have not only destroyed the traditional concept of the neighborhood, but eroded such vital social values
5
as equality, citizenship and personal safety. Further, they charge that current suburban developments are not only
economically and environmentally "unsustainable," but "not functional" because they isolate and place undue
burdens on at-home mothers, children, teens and the elderly. Adapting the precepts that famed urbanologist Jane
Jacobs used to critique unhealthy city planning, Duany, Plater-Zyberk and Speck call for a revolution in suburban
design that emphasizes neighborhoods in which homes, schools, commercial and municipal buildings would be
integrated in pedestrian-accessible, safe and friendly settings.
Barbara Ehrenreich, two income family, need to pay for home close to a good school requires two incomes
therefore two cars plus daycare, one income is no longer able to sustain a family
DOWNWARD SPIRAL TO COLLAPSE OF A COMMUNITY
Building an energy efficient community is the first step in reclaiming self-sufficiency and “keeping the money in the
community” so that we can pay our teachers a better salary, our schools can offer a better education, an increased
tax base will allow the community to offer more services, increasing the quality of life and by those actions attract
more businesses that offer high paying jobs. Which in turn leads to less crime and decreasing expenses for the
criminal justice system.
We need a paradigm shift. Some communities have already started that process and call themselves SolarCities
(San Jose, Adelaide), Eco-Cities (Cleveland, Huai Rou New Town), Sustainable Cities (Masdar), or Dynamic Cities
(Vancouver). In particular Masdar and Huai Rou New Town are good examples how entire communities are
designed with a low energy and sustainable future in mind.
http://www.climatechange.sa.gov.au/PDFs/Congress_Presentations/Tucker.pdf
http://www.adelaidesolarcity.com.au/
http://www.solarcitiescongress.com.au/program.htm
http://www.ecocitycleveland.org/
http://www.climatechange.sa.gov.au/PDFs/Congress_Presentations/Butera.pdf
File: Planning_Eco-Cities.pdf
http://www.masdaruae.com/
http://dynamiccities.squarespace.com/welcome/
In order to develop a local economy and a community to be sustainable we have to be proactive rather than
reactive. To do so, we need a four-fold approach:
1.
Conservation of resources by changing behaviors and (infra)structures
2.
Maximize local generation of energy and production of local food
3.
Maximize recycling and reusing of waste (waste is energy wasted)
4.
Device policies and funding mechanisms (incentives to support and taxes to discourage behavior and
developments)
BRIEF DISCUSSION ON DEMAND AND SUPPLY
6
Demand side management is….Supply side management is…
TRANSITION TO SUSTAINABLE ENERGY SUPPLY
We are moving from a supply sided, coal centered energy policy to a demand side, renewable and decentralized
energy policy over the next 100 years.
As the U.S. economy tumbles towards a recession we need to take a serious look at the
patterns and structures of our current economic development as well as tax and energy
policies. In particular, when we agree with Kevin Philips that the economy is worse than
commonly believed. He states that the “very measures that most shape public perception of
the economy,” such as the Consumer Price Index, inflation, and GDP “are tainted.” If we would
use the same criteria for those measures that were in place prior to 1980, then the
unemployment rate is “somewhere between 9 and 12 percent, the inflation rate is as high as 7
or even 10 percent” and economic growth has been mediocre.
Given this background, we plan to illustrate that a significant paradigm shift in our behavior and
policies is needed. Both on a national but more importantly on a local level. We have to
transform our communities to be resource-efficient and resilient. Our tax and energy policies
and thus economic development should work towards creating an island of prosperity in a see
of economic turmoil.
http://www.tampabay.com/news/article473596.ece
Kevin Phillips Bad Money: Reckless Finance, Failed Politics and the Global Crisis of American
Capitalism
http://www.amazon.com/Bad-Money-Reckless-PoliticsCapitalism/dp/0670019070/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1209569289&sr=8-1
The first step in this paradigm shift is to view the local economy as a bucket of water where the
water level indicates the amount of money circling in the community. Leaks in the bucket
indicate money leaving the community (interest rates on credit cards, fuel cost for
transportation and electricity) and new money (trade, salaries to UF and SFCC faculty, pensions
and retirement funds) coming into the community. To maximize the inflow of money and
minimize the outflow has to be our primary goal.
THE NEED FOR CONSERVATION
As Benjamin Franklin said “A penny saved is a penny earned.” Therefore, conservation of our
resources, be it time, money, water or energy has to be our primary objective. In particular, in
a time where we experience skyrocketing prices for energy it is time to step back and rethink
how we organize our life and whether there are better and less wasteful options.
7
No individual, family, business or community can be wasteful with its resources
indefinitely. Our wasteful patterns of consumption are not only a function of personal behavior
but also of structural issues. Be it poor housing stock or too many cars on the streets leading to
traffic congestions.
ENERGY AS A PROSPERITY TAX
For more than 50 years, energy was
cheap and abundant. Given the
dramatic increase in energy prices
over the last few years, it might be
appropriate to look at energy as a
prosperity tax. It would seem natural
that this “tax” is higher the bigger the
house and the bigger the car you own.
The problem, however, is that we
have little control over the amount of
this form of tax compared to sales or
property taxes. Energy prices are
determined by the global market and
all we can do is respond by adjusting
our behavior or changing our policies
to minimize the impact of it.
GRU
Rate for
$
%
Rates effective
1,500 kkWh
Increase
Increase
October 1, 2004
145.45
October 1, 2005
169.06
23.61
16.20%
October 1, 2006
191.89
46.44
31.90%
October 1, 2007
213.79
68.34
47.00%
October 1, 2008
230.89
85.44
58.70%
Table 1 Gainesville Area Increase in Monthly Utility Costs 2004-2008
To illustrate the effect of rising cost of
energy on an average household, we look at a household of four with a medium income for
Alachua County of $34,696 (as of 2004), a mortgage or rent of about $800, a car payment of
$300, a 1,500kWh monthly consumption of electricity, and 1,000 miles traveled per month in a
vehicle with a fuel efficiency of 25 miles per gallon.
After payroll taxes, mortgage or rent payments, and a car payment, the annual disposable
income left for this household is about $16,000. Assuming that the household is located in the
city of Gainesville and is serviced by GRU, then the monthly utility bill just for electricity
increased by $68.34 or 47 percent in the last four years. This takes into account the recently
announced increase of the fuel adjustment rate to 5.3 cents/kWh. The latter is a simple pass
through of fuel cost to the consumer and increased by 51 percent from 3.5 cents/kWh in 2004
(Table 1).
http://www.gainesville.com/article/20080501/NEWS/805010351/1002/NEWS&title=GRU_raisi
ng_electricity_rates
8
http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/12/12001.html
But more importantly, the $68.34 monthly increase would be equivalent to a 5.1 percent sales
tax increase given an disposable income of $16,000. With an additional rate increase expected
on October 1, 2008, an increase to $85.44 would be equivalent to 6.4 percent annually of
$16,000.
Unfortunately, we see a similar trend in fuel consumption. In October 2004, the average price
for a gallon of gasoline was around $1.96 compared to $3.65 now. The increase of $1.69 per
gallon would translate to an additional $67.60 per month given a 40 gallon/month consumption
for 1,000 miles driven in a vehicle with a 25 mpg fuel efficiency. Much like the increase in
electricity, this additional expense for fuel is equivalent to a 5.1 percent increase in sales tax on
a $16,000 disposable income.
http://www.floridastategasprices.com/retail_price_chart.aspx
So for this household with a medium income, the increase in energy prices is equivalent to a
minimum increase of 10.2 percent in sales tax. While this amount may vary from household to
household, it seems obvious that the bottom half of households with an income below the
medium will be hit harder. Furthermore, it should be clear that this “prosperity tax” makes us
collectively poorer and will do so increasingly in the future unless we make some significant
changes.
We all know how fierce the opposition was to the 0.25 percent increase in sales tax for the
CHOICES program was. What would the residents of Alachua County say if they were to realize
that the increase in energy cost over the last four years is about 40 times that amount with no
benefits whatsoever?
If our premise is that “a good energy policy is good economic policy” why should we not
increase our sales tax by 2 percent, the gasoline tax by 5 percent and the utility rate by 3
percent and use that amount to stimulate the economy by investing in energy efficiencies and
renewable energy production to lower the long term impact of this “prosperity tax?” After all, it
was a 3 percent increase in the utility bill (less than a loaf of bread a month) that was used to
fund the feed-in-tariff for renewable energy that created an economic boom and tens of
thousands of jobs in Germany. The revenue from sales and fuel tax could be used to fund public
transportation or invest in local businesses that want to grow food.
AGGRESSIVE ENERGY CONSERVATION PROGRAM (DEMAND)
Energy conservation deployed at a utility scale level is the cheapest cost for building capacity…
MAJOR RECOMMENDATIONS
(“It is recommended that…”)
9



Develop a “City of Berkeley (CA)” property-tax plan to finance efficiencies.
 This is much like a road “special assessment”, where a number of families on a dirt road ask the
County to front the capital costs to pave the road. The County paves the road, and collects the
paving cost (+ interest) from each property owner over a period of time. This would remain a lien
against the property until paid in full. Page XXX
Support a Renewable Portfolio Standard:
 Review the State of Florida’s recent RPS legislation.
 The BoCC instruct the County’s lobbyists to support of proposals for enacting or establishing
“Renewable Portfolio Standards”. A target of 20% or greater of total electric energy supplied by
utilities should be sought. Page XXX
 The BoCC work with the City of Gainesville and its utility, Gainesville Regional Utilities (GRU), to
develop a “Renewable Portfolio Standard” of at least 20% for use within the GRU electric supply
service territory. Page XXX
 The BoCC work with the Clay Electric Cooperative (Clay), to develop a “Renewable Portfolio
Standard” of at least 20% for use within the Clay electric supply service territory. Page XXX
Locate Solar Power Sites:
The BoCC instruct its Community Planning Group basis to ascertain potential solar power
generation (either photovoltaic or solar thermal) sites within the County with adequate space to
accommodate the Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) level the BoCC may establish as being in
the County’s interest. This space requirement should include allowance for use of rooftops of
buildings within the County and be based on the best presently available technologies in the
solar thermal and photovoltaic fields at the time of the assessment. Page XXX
Align Solar Power Sites with Comprehensive Plan recommendation to allow use of solar power
with agricultural lands. Page XXX
Support the location of solar power on closed landfills. Page XXX




Issue an RFP for a solar utility partnership with Alachua County. Page XXX
Alternative Solid, Liquid Fuels and Gas Supply
 Require that all land clearing debris be used as an energy source in co-generation, composting, or
other reuse applications. Page XXX
 Issue RFP for an anaerobic digester for municipal solid waste and sewage sludge for the
production of methane and fertilizer. These supplies would displace current fossil fuel
consumption. Page XXX
 Issue and or support an RFP for biodiesel fuel production facilities for local fuel use. Page XXX
 Support non-food crops for biomass production for local fuel use. Page XXX
Support of Guiding Principles for Alternative Energy for Buildings
 See Residential Subcommittees Major Recommendations Page XXX of Residential Report
 Support in the Comprehensive Plan, Land Development Regulations, and Building Code the
following ranked hierarchy of importance: (1), practice conservation (reduce consumption); (2),
Make efficiencies in building envelopes and mechanical equipment; and (3), invest in renewable
power generation.
Support the Guiding Principles of Waste and Energy Implications Subcommittee:
 See WEIS Major Recommendations. Page XXX of WEIS Report
 Support the use of waste heat from industrial applications and the co-location of business to take
advantage of that energy. For example or see some section in the report
Support Land Use and Transportation Subcommittee
10



See LUAT Major Recommendations. Page XXX of LUAT Report
Make the Comprehensive Plan and LDRs support electric vehicles charging stations, parking and
signage in premium locations and employment centers (parking garages). Page XXX
 Support state legislation to adopt regulations and standards for electric vehicle charging stations.
Page XXX
Commercial, Governmental and Industrial Building Requirements:
 Building owners to lease their rooftops for solar arrays. (see Whole Foods)
 The BoCC or its agents modify the commercial building code to require that all new commercial
buildings install a heat shield, preferable with photovoltaic panels, to reduce solar heat
introduction to the building through its roof by 90%.
 The BoCC or its agents modify the commercial building code to require that all new commercial
construction will equip its parking areas with the infrastructure to allow future addition of vehicle
electric charging in 80% of its required vehicle parking spaces.
 The BoCC or its agents require that all new rental residence properties and all new commercial
properties provide ground source heat sinks as the source of heat rejection from air conditioning
or as the source of heat for interior heating. All existing residential properties seeking to become
rental properties must also meet this standard.
 All Alachua County Buildings will exceed the County Energy Reduction Policy by XX% by XXXX
 The County shall adopt an internal CAFÉ standard above XXX for its fleet. Page XXX
 The County shall have a HERS? energy audit of all its facilities. Page XXX
 The County shall install solar arrays on XX% of its rooftops. Page XXX
ORDERED HIERARCHY FOR FUTURE ENERGY NEEDS
GUIDING PRINCIPLES: (1), PRACTICE CONSERVATION (REDUCE CONSUMPTION); (2), MAKE
EFFICIENCIES IN BUILDING ENVELOPES AND MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT; AND (3), INVEST IN
RENEWABLE POWER GENERATION.
