track 13, session 1 renewable energy feasibility and tools ... · pdf filerhode island...

Rhode Island Convention Center • Providence, Rhode Island

Track 13, Session 1 Renewable Energy Feasibility and Tools to Identify

Cost-Effective Projects

Energy Exchange: Federal Sustainability for the Next Decade 2

Session Panelists

Rachel Shepherd FEMP, Renewable Energy Program Manager [email protected] 202-586-9209

Andy Walker NREL, Principal Engineer [email protected] 303-384-7531

Shawn Norton NPS, Branch Chief, Sustainable Operations and Climate Change [email protected] 202-354-1835


Agenda

I. FEMP Renewable Energy Tools and Resources

II. Geospatial Map Screening Tool

III. Financial Scenario Models

IV. National Park Service REopt Screening Process

V. Questions and Answers


Agenda


II. GIS Map Screening Tool





FEMP Assistance

Project and Procurement

Assistance

Guidance and Reporting

Tools and Training


Project Technical Assistance Services

Planning Prescreening

Screening (single-site and multi-site)

Feasibility study

Implementation Distributed generation/grid integration

Request for proposals assistance

Contract assistance

Design assistance

• Project

• Integration in Building construction

Construction assistance

Validation Acceptance testing and commissioning

Performance period (O&M and M&V)

Energy Exchange: Federal Sustainability for the Next Decade

FEMP RE Tools and Resources

– RE Cost and Performance Matrix • http://www.nrel.gov/analysis/tech_cost_dg.html

• Initial Cost, O&M Cost, Useful Life; LCOE Calculator

– GIS Tools and Data • http://maps.nrel.gov/femp

• Resources, Topography, Environmental Concerns, boundaries

• LCC Analysis for PV, Wind, Solar Water Heating, and Solar Vent Air Preheat

– REopt Development • http://www.nrel.gov/tech_deployment/tools_reopt.html

• Optimizes a portfolio of RE projects based on LCC

– RE Website • http://www.energy.gov/eere/femp/federal-renewable-energy-projects-and-technologies

• Publications, data, technical assistance portal

– RE Training • http://www.energy.gov/eere/femp/federal-energy-management-program-training

• Project Development, Technology, O&M

7

http://www.nrel.gov/analysis/tech_cost_dg.html


http://maps.nrel.gov/femp

http://maps.nrel.gov/femp

http://www.nrel.gov/tech_deployment/tools_reopt.html

http://www.nrel.gov/tech_deployment/tools_reopt.html

http://www.energy.gov/eere/femp/federal-renewable-energy-projects-and-technologies












http://www.energy.gov/eere/femp/federal-energy-management-program-training











Cost and Performance Matrix Initial Cost for Renewable Energy Technologies



http://www.nrel.gov/analysis/tech_cost_om_dg.html

Cost and Performance Matrix Initial Cost for Renewable Energy Technologies


FEMP GIS Tools and Data


REOpt Planning Tool

• Planning tool to evaluate RE, EE, microgrid, and operational energy opportunities

• Recommends a mix of technologies and an operating strategy that meets client goals at minimum lifecycle cost

– Considers interactions between multiple technologies – Estimates costs and energy savings

• Draws on site data, NREL GIS resource data, DSIRE incentive database, and RE technology info • Has been used to assess opportunities at 1000+ sites

• Technologies currently modeled: – PV – Wind – Solar hot water – Solar vent preheat – Biomass – Waste to energy – Landfill gas – Diesel and natural gas generators – Battery storage

• Robust and adaptable to meet client goals


Certified for Continuing Education Credits by:

• Distributed-Scale Renewable Energy Projects: From Planning to Project Closeout • Federal On-Site Renewable Power Purchase Agreements • FEMP Large-Scale Renewable Energy Guide • Introduction to Alternative Financing for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Technologies • O&M Best Practices for Small-Scale PV Systems • Procuring Solar Energy for Federal Facilities: Practical Guidance • Renewable Energy: First Thursday Seminar • Renewable Energy Technology Applications: Biomass Technologies • Renewable Energy Technology Applications: Geothermal Energy Technologies • Renewable Energy Technology Applications: Hydropower and Ocean Energy Technologies • Renewable Energy Technology Applications: Integration of Renewable Energy Systems • Renewable Energy Technology Applications: Photovoltaics and Daylighting Technology • Renewable Energy Technology Applications: Solar Thermal and Concentrating Solar Power

