Showing posts with label power. Show all posts
Showing posts with label power. Show all posts

Monday, June 04, 2012

Climate Change Threatens Power Output, Study Says


By MATTHEW L. WALD
New York Times
June 4, 2012

As the climate gets warmer, so do the rivers and lakes that power plants draw their cooling water from. And that is going to make it harder to generate electricity in decades to come, researchers report.
In an article in the journal Nature Climate Change, scientists measured temperatures now and projected what they would be at midcentury. The temperatures vary according to the time of year, and, even if the extremes remain similar, they will be more frequent — meaning that the water will be too warm to allow full power production, they predict.
All power plants that burn coal or split uranium, and most of the plants that burn natural gas, turn the resulting heat into steam, which spins a turbine that turns a generator to make power. Then the steam has to be converted back to water before being reheated. If the river or lake water used to condense the steam is getting warmer, the amount it can condense is reduced, leading to a decline in power output.
Using computer projections of climate change possible outcomes, the researchers wrote that generating capacity in the United States could fall 4.4 to 16 percent on hot days from 2031 to 2060. And the number of days when river water is at a temperature that is now considered extremely high will be triple the number today, on average, they said.

The idea of varying availability of cooling water is not new; many American steam-electric plants already have a summer power rating and a winter power rating.
Extremely hot weather is not the norm today. Still, power plants have experienced the headache of cooling water shortages in the past. Some power plants in the United States shut down during a drought in 1988 because the level of water in the Mississippi fell below the opening of their intake pipes.
The Electric Power Research Institute, a nonprofit utility consortium, produced a lengthy study in 1995 on the threat posed by climate change. It discussed the possibility of federal limits on carbon dioxide emissions (which 17 years later, may now be approaching) and the problem of hot cooling water.
It found that in addition to making electricity harder to generate, warm weather would make peaks in electricity demand even higher. That would raise costs, it said, because utilities might need more generating stations that would run for only a few hours a year, during the peak summer demand periods.
It also pointed out that if rainfall patterns changed, hydroelectric dams would be less productive.
The solutions to this problem are not obvious. Wind generation might not help much, because the wind usually does not blow much in hot weather. Solar photovoltaic cells could help, but they do not generate much in the last hour before sunset, and not at all after that. That is the period in which many utilities experience peak demand, as people return home from work and turn on air-conditioners, television sets and ovens.
Some generating stations have air-cooled condensers that use electrically driven fans instead of water. But that means less output of electricity – and more carbon dioxide emissions per kilowatt-hour.
The researchers who wrote the article for Nature Climate Change — from Austria, the Netherlands, Germany and Washington State — pointed out that plants running on natural gas at a higher efficiency – that is, putting more of the heat into making power and less into waste that must be absorbed by water — could be helpful. Because generating plants usually last for many decades, ”adaptation options should be included in today’s planning,’’ they wrote.