GOAL: REDUCE CONSUMPTION THROUGH
1) CONSERVATION
2) ENERGY EFFICIENCY
GOAL: INCREASED USE OF RENEWABLE/ALTERNATIVE ENERGY OFFSETTING FOSSIL FUELS
JOB GROWTH AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT (CREATE A RESOURCE EFFICIENT AND
RESILIENT COMMUNITY)
Economic Impact (Growing Community Jobs…Economic Transfer)
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: ENERGY FOR BUILDINGS, INDUSTRY & INFRASTRUCTURE
(ELECTRICITY) AND TRANSPORTATION (FUEL)
CURRENT LEVELS OF CONSUMPTION (KWH, GALLONS OF FUEL) **FD
11
FORMS OF ALTERNATIVE ENERGY (HYDRO, BIOMASS, SOLAR, WIND, GEOTHERMAL
(DEFINE, COMPARE AND CONTRAST TO GROUND SOURCE HEAT PUMP), HYDROGEN,
METHANE, OCEAN CURRENT) – LOCAL FEASIBILITY
HISTORIC FUEL SOURCES FOR ALACHUA COUNTY
A review of the fuel sources for electric power generation shows the recent historical choices to
be:
 Coal
 Natural Gas
 Nuclear
 Biomass (methane from landfills)
 Diesel Fuel (#2)
These fuel choices are presented in the order of the amount of electricity produced by each fuel
source for the county. In more distant time periods other fuel choices have included small
amounts of residual fuel oil (Bunker C) as backup fuel.
CURRENT SOLAR SOURCES IN ALACHUA COUNTY
Gainesville Regional Utilities has as part of its generating resource mix of approximately
612,000 kW a total of about 300 kW of solar power from photovoltaic panels located at two
area schools. This amounts to a total renewable portfolio of about 0.05% of its total generating
capability. This proportion is a reasonable representation of the presently available renewable
electric generating resources in the County.
REGIONALLY APPLICABLE ALTERNATIVE ENERGY OPTIONS AND ANALYSIS
At present there are no generating resources in peninsular Florida belonging to its utilities that
use wind, hydro, or geothermal steam as the prime mover. The nature of the peninsular Florida
geology and meteorology is such that none of these prime energy resources is applicable. And
the utilities that would be most interested in using such renewable and essentially cost-free
energy sources have not seen these as viable choices.
The single major renewable energy source available in peninsular Florida, including Alachua
County, is solar energy. Attached as exhibits 1, 2 and 3 are a map of Florida by latitude and
longitude, a table of the solar energy input that strikes the ground by latitude and longitude,
and a table of the solar energy of the type known as “direct beam”. Table 2 gives the solar
input by area that is useful for photovoltaic solar power. Table 3 gives the solar power input by
area that is useful for solar thermal power.
The values of solar energy input, in kWh/meter2/day, or per year, represents the solar energy
striking the ground or the focused beam striking an energy gathering system, not the amount of
12
electricity that might result. The amount of electricity that can be produced is the amount of
solar energy input times the efficiency of the solar-to-electricity conversion process. Typically,
photovoltaic electricity production is about 5% of the solar energy input. Solar thermal
electricity production via the steam generation process known as the Carnot Cycle is typically
15% to 20% efficient.
The value of the solar energy, in kWh, by area provides a basis of the amount of solar energy
gathering space required. With some allowance for the need for land other than just for solar
power collection, such as perimeter areas, service buildings, and for solar thermal, the steam
turbine-generator building, a size factor of from 1.25 to 1.5 times the solar collection area gives
the land requirement to support a selected size of solar generating station. This could be
between 300 to 1000 acres for a 100 MW power plant, depending on whether the technology
used is solar thermal or photovoltaic. This is about half a square mile to slightly less than two
square miles. This is an important consideration when evaluating a prospective Renewable
Portfolio Standard that could call for 200 MW or more. Nevertheless, in a state the size of
Florida or a county the size of Alachua, land use is quite possible, and there are many sites that
could cost-effectively acquired for such generation. Given the lack of site geographic
disturbance, the total lack of gaseous emissions and the lack of noise, siting becomes a much
easier task than for other generating technologies.
COST CONSIDERATIONS OF SOLAR POWER
The second major consideration of the use of photovoltaic or solar thermal power generation is
the cost. This is normally expressed in term of dollar per kilowatt. Typically, natural gas-fired
combined cycle generators cost about $600 to $750 per kilowatt. This is just the cost to build
the plant, not run it. Fuel is in addition to the capital cost. Coal powered plants typically cost
$2,000/kW to $2,500/kW. Nuclear plants have cost $5,000/kW to $7,500/kW, and present
estimates, with no historical foundation of success, are estimated to cost about $5,000/kW.
Recent experience with basic photovoltaic electric generation (no energy storage) has shown
costs of about $10,000/kW. This puts photovoltaic generation at a higher capital cost than
conventional fossil fuel generation by a factor of from four to thirteen. So, even though the
fuel is free, the cost of building the plants in the first place is still not cost competitive with the
overall package of capital plus fuel and other operating expenses for a fossil fuel plant.
Photovoltaic power generation is more nearly competitive with nuclear generation on an
overall cost basis, and many would argue that the risk of nuclear accident more than makes up
the cost differential.
Until such time as there is a major breakthrough in the capital cost of photovoltaic energy
gathering, whether from new solar panel technology, or from a now-only-hoped-for approach,
or from a legislative/regulatory mandate, photovoltaic power generation will be near the end of
the list of choices for electricity production.
13
Solar thermal generation has been built recently for about $5,000/kW. This puts it competitive
with nuclear on a capital cost basis and much less risky from a hazard point of view. Since it
does not have the ability to produce as much energy (kWh) per kW as nuclear, it is still not fully
cost-competitive on a per-kWh basis with nuclear generation. However, this capital cost
disadvantage is likely to be reversed as the newly-emerging solar thermal technology field
becomes more mature, and the inventiveness that can be applied to an emerging technology
like solar thermal produces much more significant cost-effectiveness gains than could be
expected from an established technology. At a cost per kilowatt of $3,500, solar thermal power
generation becomes a technology of choice against all other generation forms. This will
become more especially true as the likelihood of a carbon tax or a CO2 cap and trade program is
implemented. As can be seen from the trend lines of the cost of fossil fuels, the use of solar
electric generation, especially solar thermal, becomes progressively more attractive. This
viewpoint is from a present cost structure within the electric power industry that places solar
thermal generation as essentially competitive today.
SOLAR THERMAL BARRIERS
The primary problem with the introduction of solar thermal power generation in Florida, and
this includes Alachua County, is the lack of experience in this field. There are no businesses
producing this type of power plant in Florida, which is not surprising since there are only a few
in the world. Neither utilities nor governmental entities have any experience with it. This does
not mean it doesn’t work. It means it needs to be understood. There is a developing sense of
urgency to gain this understanding, given the rising awareness of the impacts of global warming
and the growing understanding of the cost and limitation of non-coal fossil fuel production.
The question of whether it is possible for peninsular Florida to import its renewable energy
needs from elsewhere must be answered. Because of the limitations of the transmission
system to import power from elsewhere, this is most likely not possible on the scale needed.
The peninsula presently has an import capability limit of about 4,500 MW, all of which is fully
subscribed. Florida’s electric power demand is over 40,000 MW. The only option for importing
renewable energy, or any other energy resource for that matter, as electricity is to build major
new transmission lines. There is some question as to whether this is possible, and even more
difficultly, whether the cost of the new transmission plus the cost of the renewable energy
sources to ship here is cost-competitive with producing renewable energy within the peninsula.
Since Florida is known as the “Sunshine State”, we should take advantage of the outstanding
resource located here.
There are several solar thermal power plants that have been or are being developed in the
southwestern part of the U.S. These sites have been selected because they have the best solar
input in the country as well as relatively easy access to transmission systems to deliver their
output. Also, the states in the area where these plants are located have renewable portfolio
standards, thus making an active market for their output.
14
SOLAR THERMAL RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the BoCC establish a group (such as a commission or task force) to
encourage the development of solar thermal power generating facilities within Alachua County.
Insofar as possible the County should seek the active involvement of its neighboring counties
and the various utilities that serve these areas in such development.
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND CARBON REDUCTION – BRIEF
DISCUSSION WHY THEY ARE NOT NECESSARILY THE SAME THING?
Reduction of Carbon Emissions
Discussion on how you can be energy efficient and still have a carbon liability
Discussion of how you can have alternative energy supply and still have carbon liability
15
2. ENERGY FOR BUILDINGS, INDUSTRY AND INFRASTRUCTURE
DETAILED DISCUSSION OF CURRENT ENERGY CONSUMPTION WITHIN ALACHUA COUNTY
**FD
Within Alachua County most of the energy used to power the economy comes to the final consumer in the form of
electricity. Exceptions to this include the cement processing plant in the Newberry area; the use of natural gas for
space heating in homes and commercial establishments, and a limited number of industrial sites; and #2 fuel oil for
heating and process applications in domestic, commercial and industrial locations. The electric supply system
includes the following entities:
 Gainesville Regional Utilities (GRU)
 Clay Electric Cooperative (Clay)
 Progress Energy of Florida (PEF)
 Florida Power & Light (FPL)
While there are some municipal utility systems, none are significant generators of electricity from primary fuel
sources, buying their requirements from the utilities noted above.
Of these utilities which are significant generators of electricity, Gainesville Regional Utilities is the largest in terms
of energy amount and peak demand. PEF is the sole supplier of the University of Florida in Gainesville, as well as
other loads with the County. Clay has extensive distribution service in the County beyond the area served by GRU,
with FPL serving the Town of Hawthorne. Table 1 shows an estimate of the electricity supplied within Alachua
County by each utility.
UTILITY DATA AND EXT RAPOLATION
The ability to obtain detailed electricity supply information from all the utilities within the County was limited in
some ways, and a degree of extrapolation and interpolation was used to estimate how to fill blank spots in the
data development of electricity supply within Alachua County. For example, the Subcommittee was not able to
obtain long-term energy consumption or peak demand estimate for the University of Florida, so an extrapolation
from the information used in an electric power flow case for the year 2005 was used to estimate the University’s
peak demand. Then from that, an assumption of the load factor of the University load being the same as for the
load served by GRU was used to develop an energy requirement for the University. Also, Clay provided estimates
of its expected peak demand requirements, but no associated energy needs, so the assumption was made that
Clay’s load would have the same load factor as the GRU total load. Fortunately, the GRU forecasts of its energy
and demand included its wholesale sales to some of the municipal systems, such as Alachua, so this provides a
strong support for the forecast of energy needs in these areas.
In general, the estimate of electricity use in the County shown in Table 1 should be taken as indicative rather than
a definitive estimate. It provides a reasonable foundation for the estimate of impacts of various alternative energy
processes or programs on electricity consumption in the County.
While the Energy Conservation Strategies Commission has the word Energy in its title, it is important to note that
electricity consumption is usually analyzed in two components; energy requirements (amount of consumption) and
demand requirements (rate of consumption). Thus, it is important to consider how these two aspects of electricity
consumption are intertwined. To illustrate these two aspects of electricity consumption- rate and amount- the
following two pie charts have been extracted from the report by ICF to GRU concerning new electricity generator
requirements.
16
Figure 1 GRU Residential Electricity Load (MWh Share) by End-Use
17
Figure 2 GRU Residential Peak Demand Share by End-Use
A brief perusal of these two charts shows that on an annual basis air conditioning load consumes about 20% to the
total electricity used in residences. However, the annual maximum demand placed on the electric supply system
by residential air conditioning is 66% of the total residential use. This is far from proportionate, and points out the
cost impact of just this one end-use on supplying this requirement. Thus, the Alternative Energy Subcommittee
must deal with both capacity demands and energy consumption issues in its evaluation. Efforts to find both
demand as well as energy conservation solutions are important to the economic as well as ecological solutions
needed.
It should be noted that the approximate level of demand rate versus energy use in air conditioning applies as well
to the commercial sector of the County as it does to the residential sector.

Use of Natural Gas (& lifecycle GHG emissions)

Use of Coal and lifecycle GHG emissions

Use of other fuels???

List current utility companies and their rebate programs **FD

Explanation of utility bill (service charge, electric charge, fuel adjustment) and why it might increase;
portion which customers can affect **FD
CONSUMPTION PATTERNS AT HEAVY DEMAND TIMES
The Alachua County area experiences its maximum demand during the summer period of the year, usually when
the University of Florida is in session or its students are returning to campus. The following graph shows the
18
hourly electricity consumption on the peak demand day for GRU in 2007,
Figure 3 GRU Demand by Hour on August 8, 2007
On this particular day the maximum demand for GRU was 481 Megawatts.
It is highly likely that the demand requirements for the other electricity suppliers in Alachua County will follow the
same pattern as that for GRU, and that what caused GRU to peak will also cause the others to peak at the same
time. So, for purposes of this report, we have assumed that the Alachua County’s electricity consumption will
reach its maximum at the same time as does GRU.
LONG TERM PROJECTIONS AND OBSERVATIO NS
Energy consumption in the areas of Building, Industry, and Infrastructure is primarily in the form of electricity. The
major exception to this is that building heating is largely done using natural gas. The same is true for industrial cogeneration. In the Transportation area the energy consumption is almost exclusively in the form of oil-derived
fossil fuels.
In looking to the long-term horizon, the AE sees “in a mirror dimly”. There are only a very few century-long
estimations that have any reasonable likelihood of coming true. It is humbling to see from our current vantage
point in 2008 what were the emerging energy use and technologies of 1908 as the AE seeks to look to 2108. For
example, it was not envisioned by many others besides Jules Vern that we would see space travel or the writer of
the cartoon “Dick Tracy” that we would have that new invention, the telephone, be the wireless marvel we have
today. The advent of computers, the introduction of nuclear power, the deployment of natural gas through vast
networks of pipelines, and the medical technology improvements of this past century have made many of those
early 20th century visions look quaint. In the early 1900’s there was a significant push to use electricity for lighting
and power, but whether that should be done using DC, or 25 cycle two phase AC, or 60 cycle three phase AC was
still a battle joined by some of the engineering titans of the age, such as Edison, Steinmetz and Westinghouse.