Technology • Renewable Energy Technology Applications: Wind Energy Technology • Renewable Power Purchases and Renewable Energy Certificates • Selecting, Implementing, and Funding Photovoltaic Systems in Federal Facilities • Strategic Planning for Renewable Energy Deployment: REopt

12

FEMP RE Trainings


FEMP RE Website


Agenda







FEMP RE Geospatial Tool


http://maps.nrel.gov/femp • Coverage: Continental United States, Alaska and Hawaii

• High-level annualized economic calculation:

– Economic Results: Savings to Investment Ratio; Payback Period; Levelized Cost of Energy;

– Discount rates and escalation rates compliant with 10CFR436

– with and without potential savings from available renewable energy incentives at the state and federal level.

• Allows users to:

– access the results of energy delivery and life-cycle cost calculations,

– change assumptions to look in more detail at their areas of interest,

– and overlay other layers that may be relevant to planning renewable energy projects, such as

• renewable energy resource data

• Land ownership

• Environmentally Sensitive Areas

• Topographical relief

FEMP RE Geospatial Map Tool


Top down Executive at Headquarters can make a map of the whole US showing locations of potentially cost-effective projects Bottom up Energy Manager at a facility can use “point-location” tool to generate detailed results for a specific site

Allows both top-down and bottom-up analysis


The tool allows custom analysis, and results for multiple technologies to be summarized for quick comparison.

Assumptions and results are summarized in a report that can be saved or printed.

Point location tool


• Photovoltaics

• Wind Energy

• Solar Water Heating

• Solar Ventilation Air Preheating

Economic Analysis for four technologies:


• cinitial= per-unit cost per kW of rated capacity ($/kW)

• Default values from FEMP Cost and Performance Matrix [http://www.nrel.gov/analysis/tech_lcoe_re_cost_est.html] For example, Photovoltaics 1 to 10 MW in size $2,035/kW +/- $694/kWh

• User can modify initial cost to account for any rebates and then by

the Federal tax credit. • Cinitial, modified= (cinitial-cinitial rebate) *(1-ftaxcredit) • Where • Cinitial, modified = initial cost of PV or wind system after rebate and tax

credit • cinitial rebate = unit rebate per kW of rated capacity ($/kW), if any • ftaxcredit = tax credit as fraction of initial cost (30% currently)

Initial Cost


• cOM= per unit annual O&M cost ($/kW/year)

• Default values from FEMP Cost and Performance Matrix [http://www.nrel.gov/analysis/tech_lcoe_re_cost_est.html]

For example, Photovoltaics 1 to 10 MW in size $16/kW/year +/- $9/kWh/year

Operation and Maintenance Cost


• Annual energy delivery of the RE systems is based on the resource information as reported in the “capacity factor,” or “CF”

• CF is like percent of time system delivers its rated capacity

• Annual Energy Delivery (kWh/year) per kW of installed RE = CF*8760 (hrs/year)

• Capacity factor inclusive of balance-of-system losses

(AC capacity factor)

Annual Energy Delivery


• Annual energy cost savings is the reduced expense of purchasing

retail power; • cpower=retail utility rate ($/kWh)

Annual average commercial electricity cost extracted from ABB Energy Velocity Suite and EIA State Electricity data tables for each utility service territory

• User can modify this value to account for revenue from sale of

power at different rate; and to account for production-based incentives

• c= cpower + cincentive

• Where cincentive = production incentive ($/kWh)

Annual Energy Cost Savings


Future costs (O&M) and energy cost savings are “escalated” according to an inflation rate, i, and then “discounted” to their present value Present Worth Factor (PWF) PWF=(1+i)/(d-i)*(1-((1+i)/(1+d))^N) i=inflation rate, currently 0.1%/year d=discount rate , currently 3.0%/year