Monday, August 09, 2010


City of Dallas considers starting own power company

12:00 AM CDT on Saturday, August 7, 2010
By ELIZABETH SOUDER / The Dallas Morning News
esouder@dallasnews.com
Dallas could become an electricity provider.
The city is considering creating its own retail electric provider to procure power for city-owned facilities. That could lop $4 million off the city's annual budget but would require expertise to operate.
A city-owned power company could eventually serve customers outside of city government, but that's not the initial goal.
"The primary purpose is to serve their own facilities, to control their own destiny in terms of what they pay for electricity," said John Bick, managing principal for Priority Power Management, which is advising the city on creating an electric company.
Organizing the company will take a couple of years.
So the city signed a three-year contract with TXU Energy to buy electricity for "much" less than 9 cents per kilowatt-hour, said Bick, who also negotiated the deal for the city.
He declined to give an exact figure, but the deal saves taxpayers as much as $7 million a year. The city uses about 2.2 billion kilowatt-hours a year to juice up more than 800 facilities, traffic lights and water pumps.
Dallas will also buy renewable energy credits to cover 40 percent of the power.
Last year, those credits cost the city about $1 million, according to a June slide presentation posted on the city's website. Next year, the cost would be between $500,000 and $1.1 million, according to the presentation.
TXU will also pay for up to $812,000 in energy-efficiency upgrades.
TXU and Priority Power declined to give other terms of the contract. City staff members also didn't provide the information.
Even though the renewable-energy credits cost extra money, council member Ann Margolin said they're worth it.
"I had some doubts about whether it was worth the cost, but I became convinced," she said. Buying renewable-energy credits makes Dallas a more likely candidate for federal grants, she said.
Once the three-year contract ends, the city would be free to create its own electricity provider. Electricity retailers must be licensed by thePublic Utility Commission and must meet certain credit standards to operate.
Dallas, with its sterling municipal credit rating, could meet the credit standards at a lower cost than other major Texas power companies that carry junk ratings.
The city would also have to hire people or find contractors with the expertise to trade wholesale power and hedge against swings in prices. Poor operation could leave the city with losses.
"Basically, it's removing one level of middleman," Margolin said. "Ultimately it would shave about 3 percent off of our total electric bill. And our electric bill being in the 70, 80 million-per-year range, that's a significant amount of money."
Once Dallas establishes the electric company, it could begin to sell power to outside customers.
Bick with Priority Power, which is researching the issue for the city, said Dallas could use the power company to help lure big companies to town. The city could offer a major company cheap electricity for a certain amount of time, he said.
Or, the city could sell power to regular customers. Residential operations could create a revenue stream for the city.
"If they have already invested in infrastructure and technology to send bills out for water bills, then maybe it's just a natural extension to do the other," Bick said. But he emphasized selling power beyond city facilities is just an idea at this point.

Thursday, September 10, 2009

chicagotribune.com

eptember 01, 2009

Power play: architects help turn old Sears power plant in Chicago into new charter school

Tate_modern_0805Architects pull different power plays than politicians.

In London nine years ago, Swiss architects Herzog & de Meuron took a mighty, decommissioned power station on the Thames River and transformed it into Tate Modern (left), an acclaimed showcase for the Tate Gallery's collection of modern art.

Now in Chicago, a team of architects, foundation leaders and consultants has turned a handsome but derelict old power plant that once served Sears, Roebuck & Co.'s massive West Side headquarters into an inspired (and likely, inspiring) public charter high school.

Named the Charles H. Shaw Technology and Learning Center, in memory of the late Chicago developer who had a passion for revitalizing the beleaguered North Lawndale neighborhood, the building houses Power House High (below), which will welcome its first students Tuesday.

PowerhousehighThe $40 million project, aided by $17 million in federal tax credits, has recovered the architectural glory of the old power plant, especially in a soaring turbine room with glistening white brick walls and tall, arched windows.

Throughout are energy-saving features, from retrofitted historic windows to geothermal wells, that are expected to earn the center a Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) gold rating from the U.S. Green Building Council.

Located at 931 S. Homan Ave., just south of the Eisenhower Expressway, the 104-year-old structure is among the remnants of Sears' once-vibrant West Side catalog operation. Chicago architects Nimmons & Fellows melded Chicago School efficiency and classical decoration in the complex, which at its height mailed thousands of orders every day to customers across America.

Sears left in 1973 for the 110-story Sears (now Willis) Tower. More than 30 years later, the power plant appeared to be a white elephant. Its arched windows were either broken or boarded up. Birds flew inside. And oversize rodents lived there.

"We thought they were cats -- they turned out to be rats," said Kristen Dean, president of the Homan Arthington Foundation. The foundation worked with Shaw, who died in 2006, to develop more than 300 homes and a community center in North Lawndale.

KAMIN-POWERHOUSE-2-5C-0830 BDOG AJThe wisdom of the foundation's decision to reuse the power plant is now fully apparent, thanks to Chicago architects Farr Associates, who worked with the Midwest office of MacRostie Historic Advisors.

A palace of steam is now a palace of learning, even if some details, like the steel entrance staircases, are disappointingly mundane. Yet old arched windows (left, at rear of building, with new fire escapes) have been sensitively replaced with double-glazed, energy-efficient glass. And the building's 185-foot-tall, brick chimney has been handsomely restored.

To their credit, the architects didn't strip the building of its grit. On the north facade, for example, smudgy lines formed by old lean-to buildings haven't been erased. Round terra cotta decoration enlivens the brown brick exterior with details like bolts of electricity..

Inside, Farr Associates followed the broad outlines of the Tate Modern, making the three-story turbine room a dramatic great hall and turning the boiler room into smaller but no less compelling spaces -- in this case, classrooms and meeting rooms instead of galleries.