HUMAN POPULATION AND POWER DEMAND
19
One of the viewpoints with likely long-term outcomes is that the human population will continue to increase at an
overall rate not largely different from what we have seen in the past century. Thus, it would be reasonable for
Alachua County to plan to be more populous, along with parallel outcomes for the state of Florida, the United
States and the world.
THE END OF CHEAP FOSSIL FUELS
A second major long-term outcome the AE expects will be found to be true is that the availability of oil and natural
gas will be significantly reduced a century from now. Just as there had been much concern, ferment, and
discussion about how to implement the delivery of electricity a century ago, we are having a discussion presently
about whether the world has reached a “tipping point” on oil production. Many say that the world has already
reached the point where world-wide production of oil will decline from a peak already reached. Others say that,
while we have not reached such a point yet, that eventuality is near at hand. Only a few say that oil production will
continue to grow indefinitely. It is interesting to note that some of the world’s largest oil producers, such as the
Emirate of Abu Dabai , have set up sovereign wealth funds to accumulate money from present oil sales in order to
supply financial input to their people in the expected future when the oil production declines and the nation or
emirate will need the income from that fund to support its people and their expectations.
REGIONAL IMPACT OF CLIMATE CHANGE
The third and not least of the likely long-term outcomes is that the planet is growing warmer as a result of human
activity, primarily through the burning of fossil fuels and will continue to do so until the causative activities are
halted or at least reduced. It is the viewpoint of the AE that global warming is a real and consequential issue, with
supporting science, and that it is important for the entire human community, not just Alachua County, to take
immediate and forceful action. This issue, while centered on carbon dioxide emissions from the human-controlled
burning of coal, oil and natural gas, also includes such factors as the reduction of vegetation, especially trees that
consume carbon dioxide, and the tension of food versus fuel inherent in the production of grain-based biofuels.
The AE recommendations come out of recognition of the interplay and cumulative effect of all three of these longterm factors: population growth, declining availability of oil and natural gas, and global warming creating a type of
“Malthusian” dilemma. Because of the past work in agricultural sciences, engineering, and political action we have
not yet seen predictions of world-wide hunger due to world over-population come true. We on the AE see the
necessity to continue to make active changes to our circumstances in order to prevent the dire outcomes we with
face today’s problems.
The AE will present recommendations with the intent of reducing both the ecological
and economic impacts of energy consumption on the citizens and the environment of
Graphic of Florida
Alachua County. It has been pointed out that Alachua County is not a large emitter of
showing populated
greenhouse gases that may contribute significantly to global warming. Nor is it at
coastal areas expected
significant risk of the impact of global warming, through such effects as sea level rise
impacts due to seaor drought. However, it is in the position of having to be a responsible governmental
level rise See AIA 2030
citizen in the gathering-place of many who will be severely impacted by global
site.
warming. XXX% of Florida’s most populous regions have the difficult condition of
being on low-lying land where sea-level rise could have serious influence on the
available land area, as well as causing serious dislocation of both economies and people.
Graph showing Alachua
County energy import
quantities, types and $ to
pay for them.
20
With regard to the economic impacts of energy consumption in Alachua County, it
should be pointed out that almost the entire energy supply of the County, as well
as the State of Florida, comes from somewhere else. There is a very low
percentage of our energy consumption that is naturally occurring in either the County or the State. Thus, we will
never be able to claim any ownership of our energy sources under the current conditions. The cost of energy
within the County and State is almost entirely an economic burden. And this is a significant burden with no
possibility of relief as presently arranged.
The ability of our citizenry to have useful effect on the long-term outcomes must begin in the present and work to
change the near-term situation. So, it is with the long-term clearly in mind that the AE presents its
recommendations and the evidence to support those recommendations to Board of County Commissioners.
The largest source of energy used in Alachua County other than for transportation is electricity. This electricity is
supplied to the citizenry primarily through four utility organizations:

Gainesville Regional Utilities (GRU)

Progress Energy of Florida (PEF)

Clay Electric Cooperative (Clay)

Florida Power & Light (FPL)
There are several municipal utility entities other than GRU, but they have no generation capacity of their own, and
buy their entire need on a wholesale basis from one of the four entities noted above. For this report the data on
past and future electricity consumption, generation type and fuel source will be presented for the four suppliers
noted.
21
GRU is the largest supplier of electricity in the Alachua County area. Its service territory is shown on the map
below.
Figure 4 GRU service boundary as of August 23, 2007
The second largest supplier is PEF. It is the supplier to the University of Florida (UF), the single largest consumer of
electricity in the County. Other than the generation owned by GRU, the only utility-owned generation in the
County is the gas turbine generation and the co-generation heating steam plant located on the UF campus and
owned by PEF.
The electricity consumption in past years and projections for the future for Alachua County are shown in Table 3.1.
Tables 3.2 through 3.X show the breakdown of past and estimated future consumption by supplier, the generation
by generation type, fuel consumption by type, cost of fuel in total and unit cost of fuel by type ($ per ton for coal, $
per million BTU for natural gas, etc.)
There are a number of plans for expansion of the utility-level generating plant. GRU has recently abandoned the
proposal of building a new coal-fired generating unit in favor of a biomass-fueled generator. Analyses of proposals
for this plant are presently being made by GRU. PEF is looking closely at new nuclear generation, with specific sites
being considered in Levy County (Progress Energy, 2008). It is also considering new gas-fired combined cycle
plants. There are also some proposals in the state for new generating units using municipal solid waste as fuel as
being contemplated by Marion County as of 2008 (CURRY, 2008).
A consideration that may have a significant influence on the new power sources in the state is Governor Crist’s
recent Executive Order No. 7-127 (see text in Figure 3.2) requiring a return to carbon dioxide emission levels of
1990 by the year 2017. The Governor has also asked the Public Utility Commission to consider implementing a
Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) requiring that 20% of all energy delivered to consumers in Florida come from
22
renewable resources. Taken together, these two actions, one presently in force and the other prospective, will
have a profound impact on electric power generation in the state if they are followed through upon. Table 3-Y
shows an estimate of the renewable resources for the state and Alachua County that would be required if a 20%
RPS were to be implemented.
DEMAND: ENERGY CONSERVATION (PRESENTED IN THE ORDERED HIERARCHY FROM
GUIDING PRINCIPLES)**DA
Introduction and discussion of the order by which conservation measures should be taken…
Move from sealing and weatherization to appliances and finally alternative energy sources.
HOME INSULATION AND WEATHERIZATION
On the average, space conditioning (heating, ventilating, and air conditioning) consume about
40% of home energy use. Since Florida first began applying energy standards in 1994, for
houses that were built earlier the situation may be even worse. Thus, improving home energy
efficiency is one of the best ways to conserve energy. This should be the first approach toward
reducing energy use rather than looking for new sources of energy such as solar photovoltaic
(the same is not true for solar water heating).
Since there are many ways in which homes can be energy inefficient, the first step should be to
find out where the problems are by getting a home energy audit. The audit may indicate many
places where improvements are needed such as leaky ducts, windows, or walls, and more
insulation in walls and, especially in the attic. Leaky ducts are often cited as a being a common
problem. This indicates a need for training of installers and for more rigorous inspections of
HVAC work. (Note: so called “duct tape” should not be used on ducts since it will fail very soon.
Either use mastic or a metal tape intended for use on ducts.)
If the roof of the house is 15-20 years old, replacing it with metal such as Galvalume will reduce
the heat gain in the summer. If there are many east or west facing unshaded windows, planting
small fast-growing deciduous trees or vines on trellises will reduce the heat gain. Alternatively,
external shading of windows with awnings or “shade screen,” a louvered blind with very
narrow slots that allows looking directly through it but shields out the sun when it is above an
angle of about 200, is an option to consider.
Gainesville Regional Utilities and the Federal Government have rebates for many of the needed
improvements that will reduce energy usage that can be found at their respective web sites:
www.gru.com/YourHome/Conservation/Energy/Rebates/rebatesIntro.jsp, and
www.energy.gov/taxbreaks.htm.
BEHAVIOR CHANGE
23
In February 1977, Jimmy Carter appeared on national TV
wearing a cardigan to reinforce the message to Americans that
we needed to lower our thermostats to reduce energy use at
the time of the Arab oil embargo. Although we have no oil
embargo now, it is even more imperative that we reduce
energy consumption. After Carter was ridiculed for his
approach to the energy problem, few public figures have dared
to suggest that we need dramatic changes in behavior to
reduce CO2 emissions to acceptable levels to save the planet.
None have stepped forward to be the poster child for this effort
although hundreds of mayors have signed the cool climate initiative.
Determining what changes could lead to the desired reductions in energy use and greenhouse
gas emissions is the easy part. Achieving the changes in behavior on the part of individuals and
governments necessary to produce the reductions is the hard part. How can we get those with
the means to stop driving their gas guzzling SUV’s to their second homes while sprinkling
systems are left on automatic timers watering lush lawns rain or shine? Perhaps the marketing
genius who has gotten people to pay $3.50 a cup for Starbucks coffee or 1000 times more for
bottled water than for what comes out of the tap will become the pied piper for global
warming.
Could a slogan as catchy as “Foundation of the Gator Nation,” or “Every Journey Begins with
Passion” work for climate change? Should we start a collection for the $250,000 that a fancy ad
agency would want to come up with one?
Some suggested approaches are:
1. Create and distribute brochures and literature that make the case for
the need in behavior changes.
2. Work with School Board to distribute materials in the schools.
3. Offer prizes for the best climate change science fair project.
4. Recruit “green businesses” such as Toyota to offer the Prius as a prize
for the best senior project on ways to change behavior.
5. Adopt a program similar to that in Minneapolis that awards twenty
$1,000 mini-grants and five $10,000 awards for projects ranging from
household power-consumption monitors to “block club talks” about
global warming.
6. Recruit local utilities to run contests with substantial prizes for
homeowners who have the smallest carbon footprint.
24
7. Run showings of documentaries such as “Crude Awakening,”
“Inconvenient Truth,” “Gimme Green,” “one on waste from Sean”,
“Who Stole the Electric Car,” etc. on channel 12 TV.
8. Expand on the popular free compact fluorescent lamp giveaway
program to offer other free gifts for.
9. Start a “negagallons” campaign to promote conservation in the travel
area, analogous to negawatts
10. Ban ads that extol purchasing or using energy consuming items such
as SUV’s (we have banned tobacco and alcohol ads, why not ones that
promote wasting energy?)
ENERGY EFFICIENT APPLIANCES
The major appliances in the home such as refrigerator, clothes dryer, dishwasher, stove, and
water heater account for 25-40% of the home energy use. Thus, having the most efficient
models available would provide major savings in home energy use. This is relatively easy to
achieve since efficiencies of appliances have increased markedly in the last 10 years and many
homes have older, less efficient models. Because of the lower power consumption of newer,
more efficient models, it is economical to replace appliances that are over 10 years old with
new ones, especially if the more efficient “Energy Star” models are chosen.
In replacing or buying new appliances, attention must be paid to energy consumed by the
appliance, by comparing the ratings on the “EnergyGuide” label. The label itself does not imply
that the unit is energy efficient. A comparison must be made using the information on the
label. Differences in energy use can be significant depending on the technology. For example,
a 50” LCD TV may use 300 Watts less than a similarly sized plasma TV. If the set is on for six
hours a day, that is almost 60 kWh/month extra use for the LCD unit. Leaving the TV on all the
time even if no one is watching it makes a costly electric bill as well as a huge carbon footprint.
Refrigerators, which are likely the most energy consuming appliance in most homes, are
another example where different features make significant differences in energy use. Freezer
units on top use about 10-15% less energy than side-by-side models. Another energy hog is
having water and ice through the front rather than having to open the door for it. When
replacing a refrigerator, there may be a temptation to keep the old one as well, in the
basement or garage, as a backup. This is really energy inefficient since both the new one and
the old energy hog are running all the time.
Clothes washers are now available with horizontal axes (i.e. they are front loading) that are
more efficient than top-loaders. Few if any top-loading washers meet the EnergyStar
25
requirement. The most energy efficient dry is a clothes line that you may put up outside.
(Note: homeowners associations cannot prohibit use of outside clothes lines.)
If you have natural gas available and are replacing appliances, consider switching those that
heat, i.e. stove, dryer, water heater, etc to gas rather than electricity. It is far more energy
efficient to use gas for appliance that heat than to burn gas or coal to generate electricity, then
transmit it over lines and use that to heat at the end use. (Of course, our crystal ball is not
sufficiently good to see what the future supply of natural gas may be many years into the
future.)
There are excellent sources of information on energy efficient appliance on the internet. Just
use one of the search engines or go to:
www.nrdc.org; energystar.gov; wikipedia.org.
GROUND SOURCE HEAT SINK HVAC SYSTEM; GROUND SOURCE HEAT PUMPS **DA
(Note: paint a picture of how conventional HVAC systems work, and why they are energy
inefficient. Find a diagram of a conventional HVAC system and
include here.)
Heat pumps work like refrigerators, moving heat from one point
to another. In a refrigerator heat is “pumped” from the inside of
the refrigerator to the heat sink coils behind or underneath the
refrigerator. For cooling buildings, the heat pump extracts heat
from inside the building, with the sink where the heat is dumped
located outside the building. For heating the building, the cycle is
reversed, with heat extracted from outside and dumped inside.
Conventional heating and air-conditioning (HVAC) systems exchange heat with outside air. The
maximum efficiency for either heating or cooling is determined by the inside and outside
temperatures and is greater the closer these are to being the same. The efficiency drops if the
outside air temperature is high and, especially, if it is low, near or below freezing. Since heat is
extracted from the outside coils when the HVAC is in the heating mode, these coils may freeze
over and require defrosting (heating) just as a refrigerator (lacking automatic defrosting) would.