From Annual Supplement to Handbook 135 Energy Price Indices and Discount Factors for Life Cycle Cost Analysis- UPDATED ANNUALLY [http://energy.gov/eere/femp/building-life-cycle-cost-programs] Complies with 10CFR436 regulation

N=years of analysis period 25 years as per 10CFR436 for electrical/mechanical or for solar 40 years as per EISA. PWF (i=0.1%, d=3%, N=40 years) = 23.5 years in other words, a savings of $1/year for 40 years = $23.5 today

Present Worth Factor


Saving to Investment Ratio (SIR); Cost Effective if SIR>1

𝑺𝑰𝑹 =CF∗8760 hours/year∗cpower

∗PWF

( Cinitial+ COM∗PWF)

Simple Payback Period

𝑺𝑷𝑩 = Cinitial

(CF∗8760 hours/year)∗cpower ∗

PWF− COM∗PWF

Electricity Rate for SIR=1 (levelized cost of energy)

𝐜𝐩𝐨𝐰𝐞𝐫 = ( Cinitial + COM∗PWF)

CF∗(8760 hours/year)∗PWF

Economic Results


Map Algebra Example

PV SIR for 1 MW system =

X

2025 $/kW + (16 $/kW-yr * 23.504 yrs)

X 23.504 yrs

=

kWh $/kWh

SIR


System Cost= 2025 $/kW; O&M= 16 $/kW-yr; Present Worth Factor = 23.5

PV 1 MW System: Electricity Rate for SIR=1


Energy Production - PV: 10-km resolution for 49 states, satellite data from 1998 – 2009, produced by

Clean Power Resources; 40-km for Alaska, 7-yr period, based on satellite and ground data sources, produced by the Climatological Solar Radiation model; 86% de-rate factor

- SHW: Annual average 10km resolution solar resource data for a fixed flat plate system with tilt = latitude; 40% system efficiency

- SVP: Map of energy delivery by NREL including solar and heating requirements (heating degree days); 50 km grid

- Wind: 200m resolution gross capacity factor; 80 m hub height computed for 2015 Wind Vision update utilizing specific wind climate turbine power curves based on annual average wind speed and assuming 15% losses source data licensed from AWS Truepower

- (http://www.energy.gov/eere/wind/maps/wind-vision)

Annual average commercial electricity cost extracted from ABB Energy Velocity Suite and EIA State Electricity data tables Other variables have static values, independent of location.

Sources of Data

http://www.energy.gov/eere/wind/maps/wind-vision




Other Renewable Energy Resources

29

Other Planning Data in the FEMP GIS Tool


Land Cover and Land Use Types

30



Areas involving Environmental Concerns

31



Land Ownership

32



Political and Administrative Boundaries

33



Selection of Base Map to display under the data

34



Agenda







• I’m not a lawyer and can’t offer legal advice.

• The economic parameters and financial structure presented here are illustrative examples and not meant to represent your situation or authorities available to your agency.

• Consult agency guidance and legal counsel for your specific situation.

36

Big Huge Disclaimer


FEMP/NIST Life Cycle Cost

• Standard Life Cycle Cost (LCC) methods and assumptions required by 10 CFR 436

• Available Downloads at http://energy.gov/eere/femp/building-life-cycle-cost-programs

• BLCC5 Program (BLCC 5.3-15 for Windows or Mac OS X).

– economic analyses by evaluating the relative cost effectiveness of alternatives; calculates comparative economic measures for alternative designs, including net savings, savings-to-investment ratio, adjusted internal rate of return, and years to payback.

– Escalates costs and Discounts costs to net present value based on current rates.

• Energy Escalation Rate Calculator (EERC 2.0-15 for Windows, Mac OS X, or Linux)

– computes an average annual escalation rate for a specified time period, based on the Energy Information Administration (EIA) energy price projections

• Handbook 135, Life Cycle Costing Manual for FEMP

– explains in detail the principles of life cycle cost analysis and integrates them with FEMP criteria.

• Annual Supplement to Handbook 135

– Energy Price Indices and Discount Factors for Life Cycle Cost Analysis- UPDATED ANNUALLY


A difference of perspective: Authorities

“We can do

anything that is not prohibited

by law.”