KAMIN-POWERHOUSE-3-5C-0830 BDOG AJThe results are particularly impressive in the turbine room (left), which will be used for school assemblies, a cafeteria, exercise activities and community events. Instead of large sculptural projects, as at the Tate, the room is populated by huge industrial objects, including a big blue chilling machine and a 40-ton gantry crane.

"Every room in this building has a story," said Farr Associates' principal designer on the project, Jonathan Boyer.

The story and spaces are equally good in the building's other half, where giant boilers once turned water into steam. There, the architects supervised the removal of a junglelike thicket of machinery and carefully threaded new floors, walls, corridors and stairwells amid historic features they retained as artifacts.

Windows in some classrooms offer views to the the building's chimney. A coal ash conveyor belt is displayed behind glass.

The school's leaders -- Principal Kothyn Evans-Alexander and executive Chris Reynolds, who works for the school's partner, the Henry Ford Learning Institute of Dearborn, Mich. -- predict that the architecture and artifacts will inspire curiosity and help drive home lessons that books alone would not.

It remains to be seen, though, whether the design will help or hinder teaching. Will boisterous kids turn the hard-surfaced turbine room into an echo chamber?

Even if the Shaw Center lacks the Tate Modern's bracing contrasts of old and new, it is still likely to emerge as a model for recycling historic buildings -- and for harnessing architecture's aesthetic power to a broader social purpose.

POWERHOUSEHIGH

philly.com



N.J. venture uses compressed air to store energy

A central New Jersey company says it believes it has figured out a way in the green economy to make money from air.

Compressed air.

Energy Storage & Power L.L.C., funded by a $20 million investment from utility giant Public Service Enterprise Group Inc., has devised a patented system for storing electricity in compressed air, which is pumped into caverns, abandoned mines, or aboveground canisters and then released when it is needed to generate power.

Such mass-storage systems will be increasingly necessary as more power is derived from intermittent sources such as wind and solar generators. Windmills tend to produce power at night, when customers need it the least.

"As folks have seen renewables come into the market, particularly wind, people have gained a much greater appreciation for the importance of storage," said Stephen C. Byrd, chief executive officer of the company in Bridgewater, N.J., near Edison.

The firm, a joint venture of Public Service Enterprise Group Global L.L.C. and air-storage pioneer Michael Nakhamkin, is in line to get a share of the $50 million to $60 million that the Department of Energy will award this fall to as many as four compressed-air energy-storage projects.

Byrd said the venture's technology was incorporated into several proposed air-storage facilities that were strong candidates for grants, including a 300-megawatt plant being developed by Pacific Gas & Electric Co., of San Francisco.

"I would not be surprised if we had several of those parties win DOE support," he said.

Mass energy-storage systems will become increasingly critical as the nation's energy markets shift to comply with laws favoring renewable power over greenhouse-gas-emitting fossil fuels. Among several alternatives - ice-storage systems, pumped-storage hydroelectric plants, massive battery arrays - the compressed-air systems are considered the most cost-effective.

If renewable power is to constitute 20 percent of the nation's electrical supply - about 9 percent now comes from renewables, mostly hydroelectric - the nation will need 114,000 megawatts of electrical-storage capacity, according to a study published last year by the American Institute of Chemical Engineers.

"That's about a $342 billion market," Byrd said.

Though compressed-air storage sounds exotic, the process employs technology and equipment already extensively used by oil and gas developers to force hydrocarbons to the surface by pumping high-pressure gas and liquids underground.

And Byrd said storing compressed air in depleted salt mines or gas fields was no different than the technique utilities use to store high-pressure natural gas underground ahead of the heating season.

"We're just storing air. We're not storing hydrocarbons," he said. "So it's much more straightforward."

As the compressed air is released and expands, it becomes very cold and must be mixed with natural gas to drive a conventional turbine generator. The mixture saves about 65 percent of the gas used by a fossil-fuel turbine.

"It does take a little bit of education, but once people understand how it works, it is akin to a regular power plant," Byrd said. "It's just configured in a very different way."

Only one such facility exists in America: a 110-megawatt plant built in 1991 in McIntosh, Ala.