In this situation where heating is needed most, the efficiency
plummets.
With groundsource heatpumps (GSHP), this problem of loss
of efficiency does not occur since the outside heat exchange
is with the ground that stays essentially constant at about 68
0F a few feet below the surface. The GSHP maintains its
higher efficiency that is determined by temperature a few
26
feet below the surface of the ground rather than air temperature. Power consumption is 3050% less than with conventional HVAC systems
Although Florida does not have hot springs or other geothermal formations, there is an
opportunity for HVAC systems to make use of the earth and groundwater, which is at a
relatively constant 68 degrees F. This groundwater makes an ideal source for heat exchange in
geothermal or ground source heat pumps (GSHP).
Because of the higher efficiency of GSHP, these would be ideal for homes, schools, libraries,
churches, and public buildings in either new construction or in the replacement or upgrade of
existing HVAC systems. The cost of units and installation are somewhat higher than for
conventional HVAC systems; however, the payback time for the added costs is only a few years.
There are three options for heat exchange with the earth: a) use of a dedicated borehole, into
which the heat pump heat exchanger us inserted (no water is ever extracted from the ground
only heat is exchanged with it); b) burial of the heat exchange loop about six feet underground
in a horizontal loop; or c) circulate water from a well through the heat pump, and expel it
through a sprinkler or other means. In case a) the borehole This can be located very near the
building, and requires no special provisions. The hole borehole can, in fact, be located under a
parking lot or sidewalk.
For a large building, several heat pumps can be used, allowing only those sections of a building
to be conditioned when others are not needed. A substantial savings in energy use can be
achieved since all of the building would not be conditioned. Option (a) is probably preferred in
most situations; Option (b) requires a large area for the heat exchanger; and Option (c) is not
advisable because of the consumptive use of water.
Currently, Gainesville Regional Utilities (GRU) offers an incentive program (rebate) for new
installation or upgrade of a conventional HVAC system. Because a ground-source eat pump
system offers a significant reduction in energy use, GRU and other utilities should be
encouraged to offer an incentive program (rebate) for GSHP systems.
GSHP Rebates offered by other utilities
Florida
Gulf Power Company (GPC) offers a $150 per ton incentive for closed-loop geothermal heat
pumps installed in single family and multi-family homes. Minimum equipment efficiency ratings
(EER) and installation guidelines are required. This incentive is for Gulf Power customers only.
For more information call Gulf Power Company at 1-877-655-4001.
http://geoexchange.us/incentives/incentives_fl.htm
Resources
27
www1.eere.energy.gov/geothermal/pdfs/26161a.pdf
www1.eere.energy.gov/femp/procurement/eep_groundsource_heatpumps.html
www.toolbase.org/Technology-Inventory/HVAC/geothermal-heat-pumps
Alternative Energy subcommittee recommendation to ECSC
The Alternative Energy subcommittee recommends that the ECSC: Recommend that the
Alachua County Commission request that electric utilities operating in the County offer a
substantial rebate (above that for conventional HVAC installation) for installation of ultra-high
efficiency ground-source heat pumps (GSHP) in either new, replacement or upgrades of existing
HVAC systems; and that the utilities publicize the energy savings possible through these
systems.
ECSC Recommendation to Alachua County Commission
That the Alachua County Commission:
Request that electric utilities operating in the County offer a substantial rebate (above that for
conventional HVAC installation) for installation of ultra-high efficiency ground-source heat
pumps (GSHP) in either new, replacement or upgrades of existing HVAC systems; and that the
utilities publicize the energy savings possible through these systems.
‘NEGAWATTS’ CONCEPTUAL IDEA
The term “negawatt” was coined by Amory Lovins in a 1989 speech following observation of
the typo “negawatt” instead of “megawatt” in a utilities commission report [1]. The concept
works by using conservation to increase available power rather than increasing generation
capacity. In other words, if consumers reduce consumption by, say, 30% there will be no need
for additional generation capacity for some time. To quote Lovins, "There's no cheaper or
cleaner power than the power you don't produce."
Lovins gave the example of replacing a 75 watt incandescent bulb with a compact fluorescent
one of 14 watts that provides the same amount of light. With the negawatt concept, 61 watts
(75-14) would be sent back to the power plant. Each bulb has a net cost of minus several cents
per kWh and no coal plant can compete with that!
Locally, the GRU rebate program to homeowners and businesses to make energy-saving
improvements is another good example. These help delay the building of another costly power
plant. There is an economic spinoff as well. The owners (or renters) of more efficient buildings
save money that they have available for other uses in the community. This money stays in the
community, being spent and re-spent supporting local jobs, rather than going out of town to
buy coal. The energy improvements that were made created local jobs for home repair
companies. Thus, this is a strong form of economic development.
28
There is a great environmental benefit even for one compact fluorescent lamp. Over its life one
CFL will save, in the case of a coal-fired power plant, emissions of about one ton of CO2 and
eight kilograms of SO2. If the CFC is displacing nuclear generation, it will avoid making half a
curie—which is a lot!—of long lived radioactive waste, and plutonium equivalent to about 800
lbs of high explosive. Or, if the CFC negawatts are displacing oil-fired electricity, enough oil will
be saved to run a Prius coast-to-coast round trip.
One CFC does all that! But far from paying extra for it, you find it makes you about 20 or 30
dollars richer, because that's the amount by which its savings in fuel, lamps and labor exceed its
cost. And it will also defer hundreds of dollars of investment in utility capacity, money which
can be more productively invested elsewhere in the economy.
But CFC’s provide a very small savings of energy compared with many other things, such as
recycling. The negawatt concept could be extended to transportation where we might use the
term “negagallon” for gallons of gas saved by picking a different mode of travel such as transit
instead of driving our own vehicles.
One important negawatt that can effectively increase available power is “demand response” or
“demand side management” in which customers agree to have their air conditioners shut off
for short periods of time during high-demand times. In this way, customers “generate”
negawatts that allow utilities to reduce their peak-load generation capacity.
1. www.ccnr.org/amory.html#eff
‘NEGAGALLONS’ CONCEPTUAL IDEA
Google “negawatts” and you get 12,700 sites. To my surprise, googling “negagallons” provided
68 sites (I had expected zero since, I thought that I had invented the term).
“Negawatts” is a concept introduced by Amory Lovins into electricity usage (he got the name
from a typo, negawatt instead of megawatt) to characterize conservation measures as a way of
reducing demand for generating more megawatts. Gainesville’s Regional Utilities program of
giving away free compact fluorescent lamps and giving rebates for energy efficiency
improvements are good examples of negawatts. With a sufficiently aggressive negawatts
program, the need for new power generation could be delayed for many years.
What about a “negagallons” program to reduce the need for additional travel lanes (that do not
seem to work to reduce traffic congestion anyway)?
Can we convince the City of Gainesville (and Alachua County Commissioners) to implement a
negagallons program for the Regional Transit System? It would require a funding source (just as
GRU’s negawatts program is funded from utility profits) that could be a significant chunk of the
recently-enacted five cents additional gasoline tax.
29
Perhaps a traffic engineer or transportation planner could calculate the relative effectiveness of
using a gasoline tax to fund a negagallows program to get people out of their cars versus adding
additional lanes as a way or reducing congestion. For example, the $90 million saved in not
expanding 62 Blvd would fund a lot of negagallons.
One can think of all sorts of ways to give people incentives to get out of their cars and use other
means of transportation through a negagallons program. A free bus pass to everyone, along
with improvements to routes would probably increase bus ridership dramatically. It certainly
did for UF students who pack busses to capacity (of course, no place to park on campus is also a
tremendous motivator).
Another way to make taking the bus attractive would be to make it faster than by car during
rush hours. For this you need bus rapid transit (BRT) and lanes dedicated to busses. This could
be implemented on existing four-lane roads and included when additional lanes are added to
two-lane roads.
Obvious candidates for BRT are Newberry Road, running all the way to Newberry, and Archer
Road running all the way to Archer, with parking lots in those towns for those living further
away. This would alleviate much of the congestion that these two roads now experience.
There are many other roads that would be good candidates for BRT to serve the sprawl
development surrounding Gainesville. How the costs would compare with that to add enough
lanes to do the same would be useful to know and might help convince commissioners of the
value of negagallons.
SUPPLY: RENEWABLE LOCAL ELECTRICITY AND HEAT GENERATION
SOLAR THERMAL AND PHOTOVOLTAIC AND DISCUSSION OF LIFECYCLE GHG EMISSIONS)
**TL
PHOTOVOLTAIC POWER GENERATION
What does a photovoltaic power plant look like?
All photovoltaic power plants built to date, with one exception, have been made up of varying arrangements of
photovoltaic panels. These photovoltaic panels have become more familiar to us over the years as there has been
growing emphasis on their use to reduce the burning of fossil fuels and the emission of greenhouse gases. Most of
the photovoltaic (PV) power plants in the world have been built in Europe, as can be seen from the list below of
the largest PV plants in the world today.
The following pictures show how this basic building block of a single solar panel can be arranged to suit the place
of installation.
30
As the pictures above show, one of the important elements in arranging a PV power plant is to aim the panels at
an angle toward the sun. This will vary with latitude.
SOLAR THERMAL POWER GENERATION
What does a solar thermal power plant look like?
Solar thermal power plants have three basic configurations. The three basic types are shown in the montage
below.
31
The picture in the front is that of a “sterling engine” mounted with its own set of sunlight concentrating mirrors.
The barrel-shaped device in the upper left is the part that collects the sunlight and turns into heat energy for
conversion to electricity, the engine. The parabolic mirror array focuses the sunlight on the engine. The entire
structure (sterling engine and mirror array are mounted on a moveable pivot so that the entire package can be
aimed at the sun throughout the day.
The picture in the upper right is of what is called a “power tower” design. An array of mirror panels are able to
move bi-directionally (up and down, left to right) in order to aim sunlight from whatever direction at the fixed
tower in the middle. The top of the tower has a collector that heats a liquid, such as molten salt, to provide energy
to run a standard turbine generator .
The picture in the upper left of the montage shows a linear reflector array, in this case a parabolic trough that
focuses sunlight on a small linear collector pipe filled with molten salt. Each row has its own collector pipe. All the
rows are joined together to gather the heat energy to drive a standard steam generator.
The linear reflector array form of solar thermal is the most widely used at this point in the technology’s
development. There are fundamentally two types of linear reflector arrays; the parabolic dish and the compact
linear Fresnel reflector. Each are pictured below.
Parabolic Trough Array
32
The picture following shows the parabolic reflector itself and the collector pipe. The trough pivots at the center of
the parabolic curve, with the collector pipe moving with the array to keep the sun focused on it. Normally the
parabolic array is oriented north-south, with the rotation of the trough allowing the collector to pick up the sun’s
heat from sunup to sundown.
33
Compact Linear Fresnel Reflector
The Compact linear Fresnel reflector (CLFR)array is similar to the parabolic trough except that the collector is
located 30 feet or so above the reflectors. This style allows the collector to remain fixed and only the individual
reflectors move. With a dozen or so reflectors for each collector, the individual reflectors will have differing angles
with respect to the sun and the collector in order to focus the sun’s heat on the collector.
The picture below shows a CLFR array with 12 reflectors focusing on one collector, which is about 160 feet long.
34
COMMERCIAL **TL
RESIDENTIAL
**TL
DISTRIBUTED GENERATION
BIOMASS (AND DISCUSSION OF LIFECYCLE GHG EMISSIONS)
Biomass is organic material made from plants and animals.
WHAT IS IT?
Biomass from trees is the most abundant source of biomass in Alachua County as in the rest of the world. These
sources include:
•
Urban Wood Waste
management
Debris from tree surgeons, land clearing operations and landscape
•
Alachua County yard trash pick up
Yard Trash
35
•
Logging Debris
Woody material to small to be economically handled, processed and
transported to the mills for manufacture.
•
Forest thinnings
paper and lumber mills.
Waste wood from maintenance of forest plantations that are too small for
This material is generally considered CO2 neutral because the carbon that is released in its combustion is
recaptured as new material grows. SFRC is currently doing a literature review to determine CO2 intensity of
complete lifecycle of production, harvest, manufacture and transportation for the woody biomass to energy
process1.
HOW MUCH IS AVAILABLE (LOCALLY APPLICABLE)
According to the IFAS study, there is enough woody biomass economically available to fuel a 40mw generating
facility for GRU.
HOW MUCH IS CURRENTLY USED
Currently, only a small amount of woody biomass is being captured for fuel. These industries are driven by
markets and economics. Supply follow markets and currently there is no Alachua County market for biomass fuel.
As more markets are developed, more of available biomass will be captured and used for fuel.
There are three readily available sources for capture. First is debris from tree services and land clearers that are
being transported to C&D landfills and burned or buried. Second, is debris from land clearing sites. The most cost
effective way to handle land clearing debris is to open burn on site. Debris from logging operations are being piled
up allowed to dry and then burned.
RECOMMENDATIONS



Offer tax and fee credits to owners, builders, developers to recycle vegetative debris from land clearing
operations.
Encourage local electrical provider to adopt as policy the new net metering rule required of investor
owned utilities.
Declassify vegetative debris as C&D and require all companies who receive it to document its recovery.
1 Economic Availability of Alternative Biomass Sources for Gainesville, Florida School of Forest Resources and Conservation
Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences (IFAS) University of Florida
36
3. ENERGY FOR TRANSPORTATION **TL
Mathematics teaches us that we need to understand the problem first before we can solve it. The problem ad
hand and addressed in this report is the need for individuals and communities in our county to transition to a low
energy economy. When we talk about energy, we refer to energy in buildings (electricity) and energy in
transportation (fuel).
