DOCSLIB.ORG

Challenges Facing Combined Heat and Power Today: a State-By-State Assessment

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Challenges Facing Combined Heat and Power Today: a State-By-State Assessment Challenges Facing Combined Heat and Power Today: A State-by-State Assessment Anna Chittum and Nate Kaufman September 2011 Report Number IE111 © American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy 529 14th Street, N.W., Suite 600, Washington, D.C. 20045 (202) 507-4000 phone, (202) 429-2248 fax, www.aceee.org Challenges Facing Combined Heat and Power Today, © ACEEE CONTENTS Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................................... iii Acknowledgments ......................................................................................................................................... v Glossary ........................................................................................................................................................ vi Introduction.................................................................................................................................................... 1 Combined Heat and Power Today ........................................................................................................... 1 Methodology ............................................................................................................................................. 5 Part I: General Findings ................................................................................................................................ 6 Economics ................................................................................................................................................ 6 Financing ................................................................................................................................................ 10 Regional and Sectoral Differences ......................................................................................................... 11 Incentives ................................................................................................................................................ 13 Other Barriers ......................................................................................................................................... 17 General Findings, Thoughts and Conclusions ........................................................................................ 22 Part II: State Profiles ................................................................................................................................... 23 An Explanatory Note about Terms Used in this Section ........................................................................ 23 Alabama ...................................................................................................................................................... 25 Alaska ........................................................................................................................................................ 26 Arizona ........................................................................................................................................................ 27 Arkansas ..................................................................................................................................................... 28 California ..................................................................................................................................................... 29 Connecticut ................................................................................................................................................. 31 Delaware ..................................................................................................................................................... 32 District of Columbia ..................................................................................................................................... 33 Florida ........................................................................................................................................................ 34 Georgia ........................................................................................................................................................ 35 Hawaii ........................................................................................................................................................ 36 Idaho ........................................................................................................................................................ 37 Illinois ........................................................................................................................................................ 38 Indiana ........................................................................................................................................................ 39 Iowa ........................................................................................................................................................ 40 Kansas ........................................................................................................................................................ 41 Kentucky...................................................................................................................................................... 42 Louisiana ..................................................................................................................................................... 43 Maine ........................................................................................................................................................ 44 Maryland...................................................................................................................................................... 45 Massachusetts ............................................................................................................................................ 46 Michigan ...................................................................................................................................................... 47 Minnesota .................................................................................................................................................... 48 Mississippi ................................................................................................................................................... 49 Missouri ....................................................................................................................................................... 50 Montana ...................................................................................................................................................... 51 Nebraska ..................................................................................................................................................... 52 Nevada ........................................................................................................................................................ 53 New Hampshire ........................................................................................................................................... 54 New Jersey.................................................................................................................................................. 55 New Mexico ................................................................................................................................................. 56 New York ..................................................................................................................................................... 57 North Carolina ............................................................................................................................................. 58 North Dakota ............................................................................................................................................... 59 Ohio ........................................................................................................................................................ 60 Oklahoma .................................................................................................................................................... 61 Oregon ........................................................................................................................................................ 62 i Challenges Facing Combined Heat and Power Today, © ACEEE Pennsylvania ............................................................................................................................................... 63 Rhode Island ............................................................................................................................................... 64 South Carolina ............................................................................................................................................ 65 South Dakota .............................................................................................................................................. 66 Tennessee................................................................................................................................................... 67 Texas .......................................................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Trends in Electricity Prices During the Transition Away from Coal by William B
    May 2021 | Vol. 10 / No. 10 PRICES AND SPENDING Trends in electricity prices during the transition away from coal By William B. McClain The electric power sector of the United States has undergone several major shifts since the deregulation of wholesale electricity markets began in the 1990s. One interesting shift is the transition away from coal-powered plants toward a greater mix of natural gas and renewable sources. This transition has been spurred by three major factors: rising costs of prepared coal for use in power generation, a significant expansion of economical domestic natural gas production coupled with a corresponding decline in prices, and rapid advances in technology for renewable power generation.1 The transition from coal, which included the early retirement of coal plants, has affected major price-determining factors within the electric power sector such as operation and maintenance costs, 1 U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS capital investment, and fuel costs. Through these effects, the decline of coal as the primary fuel source in American electricity production has affected both wholesale and retail electricity prices. Identifying specific price effects from the transition away from coal is challenging; however the producer price indexes (PPIs) for electric power can be used to compare general trends in price development across generator types and regions, and can be used to learn valuable insights into the early effects of fuel switching in the electric power sector from coal to natural gas and renewable sources. The PPI program measures the average change in prices for industries based on the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS).