Nakhamkin, the technological muscle behind the Energy Storage & Power joint venture, helped build the Alabama plant. He has developed technology that cuts plant emissions, improves efficiency, and reduces costs by using more standard components.

Byrd said the installed cost had dropped about 30 percent, to $700 to $800 per kilowatt of capacity.

Energy-storage systems make economic sense: Cheap electricity produced during off-peak hours is acquired, stored, then used to generate power during peak hours, when prices are much higher.

The economics have become much more attractive with the push to build more renewables.

Advocates for storage systems say they could be built at the site of renewable-energy production, such as wind farms. But they also might be located closer to markets for the power, even in urban areas, so that they would draw upon long-distance transmission lines during the night and provide some relief during peak hours, when the electrical grid is most stressed.

"If you have storage, you can much more evenly use the transmission system and can substantially decrease the amount of transmission you have to build for renewables," Byrd said. "That's big, and a number of utilities are looking at that."

Some of the systems the company is developing are as small as 16 megawatts and could be built on two acres where the compressed air is stored aboveground in canisters, he said.

Environmental hurdles for a compressed-air plant would be "quite minimal" since regulatory agencies are accustomed to underground gas storage, Byrd said.

"And from an emissions point of view, it's quite benign."

http://www.philly.com/inquirer/breaking/business_breaking/20090909_N_J__venture_uses_compressed_air_to_store_energy.html


Monday, December 01, 2008

www.signonsandiego.com.gif

City wants new energy plant built near airport, but aviation expertsand others say that could have disastrous consequences

UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER

November 23, 2008

The city of Carlsbad's fight to shift a proposed power plant away from the coast, where the owner wants to build it, to eastern Carlsbad faces a serious obstacle: airplanes.


CHARLIE NEUMAN / Union-Tribune
With the Encina Power Station's 400-foot-tall smokestack visible about four miles away, a small private plane came in for a landing at McClellan-Palomar Airport in Carlsbad. Hot exhaust from smokestacks at a power plant proposed for a site near the airport could cause turbulence for planes landing there.
The city's favored site, the Carlsbad Oaks North industrial park in eastern Carlsbad, is within a mile and a half of McClellan-Palomar Airport's runway, posing potential trouble for air navigation. And one of Carlsbad's backup sites, the city's police and fire safety center, is even closer.

Building a power plant near an airport can be dangerous because the stacks would stand 140 feet tall, creating a physical and visual hazard for aircraft. Also, hot exhaust emanating from the stacks could cause turbulence for planes landing at the airport.

“Both of those areas are in the arrival area of light aircraft, where they're descending,” said Ron Cozad, an attorney and regional vice president of the California Pilots Association. “That would be disastrous. It couldn't be done.”

Graphic:

Power plant sites
There have been 10 accidents since 2000 involving aircraft taking off or landing at McClellan-Palomar Airport, according to the Federal Aviation Administration. Five were fatal crashes that killed a total of 13 people, FAA spokesman Ian Gregor said.

The National Transportation Safety Board has determined probable causes in six of the 10 accidents. All were the result of pilot error, and weather was a factor in three, Gregor said.

NRG Energy, which owns and operates the 54-year-old, oceanfront Encina Power Station, has applied to the California Energy Commission to build a 540-megawatt plant on its coastal property west of Interstate 5 on the south shore of Agua Hedionda Lagoon. It hopes to have the plant operating by 2011.

The city wants any power plant moved off the coast to an inland location in Carlsbad.

“It all comes down to we don't think the coastline is an appropriate site,” said Joe Garuba, the city's municipal projects manager. “All we're trying to do is point out there's a whole lot of sites that are better than the coast.”

City officials have said the land, with an unobstructed view of the Pacific Ocean, is prime property for a hotel and other developments that would serve the public.

The California Energy Commission – not the city – has authority over issuing permits for power plants. The city can question NRG's data and comment during the application process.

City officials offered two alternative sites – Carlsbad Oaks North and Maerkle Reservoir in the city's northeast – but have since said the reservoir is off the table because it is too close to the Ocean Hills senior community in Oceanside.

Carlsbad Oaks North is a 400-acre business park north of Faraday Avenue and west of Melrose Avenue that is seeking tenants.  NRG has rejected both sites for various reasons.