Over the past 150 years, mankind specifically societies in western industrialized countries have enjoyed an
unprecedented increase in living standards and quality of life. This development was based on the availability of
cheap and abundant fossil fuels such as coal, oil, and natural gas.




Fossil fuels are finite resources, they will be gone some day
EROI
Oil discovery
price
At this critical junction/turning point in our history we have to make very wise decisions about the investment of
our resources (money and energy). What was considered the best choice and decision in the past may nor serve
us for the times ahead of us.
http://www.communitysolution.org/problem.html
http://www.pseg.com/media_center/pressreleases/articles/2008/2008-04-08.jsp
Peak Oil, $120/barrel of oil
http://www.secureenergy.org/reports/westcott_report.pdf
CURRENT LIQUID FUEL CONSUMPTION WITHIN ALACHUA COUNTY
A look at Florida’s fuel tax statistics of Fiscal Year 2006/2007 indicates that Alachua County ranks 11 in the state in
the consumption of fuels in transportation with 19.2 million gallons of diesel fuel and 117.9 million gallons of
motor fuel sold. Comparing the numbers of fuel sold in Alachua County to the rest of the state one can conclude:
-
-
the higher increase in motor fuel in the state is due to the higher
population growth in the state compared to AC
the increase in diesel fuel consumption in AC compared to Florida is significant
with 56.8 percent to 33.1 percent; this might be an indication of the establishment
of several distribution centers in the City of Alachua
since diesel fuel consumption is only about 10 percent of the total fuel consumption
its increase has not significantly impacted the total consumption
Motor Fuel
Alach
ua
Diesel Fuel
2001/2002
2006/2007
112,333,29
117,937,12
37
%
4.99
Total
2001/2002
2006/2007
12,241,778
19,195,953
%
56.8
2001/2002
2006/2007
124,575,07
137,133,08
%
10.0
Coun
ty
2.7
7.9
%
.3
.5
1%
1.0
1.4
8%
Flori
da
7,835,936,
471.0
8,644,054,
018.9
10.3
1%
1,330,632,
075.0
1,770,709,
728.0
33.0
7%
9,166,568,
546.0
10,414,763,
746.9
13.6
2%
http://dor.myflorida.com/dor/taxes/fuel_tax.html
http://dor.myflorida.com/dor/taxes/certgallons07.xls
http://dor.myflorida.com/dor/taxes/certgallons02.pdf
What we need to keep in mind as we shape the energy policies for the next few decades is that diesel engines are
over 30 percent more fuel efficient than gasoline powered engines.
In Europe, where high fuel prices have been the norm for many years, 53.3 percent of new car registrations are
diesel-powered cars with Luxembourg leading all nations at 77.2%. Given a price of $8.50 per gallon at current
(April 2008) exchange rates it makes sense to select a diesel model. For example, the diesel version of the
Mercedes E-Class has a fuel economy rating of 26/35 mpg (30 mpg combined) compared to a rating of 19/26 mpg
(21 mpg combined) for the gasoline version. The extra cost of the vehicle is recouped in a couple of years.
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2008/02/european-automo.html
http://editorial.autos.msn.com/article.aspx?cp-documentid=435228
Furthermore, as we enter a period where petroleum based fuel supply will take continuous or even sharp declines
displacing diesel fuel is a much smaller but more significant problem than displacing gasoline fuel. For one, the
transportation of goods can be moved to railways or barges. Second, as we will see in our discussion on biodiesel,
there are many more feedstock options available than feedstock for gasoline substitutes. Nevertheless, every
community needs a minimum of diesel fuel in the immediate future to transport heavy equipment, power buses,
and deliver goods.
On the other hand, while the scale of the problem to displace gasoline fuel is much larger it is less critical because
there are more alternatives. For example, for short distances to get to work, school, or entertainment, there are
many options to share-a-ride, use public or alternative transportation such as a bicycle, scooter, motorcycle, or
electric powered vehicles. For out of town trips one could use the train or carpool which has been common in
Europe for over 20 years.
NegaGallons
In the previous section, we discussed the term “negawatts” introduced by Amory Lovins of the Rocky Mountain
Institute. The complimentary term “negagallon” was coined by Dr. Dwight Adams to indicate the primary and
secondary amount of fuel and money that can be saved in reducing the number of miles driven by using public or
alternative means of transportation.
The paradigm shift that needs to occur in transportation is that:
a) a city needs to be for people and not for cars
b) you solve the traffic and congestion problem by reducing the number of cars
on the street, not by widening roads
38
DISCUSSION OF PROJECTED SHORTAGE OF OIL (PEAK OIL) AND INCREASED PRICES
Needs content
DISCUSSION OF MTPO STUDY OF PEAK OIL
Needs content
DISCUSSION OF LIGHT RAIL IN TEN YEARS (SEE LUAT)
Needs content
SUPPLY: ALTERNATIVE FUEL PRODUCTION **HK
Introductory statements…?
BIODIESEL
Biodiesel is the term generally used for non-petroleum-based diesel fuel produced from vegetable oils, waste
vegetable oils, or animal fat by a process called transesterification. Legend has it that Rudolf Diesel (1858-1913),
the inventor of the diesel engine, used vegetable oil as fuel for his engine.
ETHANOL
Needs content.
METHANE/BIOGAS
Biogas refers to the gas produced from biological decomposition of organic matter such as food waste, grass
clippings, waste water sludge, or animal manures in the absence of oxygen [1]. Depending on how the
decomposition occurs (e.g. in a landfill or in an anaerobic digester where the process can be controlled), the
composition is typically 50-75% methane (CH4) and 25-50% carbon dioxide (CO2), with smaller amounts of other
gases such as nitrogen, hydrogen, and hydrogen sulfide (that imparts the smell of rotting eggs).
Biogas can be used as a replacement for natural gas (methane) for electricity production, space heating, water
heating, and process heating. It can be compressed to replace natural gas for use in vehicles, internal combustion
engines, or fuel cells [2-6].
39
Illustration of anaerobic digestion and uses of the products, from Ref. 2.
Wet-stream municipal solid waste (MSW) is a widely-used source of material suitable for anaerobic digestion for
methane production. There have been many studies of anaerobic digestion of MSW, including one by J.F.K. Earle,
D.P. Chynoweth, and R.A. Nordstedt [3] from which many of the data quoted here are taken. The typical 65%
methane, 35% carbon dioxide mixture of the biogas depends on a number of parameters including the
composition of the waste stream, the length of retention time in the digester, and prevailing physico-chemical
conditions in the digester. The heating value for biogas straight from the digester is 400 to 600 Btu/SCF (units are
British thermal units per standard cubic foot). A ton of biodegradable MSW produces up to 1100 standard cubic
feet of methane [4]. Using combined heat and power with 80% efficiency, this quantity of methane would
produce 1.2 MW from the 150 t/d Alachua County wet-stream waste, enough to supply power for the plant plus
extra for sale to the utility [4-6].
Raw biogas may be burned as fuel in either internal combustion engines or in gas turbines. The latter are
preferred since impurities in raw biogas may corrode internal combustion engines. The gas can be cleaned of CO2,
H2S and other impurities to produce “synthetic natural gas” for injecting into the gas mains, as a vehicle fuel or for
producing electricity. Many cities in Europe, including Berne Switzerland run their buses on synthetic methane
produced from sewage sludge.
In addition to wet-stream MSW, sewage sludge might be co-digested, which would bring the total power produced
(combined heat and power) to 3-5 MW when the savings in processing energy for the present aerobic digestion of
sludge is taken into account. Co-digestion of MSW with sludge or animal waste is common in European countries
that have a long-history of anaerobic digestion [4]. An anaerobic digester that would handle all the wet-stream
waste plus the sewage sludge for Alachua County would cost in the range of $10,000,000 [4]. If the output is 5
MW, this is a cost per kW of $2,000. This can be compared with the price per kW of $3,000 for the biomass power
plant presently under consideration by the City of Gainesville [7].
40
Recently, fuel cells have been developed that can operate directly from raw (digester) biogas, ADG. In 2001, a
first-of-its kind 200 kW fuel cell power plant was operated on digester gas at the Yonkers, NY wastewater
treatment facility [8]. Based on the successes at the Yonkers demonstration project, several commercial fuel cells
have been installed at sewage wastewater treatment plants in Boston, MA, Portland, OR, Calabassas, CA, and
Cologne, Germany. Recently, the New York Power Authority announced that eight AGD-fueled fuel cells will be
sited at various wastewater treatment plants serving New York City [8]. Commercial versions of fuel cell power
plants designed to operate on ADG are now available. An ADG fuel cell that produces 1 MW began operation at
King County WA waste water treatment plant at Renton in 2004 [9].
Fuel cells, unlike combustion technologies, have very low emissions of carbon monoxide, sulfur oxides, nitrogen
oxides, and non-methane organic carbon. The fuel cell at Yonkers would reduce greenhouse emissions by 8,900
MT/yr. Electrical efficiency is up to 50%, while overall efficiency is as high as 70-80% with heat recovery. In the US
there is the potential to provide 2 GW from sewage treatment plants. The quantity of MSW exceeds that of
sewage sludge by at least a factor of 10, which translates to over 20 GW of power from anaerobic digestion of
various wastes without including any from animal manures [4,8,9].
A Whole Foods grocery store in Connecticut has installed a fuel cell to provide all its power [10]. This has great
advantage over central power production because of the higher efficiency of the fuel cell compared to
conventional power plants and there is no loss in transmission lines. Using a compact modular anaerobic digester
[3,11] located in a shopping center, the food waste from a grocery store and surrounding restaurants could
provide ADG for the fuel cell, while eliminating hauling of the waste to a disposal site and the transmission of
power back to the shopping center.
In addition to the fuel value of the methane produced by anaerobic digestion of wastes, a “liquor” and a solid
digestate consisting of about 60% by weight of the solids in the incoming waste remains after digestion [4,8].
Thus, for Alachua County with about 150 t/d of wet-stream waste, which is roughly 50% solids and 50% water,
these two materials would amount to about 45 t/d. These are valuable fertilizers, especially the solid fraction that
is a humus-like material high in organic carbon. As discussed more fully in the section on Biosolids, this material is
quite useful as a soil amendment, potting material, or if dried and pelletized, is a marketable organic fertilizer [12].
Its use in this way contributes to reducing greenhouse gases through the carbon sequestered in the soil.
References
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biogas
“Turning Waste into Gold in the Future Cityscape,” Stephen Salter, Water Sentinel, Sept-Oct 2007, p 16.
“Anaerobic Composting of Municipal Solid Waste: Biogas Utilization,” J.F.K. Earle, D.P. Chynoweth, and
R.A. Nordstedt, Florida Cooperative Extension Service Bulletin 271, June 1991.
“Producing Energy and Fertilizer from Organic Municipal Solid Waste,” U. Zaher, D-Y. Cheong, B. Wu, and
S. Chen, Washington State University, Ecology Publication No. 07-07-024, June 26, 2007.
Biogas Resource Center, www.energy-network.net/resource_center/launch_documents/biogas.php
Basic Data on Biogas-Sweden at www.energynetwork.net/resource_center/launch_documents/documents/Basic_data_on_biogas_in_Sweden_2006_(
11p).pdf
City of Gainesville Biomass Proposal,
http://www.gru.com/Pdf/futurePower/BindingProposals/Binding%20Proposal%20Recommendation%20C
C%20Presentation%204-28-08.pdf.
41
8.
“Technical Assessment of Fuel Cell Operation on Anaerobic Digester Gas at the Yonkers, NY Waste Water
Treatment Plant, R.J. Spiegel and J.L. Preston, Waste Management 23, 709 (2003).
9. “Lessons Learned from the World’s Largest Digester Gas Fuel Cell,” E. Allen, J. Hennessy, G. Bush, C.
Nelson, Presentation for WEFTEC Conference, Nov. 2, 2005.
10. “Whole Foods to be Powered by Fuel Cell,” www.hydrogencarsnow.com/blog2/index.php/hydrogeneconomy/whole-foods-market-to-be-powered-by-fuel-cell/.
11. Dr. Jose Sifontes, Sigarca, Inc., Gainesville, FL.
12. Dr. Amir Varshovi, GreenTechnologies, Gainesville, FL.
HYDROGEN
Hydrogen is widely seen as the main future transport fuel; but that future is probably further off than popularly
perceived.
Hydrogen is already a significant chemical product, chiefly used in making nitrogen fertilizers and, increasingly, to
convert low-grade crude oils into transport fuels*. Some is used for other chemical processes. World consumption
is 50 million tonnes per year, growing at about 10% pa. There is a lot of experience handling it on a large scale.
Virtually all hydrogen is made from natural gas, giving rise to quantities of carbon dioxide emissions.
Like electricity, hydrogen is an energy carrier (but not a primary energy source). As oil becomes more expensive,
hydrogen may eventually replace it as a transport fuel and in other applications. This development becomes more
likely as fuel cells are developed, with hydrogen as the preferred fuel, though storage at vehicle scale is a major
challenge.
Like electricity, hydrogen for transport use will tend to be produced near where it is to be used. This will have
major geo-political implications as industrialized countries become less dependent on oil and gas from distant
parts of the world.
Electricity and hydrogen are convertible one to the other as energy carriers.
In the short term, hydrogen can be produced economically by electrolysis of water in off-peak periods, enabling
much greater utilization of base-load generating plants
DEMAND: ALTERNATIVE TRANSPORTATION **HK
WALKING
Redesign and rezoning of our communities is needed (often called “new urbanism) so that we obtain a higher
population density and can reach local destinations (work, bank, post office, restaurants) by foot rather than by
car. New York City is a prime example for where the per capita consumption of energy is half the national average.