    [Show full text]
  • Best Electricity Market Design Practices
    In My View Best Electricity Market Design Practices William W. Hogan (forthcoming in IEEE Power & Energy) Organized wholesale electricity markets in the United States follow the principles of bid-based, security-constrained, economic dispatch with locational marginal prices. The basic elements build on analyses done when large thermal generators dominated the structure of the electricity market in most countries. Notable exceptions were countries like Brazil that utilized large-scale pondage hydro systems. For such systems, the critical problem centered on managing a multi- year inventory of stored water. But for most developed electricity systems, the dominance of thermal generation implied that the major interactions in unit commitment decisions would be measured in hours to days, and the interactions in operating decisions would occur over minutes to hours. As a result, single period economic dispatch became the dominant model for analyzing the underlying basic principles. The structure of this analysis Figure 1: Spot Market integrated the terminology of economics and engineering. As shown in SHORT-RUN ELECTRICITY MARKET Figure 1: Spot Market, the Energy Price Short-Run (¢/kWh) Marginal increasing short-run Cost Price at marginal cost of generation 7-7:30 p.m. defined the dispatch stack or supply curve. Thermal Demand efficiencies and fuel cost 7-7:30 p.m. Price at were the primary sources 9-9:30 a.m. of short-run generation cost Price at Demand differences. The 2-2:30 a.m. 9-9:30 a.m. introduction of markets Demand 2-2:30 a.m. added the demand Q1 Q2 Qmax perspective, where lower MW prices induced higher loads.
    [Show full text]
  • Commercialization and Deployment at NREL: Advancing Renewable
    Commercialization and Deployment at NREL Advancing Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency at Speed and Scale Prepared for the State Energy Advisory Board NREL is a national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy, operated by the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC. Management Report NREL/MP-6A42-51947 May 2011 Contract No. DE-AC36-08GO28308 NOTICE This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States government. Neither the United States government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States government or any agency thereof. Available electronically at http://www.osti.gov/bridge Available for a processing fee to U.S. Department of Energy and its contractors, in paper, from: U.S. Department of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information P.O. Box 62 Oak Ridge, TN 37831-0062 phone: 865.576.8401 fax: 865.576.5728 email: mailto:[email protected] Available for sale to the public, in paper, from: U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Microgeneration Strategy: Progress Report
    MICROGENERATION STRATEGY Progress Report JUNE 2008 Foreword by Malcolm Wicks It is just over two years since The Microgeneration Strategy was launched. Since then climate change and renewables have jumped to the top of the global and political agendas. Consequently, it is more important than ever that reliable microgeneration offers individual householders the chance to play their part in tackling climate change. In March 2006, there was limited knowledge in the UK about the everyday use of microgeneration technologies, such as solar thermal heating, ground source heat pumps, micro wind or solar photovolatics. Much has changed since then. Thousands of people have considered installing these technologies or have examined grants under the Low Carbon Buildings Programme. Many have installed microgeneration and, in doing so, will have helped to reduce their demand for energy, thereby cutting both their CO2 emissions and their utility bills. The Government’s aim in the Strategy was to identify obstacles to creating a sustainable microgeneration market. I am pleased that the majority of the actions have been completed and this report sets out the excellent progress we have made. As a consequence of our work over the last two years, we have benefited from a deeper understanding of how the microgeneration market works and how it can make an important contribution to a 60% reduction in CO2 emissions by 2050. Building an evidence base, for example, from research into consumer behaviour, from tackling planning restrictions and from tracking capital costs, means that we are now in a better position to take forward work on building a sustainable market for microgeneration in the UK.