“Actually, being a government of

prescribed powers, we can only do that which is specifically authorized by law.”

Government Lawyer Private-sector

Lawyer


Authorities for On-Site Renewable Energy Procurement

Project Ownership Financing Method Authority or Pathway

Government Owned

Appropriations

ESPC 42 U.S.C. 8287

ESPC ENABLE (PV) 42 U.SC. 8287

UESC 42 U.S.C. 8256

Privately Owned

PPA

FAR Part 41/40 U.S.C. §501 FAR Part 12 10 U.S.C. 2922a (DOD Only) WAPA

ESPC (Title must transfer to Gov’t by end of contract)

ESPC ESA ESPC ENABLE

Utility Contract FAR Part 41/40 U.S.C. §501 EUL or other

Real Property Arrangement EUL or other


The financial scenarios considered here include:

• Business as usual: the scenario of not doing a renewable energy project and rather continuing to purchase electricity or fuels from the utility.

• Appropriations asset purchase: using an agency’s own funding, capital appropriations and/or operations budgets, to pay for a renewable energy project installation and operation.

• 10 year Power Purchase Agreement (PPA): An agency pays for delivered energy from a renewable energy system, often on a fixed or escalating $/kWh rate. The 10 year term is determined by the maximum contract term set by 40 USC §501 and regulated under Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR) Part 41.

• “10 Plus 10” year Power Purchase Agreement: Same as above but a 20-year term is assumed based on a projected pair of back-to-back maximum contract terms set by 40 USC §501 and regulated under FAR Part 41.

• DoD 2922a Power Purchase Agreement: An agency pays for delivered energy from a renewable energy system, often on a fixed or escalating $/kWh rate. A 27-year term is assumed based on the lesser of 1) the 30-year maximum contract term set by 10 USC §2922a for DoD to contract for energy purchases and, 2) investment tax credit (ITC) and accelerated depreciation (MACRS) test for “service contract term as percent of asset life” factor that puts a limit at 27 years of the assumed 35 year asset life of the PV system.

• Utility Energy Service Contract (UESC): An agency enters into a limited-source contract with its serving utility for energy- and water-efficiency improvements and demand-reduction services, including renewables. FAR Part 41. 10 year term. Tax credits “normalized” over contract period.

• Energy Savings Performance Contract (ESPC): An agency pays an energy services company, usually monthly, for specified performance outcomes as verified by an annual audit (measurement and verification of savings). The payments are less than savings over a term of up to 25 years. Government takes title to equipment. Non-recourse financing.

• Energy Service Agreement in Energy Savings Performance Contract (ESPC);Same as ESPC but energy services only and title to the equipment resides with contractor so they can take ITC and MACRS.


For each financial scenario:

• Description

• Authority

– Statutes

– Federal Acquisition Regulations

– Dictates ownership structure, term (years), etc.

• Cash Flow Diagram

• Life Cycle Cost Spreadsheet Analysis


Spreadsheet Analysis: Inputs RE System Capacity (kW) 2500

Annual energy delivery (kWh/year) 3,500,000

Initial Cost of System $7,500,000

Loan Amount ($) $1,875,000

Federal Investment Tax Credit $2,250,000

Tax Depreciation Basis ($) $6,375,000

Annual Operation and Maintenance Cost ($/year) $40,000

Annual SREC Revenue ($/year) $525,000

Prevailing Utility Rate ($/kWh) $0.110

Years of Utility Cost Savings (years) 20.00

Federal Discount Rate (%/year) 3.00%

Electric Inflation Rate 0.10%

Equity Fraction 0.75

Equity Rate of Return (minimum) 7.50%

Debt Fraction 0.25

Debt Interest Rate 5.50%

Years of Loan 20.00

Federal Investment Tax Credit 0.30

Developer Income Tax Rate (%) 30.00%

State Sales Tax 5.00%

O&M Labor Inflation Rate 0.10%

Years of O&M Costs (years) 20.00

PV degredation Rate (%/year) 0.40%

SREC Production Incentive ($/kWH) $0.150

Years of SREC Credit 3.0

SREC inflation rate (%/year) 0.00%

PPA inflation rate 1.50%

PPA Term (years) 20

Consider a Federal Building with annual energy use of 5,000,000 kWh/year, that adds an RE system that costs $7,500,000 to install and delivers 3,500,000 kWh/year.