A side benefit of walking is better health. For example, the city of Bogotá, Colombia, organize a weekly event
called Ciclovía where 70 miles of city streets are closed to traffic and opened to walking, biking, running, skating
and other non-motorized events.
http://www.streetsblog.org/2007/12/03/ciclovia-a-moving-experience-in-bogota
RIDESHARING
http://uk.autostopp.net/index.php?start=1
42
http://www.mitfahrzentrale.de/index.php?landnr=D&lang=GB
PARK AND RIDE (SEE LUAT)
http://www.zeromotorcycles.com/
http://www.teslamotors.com/
PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION (BUS AND LIGHT RAIL, BICYCLE RENTAL PROGRAM)
It is a known fact that General Motors, Firestone, and Standard Oil deliberately destroyed the public transportation
system in Los Angeles and most of California
GAINESVILLE’S REGIONAL TRANSIT SYSTEM (RTS)
While the ridership of RTS buses has significantly increased and the RTS bus system is praised as one of the best in
the state of Florida there is much to be desired. On many routes, the bus runs only every 30 or 60 minutes
BUS RAPID TRANSIT
Curitiba, capital of the state Paraná, in Brazil with a population of 3.5 million in the metropolitan area, is
considered one of the best urban planning world-wide.
While Curitiba has one of the highest per capita car ownership rate in Brazil, the per capita consumption of fuel is
30 percent less, therefore little congestion, emission levels, time lost in traffic. Private companies run the bus
system, there is only one fare for the entire day no matter the route, tickets are not sold on the bus in order to
speed up the time it takes for every stop, and finally, during rush hour the buses of the main routes arrive every 50
seconds.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nhHewvJuLsQ
http://www.mariavazphoto.com/curitiba_pages/curitiba_dvd.html
http://www.dismantle.org/curitiba.htm
Bicycling and Bicycle Rental Programs
Many cities, including Gainesville, have tried bicycle rental programs in the past. Most of them were unsuccessful
for a number of reasons.
In July 2007, the city of Paris started the most wide spread and ambitious rental program in the world. The goal is
to reduce the car use by 20 percent, have 1,451 rental locations around Paris by the end of 2007 with an average
distance of 900 feet between them and provide 26,000 rentable bicycles.
Some communities in the U.S., such as Portland, Washington, DC, and San Francisco have adopted a bike rental
program similar to and modeled after the one in Paris, adding advertising at rental locations to fund the cost of the
project.
http://nyc.theoildrum.com/node/2928
http://current.com/items/87766351_paris_on_2_wheels_a_day
43
http://www.portlandtribune.com/news/story.php?story_id=119213914085902800
BIOGAS POWERED BUSES (SEE WEIS)
HYBRID VEHICLES
Honda Insight, Toyota Prius
http://www.hybridcars.com/
http://www.howstuffworks.com/hybrid-car.htm
Hybrid electric vehicles potentially use off-peak power from the grid for recharging.
Conversion Kits for Toyota Prius
http://www.hymotion.com/
http://www.calcars.org/
http://www.pluginamerica.com/
ELECTRIC VEHICLES
In looking at a 100 year trend in the transportation sector, it is helpful to look at the situation at the start of the
20th century. It that time the automobile, with its internal combustion engine, was just beginning its rise as the
dominant form of ground transportation. It wasn’t long into the twentieth century that the term, “gone the way of
the buggy whip” became part of the vernacular, and for good reason. The days of horse-drawn transportation
were coming to a close in the United States, even if that took a few more decades to be almost entirely effect in
the general population. The new “king of the road” was no longer the horse, but the automobile.
While almost all forms of transportation, whether by rail, air, ground, or ship, are dependent on fossil fuel, this
paper will focus primarily on the issues of fuel for ground transportation, primarily the automobile.
The rise of the automobile, with its internal combustion gasoline or diesel powered engine, brought with it the
need to establish the infrastructure to provide the services these vehicles and their passengers needed. Early in
this developmental process there were many areas where such services as gasoline sales, tire repair, engine
maintenance, etc. were not available. Nevertheless, over time the overwhelming forces of demand caused the
changes that produced the present level of care and supply for this pervasive form of transportation.
At the early stages of the 21st century we are facing the dilemma of the possible failure of one of the primary
drivers of the transportation system’s entire supply chain and cost structure. This is tied to the availability and
price of the primary fuel, gasoline, and its related oil-based fuel, diesel. The price of these two essential
commodities in today’s ground transportation sector is rising, and in so doing is raising the question of whether
the continued use of this form of motive power is a good idea. Many, if not all, of the automotive manufacturers
are now looking at what is known as “hybrid” vehicles, which include the primary power source of electricity from
batteries, with an internal combustion engine as back-up power when needed for whatever reason.
In reading the sales literature of the major automobile manufacturers, it appears that they are moving toward a
propulsion system that is essentially an electric motor with choices of the source of the electricity to drive them.
44
This could be, and appears likely, to be a combination of batteries and some form of fuel-consuming engine. It is in
this latter choice, of the fuel to be used in the (internal combustion?)engine, that the future of the automobile
industry now lies. Should we be looking to continued but reduced use of fossil fuels, or hydrogen, or perhaps
some derivative of organic waste.
This situation raises a number of future paths for the development of infrastructure needed to support the ground
transportation vehicles in the 21st century. These paths include the need for vehicle charging stations where
vehicles owners can recharge their vehicles’ batteries during relatively short stops, such as while grocery shopping
or visits to the mall, before returning home. The recharging of batteries while parking one’s vehicle at work for the
day must be considered. The need for the ability to “plug in your car” in your garage for overnight charging must
be addressed. The ability to get “a fill-up” at some location on a long trip must be addressed, whether the fuel
needed is a replacement battery pack, a tank full of gasoline, or a tank of hydrogen. These are infrastructure
change issues, that, while not radical concepts, must be addressed to make the transition away from gasoline or its
cousin, Diesel, effective.
The need for this transition away from gasoline/diesel can be seen in the annual consumption rate for gasoline in
the State of Florida. The graph below (gasoline_use, “Florida_Energy_3-17-08.xlsx”) shows that by 2005 Florida
was consuming 8.8 billion gallons of gasoline(based on 42 gallons/barrel). The trend is that Florida will exceed 10
billion gallons per year in 2008. At approximately $3.30/gallon on the wholesale market, Florida is consuming over
$30 billion in gasoline, and none is produced in the state. All the proceeds go elsewhere, and Florida gains no
ownership of its transportation fuel. This is essentially “renting” our energy. The issue, then becomes how to gain
“ownership” of our energy supply for our major transportation needs.
The first, but not developed, resource idea is from renewable energy. This raises the decisional process of biofuels versus electricity. On a resource adequacy test, it appears that electricity is the only reasonable choice. Since
nearly all of our energy for electricity production in the State of Florida comes from fossil fuels imported from
elsewhere, the problem of “renting” our energy is the same for using present electric generation fuels, but is
merely displaced from one fossil fuel source to another. The challenge is to find an “indigenous” power source to
be used for supplying electricity to our vehicles. As noted in other parts of this report (see Sections XX.XX) the only
truly renewable, and therefore indigenous, power source is solar energy.
While solar power, whether supplied by a utility power plant, or by some other process such as commercial
building rooftop solar panels, the mechanisms to get that power from where it is gathered to within our vehicles
are not now in place. Herein lays the challenge of the next decade. How do we make it possible for a person going
shopping at a local store or mall to recharge their vehicle while it sits parked? Or how do we resupply our vehicles
while it sits in the garage overnight, waiting for the next day’s use? Or how can we make a vehicle that can be
recharged without being “plugged in”?
One important consideration is “compatibility”. A standard plug at a pole/post in a parking lot must fit any vehicle
that parks in front of it. A common “supply” voltage (volts) and upper current (amperes) limit for consumption
must be established in order to prevent a plethora of mixed choices. A set of standards for power characteristics
and plug types is important to a successful transition to electric vehicles.
Until such time as the automotive industry agrees upon a standard for voltage and current limits for electric
vehicle charging, it is prudent only for the County of Alachua to move its zoning and construction standards in the
direction of basic infrastructure concepts. These include such things as requiring new commercial establishments
and large employers to equip their parking lots with the basic infrastructure, such as conduits from their building
to parking rows, to allow the simplest reasonable implementation of vehicle charging once standards and
mechanisms are established and wiring can be installed. These action concepts are contained in the
recommendations at the beginning of this report, and are so identified. The automobile manufacturers have a
45
strong incentive to resolve this conceptual framework of volts, amperes, and plug type as soon as possible.
Hopefully, they and the national government can come to an agreement on these issues soon. In the meantime,
Florida’s money will continue to flow out of state in direct proportion to the rate at which fossil fuel flows into the
state.
ELECTRIC BIKES
Electric bikes are part of a wide range of Light Electric Vehicles that provide convenient local transportation.
http://www.electric-bikes.com/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_bicycles
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_bicycle_laws
ELECTRIC PLUG-IN STATIONS (SEE LUAT)
STANDARDS, LDRS AND REQUIREMENTS FOR NEW DEVELOPMENT (SEE LUAT)
NEIGHBORHOOD VEHICLES
Supporting infrastructure (See LUAT)
NEV (Neighborhood Electric Vehicle)
NEVs come in two speeds: golf cars are limited to speeds under 20 mph while low-speed vehicles (as defined by
the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration) are capable of up to 25 mph. Low-speed vehicles must have
seatbelts, windshields, turn signals, headlights, brake lights and other safety equipment that golf cars don't
require. NEVs are designed to be used in residential areas with low density traffic and low speed zones. With a top
speed of 25 mph, low-speed vehicles can be used on streets with a posted 35 mph speed limit or less. Some local
jurisdictions (e.g. Palm Springs) also allow golf cars on public streets. When driven on public streets, a driver's
license is required.
Who Killed the Electric Car
GM EV1
Battery Technology
Researchers at Standford University have found a way to increase the capacity of rechargeable lithium-ion
batteries by a factor of 10.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/12/071219103105.htm
Vehicle-to-grid synergy
http://www.aptera.com/
http://www.teslamotors.com/
Electric Mortorcyles
46
http://www.zeromotorcycles.com/
http://editorial.autos.msn.com/article.aspx?cp-documentid=434471
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_motorcycles_and_scooters
http://www.electric-bikes.com/
RAIL FOR GOODS AND SERVICES (SEE LUAT)
Map of Rail Service Corridors
Existing and past corridors
Articles from Penny on Rail
Rail Line Right of Way Encroachment
Depots for Offloading Goods
47
4. ECONOMIC, EMPLOYMENT AND POLITICAL SECURITY: JOB OPPORTUNITIES/ECONOMIC
BENEFITS **TL
ENERGY EFFICIENCIES: ECONOMIC SECURITY & COMMUNITY EMPLOYMENT
In December 2007, McKinsey & Company and The Conference Board released a report titled, “Reducing US
Greenhouse Gas Emissions: How Much at What Cost? US Greenhouse Gas Abatement Mapping Initiative”.2 The
report was produced in association with 7 leading global institutions (DTE Energy; Environmental Defense;
Honeywell; National Grid; Natural Resources Defense Council; Pacific Gas & Electric; Shell).
The #1 low-cost option to reduce greenhouse gases:
1.
Improving energy efficiency in the buildings and appliances and industrial sectors could offset some 85% of
projected incremental demand for electricity in 2030, largely negating the need for new coal-fired electric
power plants. Improved vehicle efficiency could roughly offset the mobility-related emissions of a growing
population, while providing net economic gains.3
These building efficiencies include lighting retrofits; improved heating, ventilation and air conditioning systems,
building envelopes and building control systems; and higher performance for consumer office electronics and
appliances.
The report’s other lower-cost options include:
2. Increasing fuel efficiency in vehicles and reducing carbon intensity of transportation fuels;
3. Pursuing various options across energy-intensive portions of the industrial sector;
4. Expanding and enhancing carbon sinks; and
5. Reducing the carbon intensity of electric power production.
RECOMMENDATION
That the Alachua County Commission direct the Manager and his Finance Team to meet with the Energy
Conservation Strategies Commission and/or relevant ECSC subcommittees to develop, for BOCC consideration,
potential financing mechanisms to implement energy efficiencies on a massive scale.
The ECSC also requests that Alachua County Clerk of Court Buddy Irby participate in development of this
financing mechanism.
The ECSC recommends development of a “City of Berkeley (California)” type property-tax ‘bank’ to finance mass
efficiencies in residential buildings and appliances, and the commercial/institutional sector.
The financing mechanism would be much like an Alachua County road ‘special assessment’, where property
owners along a dirt road ask the County to front the capital costs to pave the road. The County paves the road, and
collects the paving cost (+ interest) from each property owner over a period of time. This special assessment
remains a lien against the property until paid in full.
2
http://www.mckinsey.com/clientservice/ccsi/pdf/US_ghg_final_report.pdf
3
Ibid, p. xiv
48
Because of the economic downturn, local builders and subcontractors are laying off employees. Others outside of
the building industry are also in need of employment and/or job training. Immediate implementation of a
Berkeley-type financing mechanism for building and efficiency upgrades could also stimulate job growth in Alachua
County.
LOCAL EMPLOYMENT CREATE A RESOURCE EFFICIENT AND RESILIENT COMMUNITY
Energy Independence
ECONOMIC LEVERAGE: KEEPING LOCAL ECONOMY STRONG (TOM’S EXAMPLE OF $1
RECYCLED 5X THROUGH THE ECONOMY)
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND LOCAL EMPLOYMENT
BERKELEY MODEL FOR ALACHUA COUNTY **CF
The primary barrier for property owners, especially residential property owners, to conserve energy is the capital
cost of such actions. Usually, the capital cost laid out for energy improvements can only be recovered over time
through reduced energy bills. This may take years, perhaps as much as a decade or longer. Even long-term
residents are unwilling to spend large amounts today in the hope of slow and perhaps uncertain payback later. For
owners not expecting to have a long period for the cost recovery, there is even a negative incentive. Also, the
decoupling of ownership from utility bill payment for those who lease out or rent a residence makes the interest in
energy conservation even more tenuous.