    [Show full text]
  • Energy Efficiency Market Transformation Summit Report
    ENERGY EFFICIENCY MARKET TRANSFORMATION SUMMIT REPORT INITIATIVES, DESIGNS, AND KEY THEMES Prepared for ComEd Prepared by Navigant Consulting, Inc. • Beth Davis • Jan Harris • Dan Violette Designed by Kristin Salvador FEBRUARY 2019 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Executive 4. Issue Area 1: How does market 7. Conclusion Summary transformation work in today’s energy page 46 page 5 efficiency portfolio? Page 17 8. Supporting 2. Introduction Portfolio Theme 1: Synergies exist between resource Material page 12 acquisition and market transformation programs page 49 Portfolio Theme 2: A holistic view of energy efficiency • Regulatory activities across resource acquisition and market 3. Summary Spotlight: transformation programs is important of Summit Estimating Portfolio Theme 3: Regulatory treatment of market energy savings Activities transformation programs will need to differ from resource from resource page 15 acquisition programs acquisition and market 5. Issue Area 2: What are the must-have transformation components of a market transformation programs initiative? • Expert Page 24 Summaries Portfolio Theme 1: In-depth knowledge of targeted • Presentations energy efficiency markets is critical from the Portfolio Theme 2: The intervention strategy, including Summit leverage points, must be clearly defined • Output from Portfolio Theme 3: A regulatory framework supporting the Summit the intervention strategy is needed Sessions • Market 6. Issue Area 3: What market transformation Transformation initiatives could be pursued in the Resource List Midwest
    [Show full text]
  • U.S. Power Sector Outlook 2021 Rapid Transition Continues to Reshape Country’S Electricity Generation
    Dennis Wamsted, IEEFA Energy Analyst 1 Seth Feaster, IEEFA Data Analyst David Schlissel, IEEFA Director of Resource Planning Analysis March 2021 U.S. Power Sector Outlook 2021 Rapid Transition Continues To Reshape Country’s Electricity Generation Executive Summary The scope and speed of the transition away from fossil fuels, particularly coal, has been building for the past decade. That transition, driven by the increasing adoption of renewable energy and battery storage, is now nearing exponential growth, particularly for solar. The impact in the next two to three years is going to be transformative. In recognition of this growth, IEEFA’s 2021 outlook has been expanded to include separate sections covering wind and solar, battery storage, coal, and gas— interrelated segments of the power generation sector that are marked by vastly different trajectories: • Wind and solar technology improvements and the resulting price declines have made these two generation resources the least-cost option across much of the U.S. IEEFA expects wind and solar capacity installations to continue their rapid rise for the foreseeable future, driven not only by their cost advantage but also by their superior environmental characteristics. • Coal generation capacity has fallen 32% from its peak 10 years ago—and its share of the U.S. electricity market has fallen even faster, to less than 20% in 2020. IEEFA expects the coal industry’s decline to accelerate as the economic competition from renewables and storage intensifies; operational experience with higher levels of wind and solar grows; and public concern about climate change rises. • Gas benefitted in the 2010s from the fracking revolution and the assumption that it offered a bridge to cleaner generation.