Tim Hemig, NRG's project manager for the proposed power plant, says the business park falls within a proposed safety zone for the airport where development is limited. The purpose of the zone is to ensure that structures around an airport don't pose hazards to airplanes and people on the ground.  “There's a black-and-white restriction that says no power plant can be sited in (the safety zone),” Hemig said.

Sandi Sawa, manager of airport planning for the San Diego County Regional Airport Authority, which is establishing safety zones around airports, said McClellan-Palomar's zone has not been adopted, so it is not black and white.  “Under current plans, there's no reason a power plant couldn't be allowed there,” Sawa said.

A power plant would have to be approved by the FAA and the California Department of Transportation's aeronautics division, she said.  Gregor said developers hoping to build near airports must apply to the FAA, which determines whether a structure's height would interfere with air navigation.

The FAA has no authority to block developments, but its recommendation carries weight with other agencies that can, he said.  Caltrans' aeronautics division has such authority.  “We may look at it and suggest against it ... if we think it creates a hazard,” said Phillip Miller of Caltrans' aeronautics division.  Miller said the agency would comment on the proposal to the California Energy Commission.

When Caltrans declared that a 180-foot building under construction in Kearny Mesa endangered airplanes flying into Montgomery Field, San Diego City Attorney Michael Aguirre used that as ammunition to force the developer, Sunroad Enterprises, to shave 20 feet off the building's height last year.

NRG points to the California Energy Commission's recent rejection of a proposed power plant in the San Francisco Bay Area, called Eastshore Energy Center, as an example of why it doesn't want to pursue the Carlsbad Oaks North location.  The commission found that hot exhaust from the proposed plant would have been hazardous to planes landing at nearby Hayward Executive Airport.

Carol Gold, vice president of the California Pilots Association, said that because of the heavy air traffic around Hayward – Oakland International Airport is to the north and San Francisco International to the west – planes have limited airspace. Any attempt to go around the power plant would have forced them into another airport's traffic pattern.  “You can't avoid it by flying above,” Gold said.

Hemig said NRG has determined that a plume from its power plant could go as high as 1,700 feet, and planes fly at a lower altitude near the Carlsbad Oaks North industrial park, creating a hazard.  Garuba said the energy commission's Eastshore Energy Center ruling doesn't apply to Carlsbad.  He said another, larger power plant was approved within a mile of Eastshore and that pilots had to avoid the plant. That left no other space for airplanes to go if Eastshore was built.  “They're boxed in,” which is not the case with McClellan-Palomar Airport, Garuba said.

Peter Drinkwater, director of airports for San Diego County, which owns and operates McClellan-Palomar, said a new power plant near the airport would require close scrutiny.  “One thing for certain is if something gets built and it affects the flight path, then one thing that can mitigate (it) is a change in the flight path or pattern, or the approaches,” Drinkwater said. “But those things obviously cause other problems.”

Some residents who live near the airport complain that planes fly over their homes, and the airport tells pilots to avoid residences to minimize the noise. Many residents say that doesn't take care of the problem.  Garuba said the city contacted the FAA this year about aviation issues regarding a proposed power plant.  “That was one of the first things we did, and ruled out stuff” based on that contact, Garuba said.  He said there is enough space around Carlsbad Oaks North to mitigate the possible impacts.

Cozad, of the pilots association, said he doesn't see how the city's chosen site can get off the ground.  “This is a very scary issue,” he said. “You just don't put a power plant at the arrival end of an airport.”

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/northcounty/20081123-9999-lz1mc23power.html

Sunday, November 30, 2008

chronsundaybanner.gif

S.F. supervisors kill mayor's power plant plan

Wednesday, November 26, 2008

The future of San Francisco's energy production was thrown into doubt Tuesday when the Board of Supervisors adamantly refused to give Mayor Gavin Newsom the authority to negotiate and execute a plan to retrofit a polluting power plant on Potrero Hill.

IMAGES



Newsom hopes to retrofit the 40-year-old Mirant Potrero Power Plant from a diesel-fueled polluter into a cleaner plant powered by natural gas, but several supervisors insist that the plant be closed, torn down and replaced by a new, cleaner, city-owned facility.

On Tuesday, the board made its point clear by bringing back the measure, which it had tabled several weeks ago, to kill it more resolutely. The supervisors could have left it tabled to die.