The proposed model seeks to address the following issues:
•
Ownership duration
•
Interest costs for capital improvements
•
Reliable information on choices of energy conservation options
The proposal being put forward here is to use the financial leverage of Alachua County in combination with the
ability to adjust property evaluation for tax purposes in order to encourage a long-term viability of energy
conservation improvements to residences and commercial establishments.
Steps to Energy Conservation Success
The first step is for Alachua County to provide opportunity for residential and commercial building owners to
evaluate what options may be beneficial to them. This would be through the use of an energy audit conducted by
a certified energy auditor. The County would provide a list of such auditors who have passed a standardized
qualification process. The energy audit would be set up to provide a list of structured changes that would meet
the HERS standard. This list would provide an ordered list in terms of increasing energy efficiency results,
reflecting the need to take some step ahead of others. The cost of the energy audit would be borne by the
property owner initially, but could be rolled into the overall costs of energy upgrades that may be financed
through this program.
The prospective upgrade list would provide the property owner with the information needed to approach a
contractor for the installations recommended in order to establish a cost estimate.
49
The second step would be for the property owner to make
application to Alachua County for a loan to carry out the
recommended items on the upgrade list with associated cost
estimates. A review of items for upgrade and a financial capability
check of the property owner to repay a loan would be conducted
by the County, and if found reasonable, the loan or the upgrade
process would be approved for construction. Thee are a couple of
approaches on how to move financially from concept to
construction. The first is for the County to authorize a loan to the
property owner, who would pay the contractor doing the
installation. The other is have the contractor submit bills for
payment to the County, with the property owner not having any
direct financial involvement in the construction.
The third step is for the County to add the cost of the loan or
construction costs to the property assessment of the property. This
would raise the property taxes of the property owner and would
establish a lien on the property that would have to be repaid, either
by the present property owner or any future owner, until the
loan/lien is repaid.
Concept: Provide a
funding mechanism
that helps save
consumers money, and
diverts a portion of
money spent on coal
and natural gas into the
local economy, creating
jobs, reducing pollution
and carbon footprint,
and allowing for area
growth and economic
resilience.
The last step/consideration is how much funding might the County
be required to provide, and if this is an amount that may require
separate funding through a bond issue. In its initial phases, there is
a strong likelihood that the funding by the County to support this
initiative could come from the general funds of the County. However, as the initiative develops, as we hope it will,
it should be given advanced monitoring as to whether major funding from a bond issue would be necessary to
continue the program as viable.
Concept: Provide a funding mechanism that helps save consumers money, and diverts a portion of money spent on
coal and natural gas into the local economy, creating jobs, reducing pollution and carbon footprint, and allowing
for area growth and economic resilience.
Source: Bond money, with or without a program primer from a sales tax increase, secured by the municipality, to
be lent to utility customers at minimum possible cost, and administered by the utility.
DESCRIPTION OF THE CALIFORNIA, BERKELEY MODEL
Mayor’s Office Press Release December 26, 2007 http://www.ci.berkeley.ca.us/Mayor//GHG/SEFD-summary.htm
Berkeley FIRST
Financing Initiative for Renewable and Solar Technology
Sustainable Energy Financing District
Program Description
With the current state and federal subsidies, installation of solar electric and solar thermal systems are cost
effective for many residential and commercial property owners. However, disincentives to installation remain,
particularly the high upfront cost and other financial hurdles. Berkeley’s proposed “Sustainable Energy Financing
District” would address many of those disincentives.
50
The citywide voluntary Sustainable Energy Financing District would allow property owners (residential and
commercial) to install solar systems and make energy efficiency improvements to their buildings and pay for the
cost as a 20-year assessment on their property tax bills. No property owner would pay an assessment unless they
had work done on their property as part of the program. Those who do have work done on their property would
pay only for the cost of their project and fees to administer the program. The City would secure the upfront
funding through the placement of a taxable bond.
The financing mechanism is loosely based on existing “underground utility districts” where the City serves as the
financing agent for a neighborhood when they move utility poles and wires underground. In this case, individual
property owners would contract directly with qualified private solar installers and contractors for energy efficiency
and solar projects on their building. The City provides the funding for the project from a bond or loan fund that it
repays through assessments on participating property owners’ tax bills for 20 years.
The Financing District solves many of the financial hurdles facing property owners. First, there would be little
upfront cost to the property owner. Second, the upfront costs are repaid through a voluntary tax on the property,
therefore funding approval is not determined directly by property owner's credit or the equity of in the property.
Third, the total cost of the solar system and energy improvements is comparable to financing through a traditional
equity line or mortgage refinancing because the well-secured bond will provide lower interest rates than is
commercially available. Fourth, the tax assessment is transferable between owners. Therefore, if you sell your
property prior to the end of the 20-year repayment period, the next owner takes over the assessment as part of
their property tax bill.
Property owners and their contractors would be required to agree to certain terms and conditions mandating
energy efficiency steps, appropriate warranties, and other performance measures to take advantage of the
financing.
The Berkeley City Council has the legal authority to create this Financing District under its authority as a Charter
City. Currently, the City has completed its initial legal and financial review and is now beginning to work with solar
installation companies on program design. The City Council unanimously approved the concept and framework of
the program in November. The goal is to formally approve and launch the pilot phase of the program in the
summer of 2008.
The Sustainable Energy Financing District is being developed as part of the City’s implementation of Measure G –
last year’s ballot measure setting greenhouse gas reduction targets for Berkeley and directing the Mayor to lead
the development of a plan to meet those targets.
PROGRAMMATIC GOALS FOR ALACHUA COUNTY MODEL (SCOPE AND SCALE)
ALACHUA COUNTY COMMISSION CREATES LONG-TERM ECONOMIC SECURITY FOR RESIDENTS
84.2% of all existing housing structures in Alachua County were built prior to 1994. 4 It was 1993 before Florida
required minimum energy standards for new construction. This means the vast majority of existing Alachua County
housing stock was constructed without minimum energy standards. 5
4
http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/ADPTable?_bm=y&-geo_id=05000US12001&qr_name=ACS_2006_EST_G00_DP4&-ds_name=ACS_2006_EST_G00_&-_lang=en&-_sse=on
5
Same data not readily available for non-residential structures.
51
Thus, it is expected that all structures in Alachua County could benefit significantly from weatherization (sealing
the building envelope), efficiencies in building machinery (heating, ventilation and air conditioning) and appliances
(upgrading to Energy Star).
Many property owners do not have access to funds required for investment in improved process and mechanical
system efficiencies, alternative energy systems, and other major energy conservation actions. The creation of a
financing mechanism – similar to Alachua County’s road special assessment - could assist with this problem of
capital accumulation. Once the ‘loan’ is repaid, property owners and resident can benefit from reduced energy
bills.
Through a financing mechanism similar to the Alachua County special assessment, property owners could access
this “bank” for energy efficiency upgrades only after receiving a certified energy audit of their building, and specific
instructions on what energy-saving features to accomplish. This would allow a large portion of the community to
more quickly:
i.
ii.
iii.
iv.
v.
vi.
vii.
viii.
vix.
Add insulation where needed.
Replace single-pane windows with double-pane windows.
Replace old refrigerators with new Energy Star appliances.
Replace inefficient water heaters.
Upgrade HVAC systems with smaller, more efficient units.
Upgrade duct system. The Florida Energy Office states that duct leaks in Florida can
increase total energy use (cooling and heating) by about 33%.
Weatherize low-income homes.
Add solar water heaters to homes and businesses.
Add Photovoltaic(PV) systems to homes and businesses.
ECSC calculates that the average home could accomplish significant upgrades and efficiencies with $$ to $$ XXX.
Alternative Scope and Scale from CF
Opportunity Seized: The first 1-2 thousand dollars of repairs of 50% of current housing stock have an average 8-10
month payback, or over 100% return on investment per year. The next 50 thousand dollars, from existing homes to
new home upgrades, have diminishing, yet possibly synergistic, returns down to 10% per year. All of which can
easily cover a bond issue, and yield a substantial savings to the customer over the life of the improvements.
Besides the savings in monthly expenses realized, and that of pollution and footprint reduction, this investment in
“negawatts” essentially diverts money from coal and gas suppliers, to businesses and workers in our community.
Precedent: We were going to take a US 1 Billion dollar bond to construct a coal plant to allow us to meet increased
demand. For a fraction of this money, we can achieve the same increase in service and effective supply through
deep reductions in waste and distributed power and better efficiency to diminish peak load requirements.
However, the money paid will instead stay in our local economy, providing local jobs, as well as save everyone
money (especially those currently with the oldest and poorest quality houses) without subsidy. Essentially, we are
building a “negawatt generator.”
Possible Structuring: Buildings being built could apply for low interest loans to upgrade their mechanical and
insulation systems, providing a profit for the fund above the bond rate- yet still lower than a conventional
mortgage. Existing structures could apply for the loan at just above bond rate, effectively a break even point after
administrative costs. Low income and non-profit owned structures could receive a slight discount on the loan rate.
For ultra low income, those charity and nonprofit organizations currently paying utility bills could instead invest in
efficiency with matching grant possibilities from the fund overages collected.
52
FINANCING MECHANISMS
Revenue Transfer: There are multiple possibilities for revenue transfers to the municipalities for such a fund due to
the massive returns on investment available converting our poor quality building stock to proper building systems.
The spread is anywhere from 100 points across the very low numbers, to 2 over tens of thousands per annum. A
US 1 Billion dollar fund could conceivably generate 2 to 5 million per year in revenue. If administered correctly,
taxes and costs to citizens can be reduced, while money coming in to the municipal treasury increases.
Municipal Bond Program
Low-Interest Loan Program
Sales Tax or Utility Tax
Local Mutual Fund or Investment Fund?
APPLICATION AND ADMINISTRATION OF FUNDS
The funds would be administered through the local utilities, as they already collect money each month from their
customers. Credit worthiness could also be determined in based upon how much customers currently pay in
power bills. Savings will be measured by how much decrease in costs customers achieve after improvements are
made. Debts will be carried over to future occupants as the improvements carry over as well. Rental properties
will function in the same way, where prospective tenants can view their utility costs and fund liabilities before
renting. A special rate can apply to rental properties to account for vacancies, or this can be considered a good
faith subsidy to help out a currently failing energy efficiency market. All retrofits and upgrades should be done in a
systems perspective, using performance metrics such as the HERS rating to insure investment risk.
Accountability and Measurement of Success via HERS **KF
53
APPENDICES
RENEWABLE PORTFOLIO STANDARDS
The Florida Legislature, at the request of Governor Charlie Crist, is debating the elements of a “Renewable
Portfolio Standard” for the State of Florida. Such legislation is likely to be passed by the Legislature at its current
session, and it is likely to be signed by Gov. Crist. This legislation would require the Florida Public Utility
Commission to impose a percentage of the energy delivery by utilities under its jurisdiction that must come from
renewable resources. The present proposal being discussed is a 20% renewable energy standard to be met by no
later than the year 2020.
Florida is considering a standard that has been implemented in 25 states in varying forms to date. The attached
map shows these states.
The purpose of a Renewable Portfolio Standard is to reduce the level of fossil fuel consumption in the generation
of electricity, and to reduce the level of greenhouse gas emissions coming from the use of fossil fuels. The concept
of “renewable” is that the source of energy for electricity generation is replenished within a short time period,
such as an hour or a day or a season. Resources that are created on a geologic or centuries-long time scale are
deemed not renewable. This reduces the list of energy sources to such things as solar power, geo-thermal power,
wind, and water power and heat sources that produce no CO2 emissions, such as anaerobic waste digestion.
The timeframe for fulfilling the Renewable Portfolio Standard is extended to more than a decade because of the
need to make a major change in what generation resources are selected for construction and to assure that the
best possible choices of such new “green” resources are technically feasible and selected as the “best available
competitive technology”. The need for some extended time to complete this requirement comes also from the
fact that almost all of the state’s utilities have only begun to think of the consequences of the RPS on their
resource choices.
The development and deployment of renewable energy resources that would qualify under the RPS has largely
been undertaken by “non-utility generators”(NUGs). This process has been aided by the federal government in
offering “Production Tax Credits”, without which many of the new crop of geothermal plants and wind farms
would not be economically competitive. Production tax credits in combination with an RPS is seen by many as
providing the needed incentives to drive innovation with some assurance of success. Without such combined
pressures the “business as usual” development of fossil fueled generation would continue to cause greater
consumption of fossil fuels and greater emission of greenhouse gases.
A third force, not of governmental derivation, is the rapidly increasing cost of natural gas and oil. Also, there is a
growing sentiment in the citizenry that the use of coal as the primary fuel source for electricity generation, while
cheaper than other fossil fuels, is unacceptable from an environmental perspective. Thus, the negatives of the use
of fossil fuels for multiple reasons is driving thinking toward the importance of renewables.
In the long-term it is quite possible that with the rise in gas and oil prices and the discouragement of the use of
coal, the requirement of an RPS may not be needed, nor production tax credits, because the cost of electricity
from renewables will be at least competitive with other primary energy sources. That is, the RPS may work itself
out of a job, with the help of the energy demands of such nations as China and India.
The mechanics of how an RPS would be implemented is founded in the use of “energy certificates”. The output
from a particular generator would be certified as being “green energy” and certificates, somewhat like cash, would
54
be denominated in blocks of kilowatt-hours (kWh). Each generator could use the certificates to satisfy the RPS
energy requirement that the utility owner of the generator must meet. A NUG could sell the energy certificates it
receives to a utility so the utility doesn’t have to create its own “green” energy. This is similar to the present open
market process used for sulfur dioxide (SO2) credit trading.