Federal Agency Utility ($) kWh

Cash Flow Diagram: Base Case; Business as Usual


Spreadsheet Analysis: Base Case

Year Utilty Cost ($/year)

0

1 $550,000

2 $550,550

3 $551,101

4 $551,652

5 $552,203

6 $552,756

7 $553,308

8 $553,862

9 $554,415

10 $554,970

11 $555,525

12 $556,080

13 $556,636

14 $557,193

15 $557,750

16 $558,308

17 $558,866

18 $559,425

19 $559,985

20 $560,545

Net Present Value $8,252,748

$0

$100,000

$200,000

$300,000

$400,000

$500,000

$600,000

1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21

An

nu

al C

ash

Flo

w (

$/y

ear

)

Year

Utilty Cost($/year)


REC Sale

Federal Agency

($)

RECs

EPC Contractor Engineering,

Procurement,

Construction

Initial Cost($)

O&M Contractor

O&M Services

($)

Utility ($) kWh

Cash Flow Diagram: Appropriations


Year Capital

REC Production Incentive O&M Cost

Cost of Replacement RECs ($/year)

Utilty Cost ($/year)

0 $7,500,000

1 -$525,000 $40,000 $35,000 $165,000

2 -$525,000 $40,040 $35,000 $165,165

3 -$525,000 $40,080 $35,000 $165,330

4 $0 $40,120 $0 $165,495

5 $0 $40,160 $0 $165,661

6 $0 $40,200 $0 $165,827

7 $0 $40,241 $0 $165,992

8 $0 $40,281 $0 $166,158

9 $0 $40,321 $0 $166,325

10 $0 $40,361 $0 $166,491

11 $0 $40,402 $0 $166,657

12 $0 $40,442 $0 $166,824

13 $0 $40,483 $0 $166,991

14 $0 $40,523 $0 $167,158

15 $0 $40,564 $0 $167,325

16 $0 $40,604 $0 $167,492

17 $0 $40,645 $0 $167,660

18 $0 $40,685 $0 $167,828

19 $0 $40,726 $0 $167,995

20 $0 $40,767 $0 $168,163

46

Spreadsheet Analysis: Appropriations

-$1,000,000

$0

$1,000,000

$2,000,000

$3,000,000

$4,000,000

$5,000,000

$6,000,000

$7,000,000

$8,000,000

1 5 9 13 17 21

An

nu

al C

ash

Flo

w (

$/y

ear

)

Year

Utilty Cost($/year)

Cost ofReplacementRECs ($/year)

O&M Cost

REC ProductionIncentive

Capital



REC Sale

Federal Agency

Project Developer

kWh

Tax-Equity Investor

IRS

Depreciation,

Tax Credits

Income

tax ($)

Land Owner

($)

Easement

($)

RECs

kWh ($)

EPC Contractor Engineering,

Procurement,

Construction

Initial Cost($)

O&M Contractor

O&M Services

($)

Utility ($)

kWh

($) kWh

Cash Flow Diagram: PPA


Spreadsheet Analysis (PPA 10+10)

Year Cumulative Cash Cash Flow Capital

PPA Energy Sale ($/year)

REC Production Incentive Tax Credit MACRS O&M Cost State Tax

Debt Payment

0 -$5,625,000 -$5,625,000 -$5,625,000

1 -$2,428,357 $3,196,643 $248,464 $525,000 $2,250,000 $382,500 -$40,000 -$12,423 -$156,899