    [Show full text]
  • Benefits of Demand Response in Electricity Markets and Recommendations for Achieving Them
    BENEFITS OF DEMAND RESPONSE IN ELECTRICITY MARKETS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ACHIEVING THEM A REPORT TO THE UNITED STATES CONGRESS PURSUANT TO SECTION 1252 OF THE ENERGY POLICY ACT OF 2005 Price of Demand Electricity Supply Supply DemandDR P PDR QDR Q Quantity of Electricity February 2006 . U.S. Department of Energy ii U.S. Department of Energy Benefits of Demand Response and Recommendations The Secretary [of Energy] shall be responsible for… not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of the Energy Policy Act of 2005, providing Congress with a report that identifies and quantifies the national benefits of demand response and makes a recommendation on achieving specific levels of such benefits by January 1, 2007. --Sec. 1252(d), the Energy Policy Act of 2005, August 8, 2005 U.S. Department of Energy Benefits of Demand Response and Recommendations iii iv U.S. Department of Energy Benefits of Demand Response and Recommendations EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Sections 1252(e) and (f) of the U.S. Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPACT)1 state that it is the policy of the United States to encourage “time-based pricing and other forms of demand response” and encourage States to coordinate, on a regional basis, State energy policies to provide reliable and affordable demand response services to the public. The law also requires the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) to provide a report to Congress, not later than 180 days after its enactment, which “identifies and quantifies the national benefits of demand response and makes a recommendation on achieving specific levels of such benefits by January 1, 2007” (EPACT, Sec.
    [Show full text]
  • Modernizing the U.S. Electrical Grid
    Transmission Innovation Symposium Modernizing the U.S. Electrical Grid Chen-Ching Liu Electricity Transmission Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State System Research University and Development: Emma M. Stewart Distribution Integrated Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory with Transmission Operations Prepared for the Transmission Reliability and Renewable Integration Program Advanced Grid R&D, Office of Electricity US Department of Energy April 2021 Electricity Transmission System Research and Development: Distribution Integrated with Transmission Operations Transmission Innovation Symposium: Modernizing the U.S. Electric Grid 2021 White Papers Prepared for the Office of Electricity U.S. Department of Energy Principal Authors Chen-Ching Liu Power and Energy Center Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University Emma M. Stewart Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory April 2021 The work described in this study has been authored by authors at Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, under a subcontract from Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231, and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory under Contract No. DE-AC52-07NA27344 with the U.S. Department of Energy. Disclaimer This work was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, nor any of their contractors, subcontractors or their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or any third party’s use or the results of such use of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof or its contractors or subcontractors.
    [Show full text]
  • International Experience with The
    International Experience with Public Benefits Funds: A Focus on Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency FINAL REPORT Prepared by: Ryan Wiser, consultant to the Center for Resource Solutions Catherine Murray, consultant to the Regulatory Assistance Project Jan Hamrin, Center for Resource Solutions Rick Weston, Regulatory Assistance Project Prepared for: Energy Foundation, China Sustainable Energy Program October 16, 2003 Table of Contents 1. Introduction and Summary ..........................................................................................................4 1.1 Report Purpose and Content .........................................................................................................4 1.2 Report Summary...........................................................................................................................5 2. Overview.......................................................................................................................................10 2.1 What is a PBF? ...........................................................................................................................10 2.2 Where Are PBFs Used?..............................................................................................................10 3. Why Have PBFs Been Established? ...........................................................................................22 3.1 Historical Overview....................................................................................................................22
    [Show full text]
  • DC Power for Improved Data Center Efficiency