The purchase of energy certificates could offset any need for a utility to produce green energy. However, this
comes at a cost. The question that needs analysis is whether a utility should produce its own green energy or
continue to use fossil fuels and buy energy certificates to meet its RPS requirements. It is likely that the cost of
using fossil fuels to generate electricity and buying certificates to meet the RPS would significantly exceed the cost
of generating its own green energy or buying both the energy and energy certificates from a NUG. If the energy
generated by a renewable resource is tied to the energy certificate so that both the energy and the certificates
must be bought and used by the same utility, then the problem of deliverability arises. This issue will have to be
resolved in the legislation before the Florida Legislature now.
One of the likely implications of setting a 20% Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) is that almost all of the new
generation to be built in Florida over the next decade will be renewables. This is the result of the fact that the
growth in energy requirements over the decade will be approximately the same as the requirement to produce
20% of electricity from renewable generation.
The types of sources of renewable energy in peninsular Florida are limited. There is no known geothermal source.
The wind potential, while it does exist, is limited by the energy potential and location of this resource. There being
very little change in elevation in the peninsula, the change in elevation needed to make water power functional is
very limited. While there are ocean currents in the Gulf Stream that could be harnessed, the research and
engineering to test this concept’s feasibility has not been completed, perhaps not even started on a concerted
level needed to test commercial viability. While there is woody biomass available as fuel, this will require the use
of anaerobic digesters to produce the fuel. Also, the “renewable” nature of this resource is limited to begin with,
since it is a function of forest growth rates measured in decades and land area devoted to such growth, and will
become more limited with the population growth in the state reducing the availability of the raw material.
Florida’s situation with regard to the development of renewables boils down to the fact that the only significant
resource capable of supplying the tens of thousands of megawatts it will need in the future, especially with an RPS,
is solar energy. The tables below show the amount of renewable generation that will be needed to meet an RPS
for the State of Florida, for Gainesville Regional Utilities and for Alachua County by the year 2016, the last year for
which thorough energy requirement forecasts are available.
The inclusion of nuclear power as a “renewable” is subject to discussion, and will have both significant political
freight and impact on resource choices. Also, the timeframe to site, build and begin operation of nuclear facilities
is nearly the full implementation timeframe the RPS legislation envisions.
PHOTOVOLTAIC POWER STATIONS
World's largest photovoltaic power stations
Co
DC Peak
Project
Power (MW)
55
GW·h/
Description
year
Parque Solar Hoya de Los Vincentes
Spain
23
41
Solarpark Calveron
Spain
21
40
Planta Solar La Magascona
Spain
20
Beneixama photovoltaic power plant
Spain
20
Tenesol, Aleo
and Solon solar
30
modules with QCells cells
Nellis Solar Power Plant
USA
14
70,000 solar
panels
30
Planta Solar de Salamanca
Spain
13.8
70,000 Kyocera
panels
n.a.
Lobosillo Solar Park
Spain
12.7
n.a.
n.a.
Erlasee Solar Park
Germany
12
1,408 Solon
mover
14
Serpa solar power plant
Portugal
11
52,000 solar
modules
20
Pocking Solar Park
Germany
10
57,912 solar
modules
11.5
Monte Alto photovoltaic power plant
Spain
9.5
14
Viana Solar Park
Spain
8.7
11
Gottelborn Solar Park
Germany
8.4
8.4
Alamosa photovoltaic power plant
Colorado,
USA
Bavaria Solar Park in Muhlhausen
Germany
56
8.22
Completed
December 20,
2007
17
6.3
57,600 solar
modules
6.7
Huerta solar de Aldea del Conde
Spain
6.3
Completed
October 2007
Huerta Solar Crevillent
Spain
6
Completed
January 2008
Huerta Solar de Olmedilla
Spain
6
Completed
November 2007
Rote Jahne Solar Park
Germany
6
90,000 First Solar
5.7
thin-film modules
8
Darro Solar Park
Spain
5.8
Conergy and
SunPower
modules
Kameyama
Japan
5.2
47,000 square
meters on Sharp n.a.
LCD factory roof
11.6
For comparison, the largest non-photovoltaic solar plant, the solar thermal SEGS in California has an installed
capacity of 350 MW. The largest nuclear power stations generate more than 1,000 MW.
This list was taken from Wikipedia.
CURRENT POWER GENERATION & EXISTING BASE **FD
Analysis of Gainesville Regional Utilities
Gainesville regional Utilities (GRU) is the largest electricity supplier in Alachua County, estimated to
supply over 70% of the total electricity consumed in the County. Since information for GRU on projected
demand (Peak in Megawatts) and energy consumption (Megawatt-hours) is available to AE, and other
utilities’ details on these matters are not, the GRU data has been extrapolated to provide data for the
County in total. A brief survey of the type of generating equipment used by other electricity suppliers in
the County in comparison to that for GRU, and the fuel type for these generators showed them to be
approximately comparable. So, the GRU data on generation type and fuel consumption was extrapolated
based on peak demand to estimate the total generation and fuel consumption for the County in total.
GRU has two major generating stations in its service territory, Deerhaven Station and J.R. Kelly Station.
In addition, GRU owns a small portion of the Crystal River 3 nuclear unit and two diesel generators
located at the Southwest Landfill site fueled by methane gas from the landfill. There are also three
photovoltaic sources and one windpower source that supply energy to GRU. These latter four resources
provided approximately 0.25% of GRU’s total energy resources in 2005. The following table summarizes
the fossil fuel-fired and nuclear generating equipment presently owned by GRU.
57
Net
Plant
Crystal River
Deerhaven
Summer
Unit
Primary
Capability
Type
Fuel Type
11.43 MW
NUC
Uranium
FS01
83.00
Steam
Natural Gas
FS02
228.40
Steam
Bituminous Coal
GT01
17.50
Gas Turbine
Natural Gas
GT02
17.50
Gas Turbine
Natural Gas
GT03
75.00
Gas Turbine
Natural Gas
Unit
3
421.40
J.R. Kelly
FS07
37.00
Steam
Waste heat from GT04 as combined cycle
FS08
23.20
Steam
Natural Gas
GT01
14.00
Gas Turbine
Natural Gas
GT02
14.00
Gas Turbine
Natural Gas
GT03
14.00
Gas Turbine
Natural Gas
GT04
75.00
Gas Turbine
Natural Gas
177.20
SW Landfill
SW-1
0.65
Internal Comb. Landfill Gas
SW-2
0.65
Internal Comb. Landfill Gas
1.30
Total – All Generation
611.33 MW
Fuel consumption estimates for this GRU generation by year are shown in the following table.
GRU Fuel Consumption Estimates
Fuel Type
Units
2008
2009
Coal 0.7%Su
103 Tons
653.1
114.8
58
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
Coal 1.7% Su
103 Tons
Natural Gas
109 CuFt
Nuclear
Landfill Gas
516.8
635.3
652.7
673.2
673.0
661.7
649.0
650.0
6.120
7.176
7.461
7.406
7.166
7.332
7.820
8.290
8.398
109BTU
1004
791
1004
909
1004
909
1004
909
1004
109BTU
127
127
63
63
63
63
0.000
0.000
0.000
The transition from 0.7% sulphur coal to 1.7% sulfur coal is made with the completion of the flue gas
scrubber for Deerhaven 2.
GRU is planning some other changes in its generating capability. The addition of the scrubber at
Deerhaven 2 in May 2009 will decrease its capability by an estimated 3 MW. At about the same time
GRU plans to be adding a 4.5 MW combined cycle, natural gas-fueled generator as part of the changes
at Shands/UF. Finally, the two diesel generators at the Southwest landfill will be retired, one in 2009 and
the other in 2013.
If the assumptions are made that the Coal used by GRU contains 13,000 BTU/lb and the natural gas
contains 1,020 BTU/CuFt, the following table would show GRU’s generating fuel input on a BTU basis.
Fuel Type
Units
2008
2009
16,981
2,985
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
Coal 0.7%Su
109BTU
Coal 1.7% Su
109BTU
Natural Gas
109 BTU
6,242
7,320
7,610
7,554
7,309
7,479
7,976
8,456
8,666
Nuclear
Landfill Gas
109BTU
109BTU
1,004
127
791
127
1,004
63
909
63
1,004
63
909
63
1,004
0
909
0
1,004
0
Total
109BTU
13,437 16,518 16,970 17,503 17,498 17,204 16,874 16,900
27,354 24,660 25,195 25,496 25,879 25,949 26,184 26,239 26,570
GRU has developed an estimate of the greenhouse gas emissions for its various generation types and
fuels. The following table shows these estimates.
Insert Table of CO2 emissions by generator and fuel type
The historical cost of fuels in the U.S. is shown in the following table and graph. As a review of this
information shows, the most recent five year experience on the cost of fuels shows a major rate of
59
increase. There is no assurance that these trends may not continue, but there is no reason to believe
that these trends will continue.
U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics
Producer Price Indices for Energy/Transportation-related sources
For Years 1987-2007
Historical Indices
Year
Related &
Natural
Energy
Crude
Power
Gas
Goods
Petroleum
Gasoline
Diesel #2
1987
70.2
79.5
61.8
55.5
58.8
55.4
1988
66.7
77.4
59.8
46.2
57.3
49.7
1989
72.9
82.0
65.7
56.3
65.1
58.9
1990
82.3
80.4
75.0
71.0
78.7
74.1
1991
81.2
79.1
78.1
61.9
69.9
65.6
1992
80.4
80.6
77.8
58.0
68.1
61.9
1993
80.0
84.7
78.0
51.4
63.9
60.5
1994
77.8
78.8
77.0
47.1
61.7
56.0
1995
78.0
66.6
78.1
51.1
63.7
57.0
1996
85.8
91.2
83.2
62.6
72.8
70.0
1997
86.1
101.7
83.4
57.5
71.9
64.5
1998
75.3
83.9
75.1
35.7
53.4
47.4
1999
80.5
91.2
78.8
50.3
64.7
57.3
2000
103.5
155.5
94.1
85.2
94.6
93.3
2001
105.3
171.8
96.7
69.2
90.5
83.4
2002
93.2
122.5
88.8
67.9
83.3
77.9
2003
112.9
214.5
102.0
83.0
102.7
100.5
2004
126.9
245.9
113.0
108.2
128.1
128.2
2005
156.4
335.4
132.6
150.1
168.6
189.1
2006
166.7
280.3
145.9
176.0
197.2
216.9
2007
177.7
274.7
156.4
192.3
222.1
235.5
60
Avg. Annual Growth Rate
19872007
4.75%
6.40%
4.75%
6.41%
6.87%
7.50%
19972007
7.51%
10.45%
6.49%
12.83%
11.94%
13.83%
19871997
2.06%
2.49%
3.04%
0.35%
2.03%
1.53%
61
The cost of fuel to meet the forecasted supply requirements for GRU is shown in the following table.
Estimating forecasted fuel prices is difficult for a variety of reasons. Among those reasons are: the
political volatility in many of the oil-supplying areas; questions on the technical ability to meet future
demands (the “peak oil” question); potential legislative/regulatory processes within the U.S., and as-yet
undefined technical/engineering breakthroughs in energy resource options (cheap photovoltaic, battery
technology for transportation, etc.) The interplay of price and demand is poorly defined because of these
issues, among others, so future natural gas and coal prices may vary widely even within perfect
forecasts. But the crystal ball on this issue is very cloudy besides. Nevertheless, the impact of fuel prices
must be considered, so forecasts from a variety of sources have been reviewed. The safest natural gas
price forecast, even if not the most enlightened, is the forecast provided by the U.S. Energy Information
Agency (EIA). This forecast is given in 2006 dollar costs. Escalation of four percent per year (4%/year) is
then applied to arrive at the annual cost in the year of expenditure. Coal and nuclear fuel prices have
been taken from the GRU 2006 10-year Site Plan, Table 3.3. These prices are given for the year of
consumption/expenditure.
Natural Gas Price Estimates
(2006$/Million BTU)
62
Fuel Type
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
Natural Gas
8.67
7.07
7.09
7.45
7.61
7.16
6.84
6.67
6.42
6.23
6.10
Fuel Price Estimates
(Expenditure Year $/Million BTU)
Fuel Type
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
Natural Gas
8.34
7.07
7.37
8.06
8.56
8.38
8.32
8.44
8.69
8.77
8.93
Coal
-
2.37
2.36
2.39
2.42
2.45
2.52
2.62
2.73
2.82
2.85
Nuclear
0.41
0.45
0.42
0.42
0.44
0.43
0.50
0.49
0.49
0.48
0.50
With this information, then, the following table provides the estimated cost of fuel for GRU by type and
year.
GRU Fuel Cost Estimates
(Expenditure Year - Million$)
Fuel Type
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
Natural Gas
-
-
-
50.3
62.7
63.8
62.8
61.7
65.0
69.9
75.5
Coal
-
-
-
47.8
39.7
40.5
42.8
45.9
47.8
48.5
48.1
Nuclear
-
-
-
0.4
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.5
0.4
0.5
0.5
63
Land Fill Gas
-
-
-
-
Total
-
-
-
98.5
-
102.7
-
104.7
-
106.1
-
108.1
-
113.2
-
118.9
-
124.1
The fuel cost information for GRU can be used to extrapolate fuel costs estimates for electricity supply
within Alachua County. The extrapolation is based on the ratio of the peak demand estimate, and
assumes that the generation mix and associated fuel cpsts for the County in total will be approximately
the same as that for GRU. With these assumptions the estimated cost of fuel for electricity supply in
Alachua County is follows.
Alachua County Electricity Supply Fuel Cost Estimates
(Expenditure Year - Million$)
2005
Alachua County -
64
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
-
-
139.9
150.1
153.2 155.3
158.8
167.0
176.0
184.6