2 -$1,249,673 $1,178,685 $251,183 $525,000 $612,000 -$40,040 -$12,559 -$156,899

3 -$313,217 $936,455 $253,931 $525,000 $367,200 -$40,080 -$12,697 -$156,899

4 -$46,043 $267,174 $256,709 $0 $220,320 -$40,120 -$12,835 -$156,899

5 $223,377 $269,420 $259,517 $0 $219,938 -$40,160 -$12,976 -$156,899

6 $385,676 $162,299 $262,356 $0 $110,160 -$40,200 -$13,118 -$156,899

7 $440,501 $54,826 $265,226 $0 -$40,241 -$13,261 -$156,899

8 $498,043 $57,542 $268,128 $0 -$40,281 -$13,406 -$156,899

9 $558,332 $60,288 $271,061 $0 -$40,321 -$13,553 -$156,899

10 $621,397 $63,065 $274,027 $0 -$40,361 -$13,701 -$156,899

11 $687,269 $65,873 $277,024 $0 -$40,402 -$13,851 -$156,899

12 $755,981 $68,711 $280,055 $0 -$40,442 -$14,003 -$156,899

13 $827,562 $71,582 $283,119 $0 -$40,483 -$14,156 -$156,899

14 $902,046 $74,484 $286,216 $0 -$40,523 -$14,311 -$156,899

15 $979,464 $77,418 $289,347 $0 -$40,564 -$14,467 -$156,899

16 $1,059,848 $80,384 $292,513 $0 -$40,604 -$14,626 -$156,899

17 $1,143,232 $83,384 $295,713 $0 -$40,645 -$14,786 -$156,899

18 $1,229,648 $86,416 $298,948 $0 -$40,685 -$14,947 -$156,899

19 $1,319,131 $89,483 $302,219 $0 -$40,726 -$15,111 -$156,899

20 $1,411,714 $92,583 $305,525 $0 -$40,767 -$15,276 -$156,899

Cash Flow from Perspective of Private Party

PPA Price $0.071 (use goal seek function to solve for PPA Price)



Cash Flow from Perspective of Government Agency

Year PPA Energy Purchase ($/year)

Cost of Replacement RECs ($/year) Utilty Cost ($/year)

0 0

1 $248,464 $35,000 $165,000

2 $251,183 $35,000 $165,165

3 $253,931 $35,000 $165,330

4 $256,709 $35,000 $165,495

5 $259,517 $35,000 $165,661

6 $262,356 $35,000 $165,827

7 $265,226 $35,000 $165,992

8 $268,128 $35,000 $166,158

9 $271,061 $35,000 $166,325

10 $274,027 $35,000 $166,491

11 $277,024 $35,000 $166,657

12 $280,055 $35,000 $166,824

13 $283,119 $35,000 $166,991

14 $286,216 $35,000 $167,158

15 $289,347 $35,000 $167,325

16 $292,513 $35,000 $167,492

17 $295,713 $35,000 $167,660

18 $298,948 $35,000 $167,828

19 $302,219 $35,000 $167,995

20 $305,525 $35,000 $168,163



-$7,000,000

-$6,000,000

-$5,000,000

-$4,000,000

-$3,000,000

-$2,000,000

-$1,000,000

$0

$1,000,000

$2,000,000

$3,000,000

$4,000,000

1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21

An

nu

al C

ash

Flo

w (

$/y

ear

)

Year

Debt Payment

State Tax

O&M Cost

MACRS

REC ProductionIncentive

PPA Energy Sale($/year)

Tax Credit

Capital $0

$100,000

$200,000

$300,000

$400,000

$500,000

$600,000

1 6 11 16 21A

nn

ual

Cas

h F

low

($

/ye

ar)

Year

Utilty Cost($/year)

Cost ofReplacementRECs ($/year)

PPA EnergyPurchase($/year)


Private Party (PPA Provider) Private Party (PPA Provider)


Comparison of Financial Scenarios

Net Present Value

Base Case: $8,252,748

Appropriations: $8,922,335

PPA (10+10 years): $7,060,132

51

Spreadsheet Analysis (PPA 10+10 years)


Federal Project Executives

• agencies identify, obtain, and implement alternative financing for renewable energy projects through Federal Project Executives (FPEs). A list of FPEs by geographic area is available on the FEMP Web site at: http://www1.eere.energy.gov/femp/financing/espcs_financingspecialists.html.