    DC Power for Improved Data Center Efficiency March 2008 My Ton Brian Fortenbery Ecos Consulting EPRI William Tschudi Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory DC Power for Data Center Efficiency 1 March, 2008 The work described in this report was performed as part of Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory's (LBNL) "High-Performance High-Tech Buildings" project focused on improving energy efficiency in Laboratory, Cleanroom, and Data Center facilities. This project was sponsored by the California Energy Commission's Public Interest Energy Research (PIER) Industrial program with technical leadership by LBNL. Ecos Consulting and EPRI Solutions performed the research reported herein collaboratively under subcontract to LBNL and with input from industry advisors and manufacturers. Legal Notice This report was prepared as a result of work sponsored by the California Energy Commission (Energy Commission). It does not necessarily represent the views of the Energy Commission, its employees, or the State of California. The Energy Commission, the State of California, its employees, contractors, and subcontractors make no warranty, express or implied, and assume no legal liability for the information in this report; nor does any party represent that the use of this information will not infringe upon privately owned rights. This report has not been approved or disapproved by the Energy Commission, nor has the Energy Commission passed upon the accuracy or adequacy of this information in this report. DC Power for Data Center Efficiency 2 March, 2008 Table
    [Show full text]
  • Dynamics of Energy Systems: Methods of Analysing Technology Change
    Dynamics of Energy Systems Methods of analysing technology change Lena Neij May 1999 Thesis for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Engineering Department Environmental and Energy Systems Studies Lund University © 1999, Lena Neij and the respective publishers Printed at KFS AB, Lund, Sweden ISRN LUTFD2/TFEM—99/1019—SE + (1-136) ISBN 91-88360-42-3 LenaNeij Department of Environmental and Energy Systems Studies Lund Institute of Technology Lund University P.O. Box 118 SE-221 00 Lund, Sweden DISCLAIMER Portions of this document may be illegible in electronic image products. Images are produced from the best available original document. Organization Document name LUND UNIVERSITY DOCTORAL DISSERTATION Department of Environmental and Date of issue Energy Systems Studies May 21,19 99 Gerdagatan 13, SE-223 62 LUND, SWEDEN CODEN. LUTFD2/TFEM - - 99/1019 - - SE + (1-136) Author(s) Sponsoring Organization Lena Neij Title and subtitle Dynamics of Energy Systems: Methods of analysing technology change Abstract Technology change will have a central role in achievinga sustainable energy system. This calls for methods of analysing the dynamics of energy systems in view of technology change and policy instruments for effecting and accelerating technology change. In this thesis, such methods have been developed, applied, and assessed. Two types of methods have been considered, methods of analysing and projecting the dynamics of future technology change and methods of evaluating policy instruments effecting technology change, i.e. market transformation programmes. Two methods are focused on analysing the dynamics of future technology change; vintage models and experience curves. Vintage models, which allow for complex analysis of annual streams of energy and technological investments, are applied to the analysis of the time dynamics of electricity demand for lighting and air-distribution in Sweden.
    [Show full text]
  • EESI Briefing
    Hydropower – A New Look at Opportunities for America’s First Renewable Energy Resource April 24, 2019 Materials will be available at: www.eesi.org/042419hydropower Tweet about the briefing: #eesitalk @eesionline @NatlHydroAssoc • Founded in 1984 by a bipartisan Visit www.eesi.org to: Congressional caucus. • Subscribe to our weekly newsletters, Climate • Now an independent, bipartisan Change News and nonprofit with no Congressional funding. Sustainable Bioenergy, Farms, and Forests. • We provide fact-based information on • View videos of our energy and environmental policy for Congressional briefings. Congress and other policymakers. • Sign up to receive our • We focus on win-win solutions to make briefing notices and our energy, buildings, and transportation fact sheets. sectors sustainable and resilient. Available. Reliable. Affordable. Sustainable. National Hydropower Association Hydropower –A New Look at Opportunities for America’s First Renewable Energy Resource Environmental and Energy Study Institute Briefing April 24, 2019 3 Available. Reliable. Affordable. Sustainable. Presentation Overview • About NHA • Current state of hydropower • Growth potential • Benefits – climate, environmental, grid reliability • Federal and state policy, market and valuation challenges • Q&A 4 Available. Reliable. Affordable. Sustainable. 5 Available. Reliable. Affordable. Sustainable. Current state of hydropower 6 Available. Reliable. Affordable. Sustainable. 7 Available. Reliable. Affordable. Sustainable. LatePostTheWWIIHydropowerEarly 1920Depressionthth- WarCentury U.Century Hydropower20th S. Hydropower CenturyHydropower Development EraHydropowerHydropower Hydropower Construction Hydropower Development Developmentsince Fleet 1990 Build Time pre 1900 1900 - 1929 1930 - 1939 1940 - 1949 1950 - 1969 1970 - 1989 1990 - 2008 8 Sources: ORNL, NID Available. Reliable. Affordable. Sustainable. Wind surpassed hydro in capacity in 2016. 2019 Sustainable Energy Factbook. Bloomberg Finance LP 2018. Developed in partnership with 9 The Business Council for Sustainable Energy.
    [Show full text]