Now it's not clear where city officials will go from here: The existing plant must remain open until an alternative of some sort is built, because the city is required to be able to produce enough energy to handle emergencies or shutdowns of plants elsewhere.

Meanwhile, neighbors of the plant - owned by Mirant Corp. - have worked for years to shutter the facility, which is blamed for numerous health problems in the area.

Several supervisors argued Tuesday that there was no reason to bring the measure back to the floor, but Supervisor Sophie Maxwell, whose district includes the plant, said she wanted to send a strong statement and preserve the board's role in any future decisions.

"The issue is that this resolution takes away the board's ability to comment any further on the retrofit," she said. "The board's input is extremely important, especially to my constituents - people expect me not to sign that away."

Until recently, the mayor and the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission, which regulates the plant, supported the plan to replace the Mirant plant with a newer facility. But they changed their minds this summer, saying it didn't make sense to build a new fossil-fuel burning facility when renewable energy sources are gaining ground.

Maxwell and other supervisors balked at the change, pointing out that they have been working with city officials and the community for years on a plan to close the plant. They also question whether the retrofit will actually lead to acceptable emission reductions.

Meanwhile, several supervisors who are generally allies of the mayor questioned why the board brought the measure back at all. Supervisors Sean Elsbernd and Michela Alioto-Pier said they would have rather left it tabled. They voted against the resolution, however.

Newsom's office struck a conciliatory tone after the vote Tuesday.

Spokesman Nathan Ballard said the mayor remains opposed to replacing the existing plant with other, polluting plants.

"However, he does want to work closely with Supervisor Sophie Maxwell and the Board of Supervisors to find the best solution to this problem," he said.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/11/26/BAPM14C7CE.DTL

Monday, August 11, 2008


 

Local
City-owned power plant carries polluted price tag
A charged issue: Mirant Corp.’s main power plant is expected to shut down if it is unable to renew its water permit at the end of the year.
(Cindy Chew/The Examiner)
A charged issue: Mirant Corp.’s main power plant is expected to shut down if it is unable to renew its water permit at the end of the year.
SAN FRANCISCO -

New environmental figures could help settle a vexing debate, which has pitted environmentalists, Bayview activists and energy corporations against public power champions and real estate interests, over how best to burn fossil fuels.

Mirant Corp. plan — which would add smokestacks and gas-powered turbines to three non-waterfront backup diesel generators at its Potrero Hill site — would spew more air pollution over San Francisco per operating hour than a proposed city-owned plant, according to a three-page San Francisco Public Utilities Commission analysis.

But the proposed city-owned plant, on the edge of the nearby Bayview neighborhood, would need to run more frequently than Mirant’s three backup generators are currently allowed to run in order to repay construction-related debts.

As a result, the proposed city-owned plant would churn out at least double the soot and airborne nitrogen and sulfur pollution as Mirant’s backup units, unless the company or a new owner changes or violates the permit. San Francisco previously sued Mirant for running its backup units more than it was allowed when power prices spiked.

The San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board has indicated it is reluctant to renew Mirant’s water permit, which is needed to operate its main plant, once it expires at the end of the year because of damage caused to the Bay. The plant currently is propped up with ratepayer subsidies because it is considered critical to protecting San Francisco against blackouts.

Only one of the two proposed power plant projects would qualify for ratepayer subsidies once the main plant shuts, said Sidney Davies, the assistant general counsel for California Independent Systems Operator.

“We need one or the other — not both,” she said.

The Mirant retrofit is proposed on the company’s 27-acre swathe of contaminated land next to the up-and-coming Dogpatch neighborhood and a planned billion-dollar city redevelopment.

The retrofitted units might run for five years before the site is redeveloped, Mirant California President John Chillemi said.

The city-owned plants would need to run for 18 years if millions of dollars in construction-related costs are to be repaid through electricity sales and ratepayer subsidies, according to SFPUC figures.

jupton@sfexaminer.com

Rewiring plan never reached intended desk

A plan to rewire The City to offset the need for new or retrofitted power plants appears to have stalled.

The Board of Supervisors in June voted to present a Pacific Gas & Electric Co. proposal to state regulators that would see hundreds of millions of dollars in ratepayer subsidies spent rewiring The City.