http://www1.eere.energy.gov/femp/financing/espcs_financingspecialists.html

http://www1.eere.energy.gov/femp/financing/espcs_financingspecialists.html


Agenda






National Park Service - PFMD

E X P E R I E N C E Y O U R A M E R I C A ™ 54

National Park Service Park Facility Management Division

Renewing Our National Parks

Renewable Energy Project Identification At The National

Park Service

Presented by: Shawn Norton

August 9, 2016



Agenda

• Background

• Phase I

• Phase I Results

• Phase II

• Phase II Current Status and Next Steps



Background

• The NPS’s mission is to preserve unimpaired the natural and cultural resources

and values of the national park system for the enjoyment, education, and

inspiration of this and future generations

• The NPS manages the largest number of constructed assets of any civilian

agency, consisting of over 400 units and over 75,000 assets nationwide and in

U.S. territories, including:

o More than 50 million square feet of constructed space (such as visitor centers and

historic structures);

o More than 4 million acres of maintained landscapes (such as campgrounds and

battlefields);

o More than 17,000 miles of trails; and

o More than 3,000 utility systems

• 2016 marks the centennial anniversary of the NPS. In support of the centennial

celebration, the NPS engaged with DOE’s National Renewable Energy Laboratory

(NREL) to help the NPS identify the most cost-effective way to meet federal and internal

renewable energy (RE) goals and targets

NPS Overview



Background

• The Green Parks Plan was released on Earth Day 2012 and defines our

collective vision and strategic plan for sustainable operations through

pursuit of sustainability goals

o Commits to reducing Servicewide building energy intensity by 35 percent

(measured as BTU used per square foot of building space) by 2016 from the

2003 baseline.

NPS Environmental and Energy Goals

• The NPS strives to be a leader in resource

management, and in many cases sets internal goals

that surpass Federal requirements

• A Call To Action was released in 2011 and outlines

our vision and action items leading up to our 100th

anniversary

o Commits to reducing our greenhouse gas emissions by

20 percent over 2009 levels, including on-site fossil fuel

usage and emissions due to electricity consumption,

and widely showcasing the value of renewable energy

http://www.nps.gov/greenparksplan/downloads/NPS_2012_Green_Parks_Plan.pdf



Background

• In FY15, 7.5% of the NPS’s electricity consumption was renewable electric energy

• EO 13693 requires the following percentage of renewable electric energy:

o 10% in FY 2016 and 2017;

o 15% in FY 2018 and 2019;

o 20% in FY 2020 and 2021;

o 25% in FY 2022 and 2023; and

o 30% by FY 2025 and thereafter

RE

Type

AKR IMR MWR PWR SER NCR NER TOTAL

Hydro-

electric

2 7 3 4 16

PV 10 32 28 158 17 6 9 250

Thermo

-electric

2 2

Wind 1 2 3

TOTAL 15 39 33 162 17 6 9 271

Number of Renewable Energy Systems by Region

Current NPS Renewable Energy Status



Background

• The NPS has successfully met or exceeded the targets set forth by The Energy Policy Act (EPAct) of 2005, but will need to almost triple RE consumption in the next 5 years to meet the 30% renewable electricity consumption by FY 2025 target set forth in EO 13693

EPAct-qualified RE as a percent of total electricity consumption

NPS RE Consumption Trend



Phase I

Activities Performed (2015):

• Screened 320 parks using the Renewable

Energy Optimization (REopt) tool

o The REopt tool integrates and optimizes

multiple technologies to find a mix of

technologies and an operating strategy that

meets NPS goals at minimum lifecycle cost

Technologies evaluated for

this screening: Rooftop Photovoltaics

Small Wind Turbines (<100 kW)

Biomass (thermal only)

Solar Hot Water (SHW)

Solar Vent Preheat (SVP)

Goals:

• Conduct Servicewide screening for renewable energy potential

• Identified locations of technical and cost-effective renewable energy

projects through the preliminary high-level enterprise-wide screening

• Prioritized additional, in-depth analysis of potential renewable energy

projects

• Conducted detailed site-specific feasibility studies at three parks

o Golden Gate National Recreation Area

o San Juan National Historic Site

o Wrangell – St Elias National Park & Preserve

REopt Study Background



Phase I

Government funded

projects that reduce

costs now

Inform 20% RE strategy

and support planning of

government owned projects

3rd Party developer

owned projects that

reduce costs now

Inform 20% RE strategy

and support planning of 3rd

party developer owned

projects

OBJECTIVE

Minimize LCC 20% Net Zero Electric

OW

NE

RS

HIP

D

eve

lop

er

NP

S

• The REopt tool has two different ownership scenarios: o Third-Party Financed

o Government Financed

• …And two different objectives: o Lowest life cycle cost (minLCC)

o 20% Net Zero electric (NZe) energy case

• NPS study focused on developer-owned projects that minimize lifecycle cost

REopt Study Overview



Phase I

Projects Size Cost NPV

PV 161 34,480 kW $40,610,000 $45,455,000

WIND 67 4,873 kW $6,697,000 $19,391,000

SVP 245 244,907 sq. ft. $2,600,000 $8,176,000

SHW 167 45,011 sq. ft. $1,803,000 $3,407,000

Servicewide REopt Results

*Findings are for a third-party financing scenario

Park PV Wind SHW Biomass Total

Golden Gate National

Recreation Area

$68,269 $68,269

San Juan National Historic

Site

$318,287 $376,109 $8,177 $702,573

Wrangell – St Elias National

Park & Preserve

$57,000 $14,600 $71,600

Site Feasibility Study Results

*Dollar amounts are in Net Present Value (NPV) and do not include incentives

REopt Study Results



Phase I

• Onsite RE makes up 3%* of current NPS electricity consumption

• Potential to cost effectively meet an additional 25%* of current electricity consumption

with onsite RE for a total of 28%

Information based on FY 2013 Greenhouse Gas and Sustainability Report

REopt Study Results, con’t

NPS

• Because EPAct awards a double bonus for new onsite RE generation, this would

count as 55% toward the federal goal

* Does not include EPAct bonus



Phase I

• Largest opportunities for new cost-effective RE generation are in the Northeast Region

and Pacific West Region due to higher energy consumption, higher utility energy costs,

and good RE incentives

• PV is the most promising contributor to NPS RE generation

o Compatible with the NPS’s many small distributed loads and low environmental

impact mission

o Simple to install and maintain.

*Information based on FY 2013 Greenhouse Gas and Sustainability Report

REopt Study Results, con’t



Phase II

Phase II Goals:

• Install renewable energy technologies in our National Parks in order to

improve park sustainability performance

• Utilize these projects to demonstrate sustainability efforts during the

Centennial celebration

Phase II Activities:

Based on the results of the NREL REopt study, select the top 25 parks

based on the following attributes:

o High net present value (NPV)

o High visitor traffic

o Diversity in region, location (rural/urban), and project type

o Strong PV potential (e.g., Top 25 potential PV site in Phase I)

Engage with top 25 parks to gauge level of interest for receiving an on-

site feasibility assessment

Perform on-site feasibility assessments and provide report with potential

projects, including financing options and implementation plan

Provide as-needed assistance with project implementation and support

communication and outreach efforts for the 2016 Centennial

REopt Study Implementation



Phase II

• Thirteen sites expressed strong interest in receiving technical support for

RE project installations

o Six sites are in progress

o Seven sites are planned for future support

Park Project

Hawai’i Volcanoes National Park Interconnection agreement support; feasibility study

Virgin Islands National Park RE feasibility study

Yosemite National Park Solar PV project scoping

Joshua Tree National Park RE feasibility study and project scoping

Katmai National Park &

Preserve RE feasibility study and project scoping

Sequoia & Kings Canyon

National Parks RE feasibility study and project scoping

Current Status & Next Steps


Agenda







Questions and Answers

Rachel Shepherd FEMP, Renewable Energy Program Manager [email protected] 202-586-9209

Andy Walker NREL, Principal Engineer [email protected] 303-384-7531

Shawn Norton NPS, Branch Chief, Sustainable Operations and Climate Change [email protected] 202-354-1835

track 13, session 1 renewable energy feasibility and tools ... · pdf filerhode island...

Documents