The proposed rewiring plan could power San Francisco using homegrown renewable electricity along with fossil-fuel-generated power imported through cables from facilities outside of The City.

The latest steps toward developing 103 megawatts of solar power and 140 megawatts of wind power, which would be directly piped to consumers in and around The City through PG&E’s transmission lines, were approved by city leaders in 2007.

But the California Independent System Operator, which assigns limited ratepayer subsidies, has not received the proposal from The City, agency spokeswoman Stephanie McCorkle said.

Instead, she said, the agency is negotiating with Mirant, which applied for subsidies to retrofit its backup power generators.

The San Francisco Public Utilities Commission is trying to woo potential customers for the program and then plans to search for power providers, spokeswoman Laura Spanjian said. — John Upton

Examiner
http://www.examiner.com/printa-1530889~City-owned_power_plant_carries_polluted_price_tag.html

Tuesday, August 21, 2007

New York City, State Push Energy Change
BY GARY SHAPIRO - New York Sun
August 15, 2007
URL: http://www.nysun.com/article/60517

Wherever one looks, the Empire State appears to be getting a little greener. Underwater tidal turbines submerged in the East River, geothermal homes in the Hudson Valley, an urban wind farm on a brownfield site south of Buffalo, and a solar building in Battery Park that reuses storm water are among projects changing the way New Yorkers meet their energy needs.

"We will see a greater role for renewable energy in New York overall" in the coming decades, the director of Pace Law School's Energy Project, Fred Zalcman, said. The director of the Urban Energy Project at Columbia University's Center for Energy, Marine Transportation and Public Policy, Stephen Hammer, said the degree of change toward renewable energy in the next decade would ultimately depend on how aggressively the government imposed mandates or established incentives. He said that PlaNYC 2030, Mayor Bloomberg's 127-part proposal to reduce greenhouse emissions, was one of the most comprehensive energy and climate plans ever written for a city. The plan would have "a ripple effect," and other cities would pay attention, he said.

New York State has set 2013 as the date when 25% of all power used in the state should come from renewable sources. The director of the Alliance for Clean Energy New York, Carol Murphy, said that given the state's abundant natural resources of wind, solar, and hydropower, the state could exceed that target. Governor Spitzer has likewise outlined a "15 by 15" plan to reduce New York's energy demand by 15% by 2015. The lieutenant governor, David Paterson, this summer held the first meeting of the Renewable Energy Task Force, which hopes to spur clean energy companies to settle in New York.

Wind: The president of New York State Energy Research and Development Authority, Paul Tonko, said wind energy was the most economical resource compared to conventional sources.
The managing director of Putnam County-based BQ Energy, Paul Curran, said Denmark derives between 20% and 25% of its electricity from wind, but America derives less than 1% from that source. "There's a lot of room to grow," he said.

But wind, like nearly every alternative to oil, has drawbacks or complications. A founder of Riverkeeper, Robert Boyle, opposes certain wind turbines. He wants the state to issue siting guidelines. "They are not an absolutely benign industrial installation," he said, noting that they have killed birds and bats, have destroyed pristine views, and intermittently block the sunlight. He said many of these 40-story "aerial Cuisinarts" envisioned for central New York State would be the largest structures between New York, Montreal, and Buffalo.

Hydro: Underwater turbines generally draw fewer critics aesthetically. Regarding the six that Verdant has submerged in the East River, Mr. Hammer of Columbia University remembers a humorous moment at one presentation with before and after river views showing the same water with no difference. But a lifelong New York resident and fisherman since 1978, Laurie Nolan, said proposals for hydro-energy off Long Island have her concerned. She said a lot of work remained to determine what effects, including noise, there will be to the marine ecosystem. A member of the Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council, Ms. Nolan said the locations where turbines are placed become "closed areas" that are off-limits to commercial and recreational fishing.

Hydropower already accounts for about 17% of New York's electricity needs. A professor at the University at Albany, Pradeep Haldar, said that New York was a leader in generating hydropower. While there are few future large-scale hydro projects left like Niagara Falls, every smaller-scale hydro project helps, he said. Mr. Zalcman said refitting existing hydro facilities with more efficient turbines would likely occur in the ensuing decade or so.

Solar: Mr. Haldar said he is optimistic about solar energy. He said that in the last 20 years, New York has installed 10 to 20 megawatts of solar power, but in the next decade would try to implement about 2,000 megawatts of energy from solar panels. By comparison, Germany last year alone installed 1,000 megawatts of solar, he said.

Nuclear: The director of a New York-based environmental nonprofit, WildMetro, David Burg, said he agreed with the ecological writer Barry Commoner's view that nuclear power was like using a cannon to ring a doorbell. The chairman of the economics department of Brooklyn College, Robert Bell, who is the author of a book on energy, said that there were drawbacks to nuclear energy such as its "just-for-eternity inventory" of nuclear waste.

Nuclear energy is getting a second look from certain environmentalists. A Greenpeace co-founder, Patrick Moore, writing in the Washington Post last year, argued that in 40 years, used nuclear fuel retains only one-thousandth of its radioactivity. Mr. Moore and a former Environmental Protection Agency director, Christine Todd Whitman, co-chair the Clean and Safe Energy Coalition, which points out that nuclear energy produces no harmful greenhouse gasses.

The split among environmentalists comes down to whether one thinks the focus needs to be on carbon reduction by any means or whether the nuclear waste disposal problem and security issues ultimately outweigh other aspects of the issue, said Mr. Hammer of Columbia University.

Biofuels: One who believes in the future of biofuels is the 37-year-old founder of Innovation Fuels, John Fox, whose company was the first entrant in Pace University's business incubator program. Now headquartered in Times Square in the same building as "Good Morning America," his company began five years ago with four employees and has since grown to 20. He says biodiesel offers environmental benefits such as reducing asthma-causing emissions. He said the current American biodiesel consumption is about 225-250 million gallons a year, while the country consumes 44 billion gallons of diesel annually. He thinks that biodiesel usage could grow to between 2% and 5% of that $44 billion market in the next decade. One problem is that there are relatively few places to refuel such vehicles: according to the National Biodiesel board, there are 15 fueling stations in the tristate area. Shell Hydrogen and General Motors may also build a hydrogen filling station in White Plains., N.Y.

A key growth area for New York City, several scholars and environmentalists say, is increasing fuel and energy efficiency of buildings. Mr. Tonko said New York might treat energy efficiency the way Texas does oil — as a valuable resource. The New York State Energy Research and Development Authority has already encouraged New Yorkers to exchange 275,000 inefficient air conditioners.

Building efficiency in New York is key, said the director of planning of New Yorkers for Parks, Micaela Birmingham, who cited a study that of all the carbon dioxide emissions of greenhouse gases in New York City, 79% comes from buildings — far higher than the 32% national average. A professor at NYU, Martin Hoffert, said the dense packing of people in New York makes for great opportunities for energy savings.

Mr. Zalcman said one area for savings was "cogeneration facilities," whereby small-scale generators combine heat and power into a system converting waste heat into usable energy. He said that the best opportunities for this technology were hospitals, nursing homes, and schools. He said New York-Presbyterian/Weill Cornell Medical Center and Montefiore Medical Center have such systems. More city buildings will likely adopt cogeneration in the coming years, he said.

The Future: What other changes may occur in the coming decade or so?

Ms. Birmingham of New Yorkers for Parks said that she would like to see greener parking lots, with permeable surface mosses and grasses between squares. She said that New York is already a pretty green place to start with: "People tend to forget that," she said. Its extensive public transit is more sustainable than most suburbs, she said. Mr. Burg said a New York apartment dweller taking the subway daily would have less adverse impact on the environment than an adventurer in the Canadian wilderness who cuts trees to build a cabin, traps furs, and cooks by fire. Per capita energy use in New York City is lower than most other cities because of its public transportation system and smaller houses, said Mr. Hammer of Columbia University.

Mr. Bell of Brooklyn College believes New York will eventually implement widespread bicycle availability, as have cities such asLyon and Paris. In France, riders swipe their credit cards, select a bicycle from a public rack, and pay nothing if the bicycle is returned within the first half-hour. An outreach volunteer at Time's Up, a volunteer environmental group, Judy Ross, said she, too, foresees an increase in bicycle usage in New York in the next decade or two. She offered the example of the increasing number of city bicycle lanes. Ms. Birmingham said that being green was definitely becoming trendier. As to whether it is a fad or a real commitment, she said time would tell.