Analysis of Energy Investments with the Pinoleville-Pomo Nation:

The Native American Energy Plan Analysis (NAEPA) Tool

Tobias C. SchultzRyan L. Shelby

Dr. Alice M. AgoginoASME 2010 4th International

Conference on Energy SustainabilityMay 19, 2010

2

Presentation Outline

1. Introduction2. NAEPA Methodology3. Results4. Discussion5. Conclusions6. Future Research

3

The Pinoleville Pomo Nation (PPN) is a Native American Tribe located in Mendocino County

Introduction

4

Motivation: Concerns of the Pinoleville Pomo Nation

90,000 American Indian families are homeless or under-housed,

18% severely crowded PPN part of these trends

HUD-financed housing provides only basic necessities

Rising heating and cooling costs

No representation of the cultural values

Introduction

5

Introduction

Pinoleville Pomo Nation Objectives1. Financial security, for the Tribe and Tribal citizens. 2. Environmental stewardship and harmony.3. Promotion of health and safety of Tribal citizens. 4. Tribal sovereignty.

Sustainability Strategies1. Retrofits to existing homes and buildings.2. Construction of new homes and buildings.3. Implementation of a renewable energy generation system

on Tribal lands.

Tribal Energy and Land Use Sustainability (TELUS) Plan

6

Introduction

Pinoleville Pomo Nation and UC Berkeley Partnership

E10, Spring 2008 : freshmen engineering design class Taught by Dr. Alice Agogino, GSI Ryan Shelby Project goal: Assess the needs and design sustainable housing

that could be integrated into the tribal community

7

Introduction

Preliminary Roundhouse Design: completed during Spring 2008 semester

Finalized Roundhouse Prototype Design Finalized over Summer 2009; team led by

Tobias Schultz and Yael Perez Construction begins this month

8

Partnership Background

Other Projects Community Plan for Sozonni Property Renewable Energy Generation System Retrofit Recommendations in Lakeport

Wind SolarMicro-hydro

Community Housing Plan

9

NAEPA Methodology

Inputs:1. New Housing Design2. Existing Housing

Retrofits3. Renewable Energy

System Design

Outputs:1. Initial Costs2. Lifetime Energy Costs3. Lifetime CO2 Emissions

Goal: Offer design recommendations consistent with the TELUS strategies and objectives.

Note: No Energy

System in current version

10

NAEPA Methodology

Total Initial Costs, XI

Lifetime Energy Expenditures, XR

Construction New Equipment

Propane Electricity (PG&E)

Federal Sources, Tribal Governments

Tribal Members

11

NAEPA Methodology

Carbon Dioxide EmissionsComponents: Equipment Manufacture: EIO-LCA Electricity : Mix Info & Emissions

Factors from Academic Research Fuel: EIA Emissions Factors & EIO-

LCA

Utility Carbon Emissions

Electric Propane Natural Gas

0.35 0.36 0.26

kg CO2e/ kWh

kg CO2e/ kWh

kg CO2e/ kWh

PG&E Electricity Mix Self Report:

.289 kg CO2e/ kWh

12

Results

Prototype Roundhouse Design Elements

Geothermal Heat Pump

Solar Hot Water

PhotovoltaicPassive Home Design

Straw Bale Insulation

13

Results

Objective XI

(Savings)Annual XR

(Savings)

Lifetime XR

(Savings)

Lifetime E(Savings)

Units USD 2009$ USD 2009$ USD 2009$ MT CO2e

Entire Home

270,000(-70,000)

410(1,800)

5,200(22,000)

170(200)

PV Array 36,000(-36,000)

-1,400(1,400)

-18,000(18,000)

-102(102)

SHW array Heating

8,200(-6,200)

85(340)

1,000(4,300)

10(62)

HVAC 8,300(0)

160(270)

2,000(3,300)

18(57)

Prototype Roundhouse Systems: XI, XR, and E

14

Results

Objective XI

(Savings)Annual XR

(Savings)

Lifetime XR

(Savings)

Lifetime E(Savings)

Units USD 2009$ USD 2009$ USD 2009$ MT CO2e

Community Plan

600,000(-200,000)

14,000(10,000)

170,000(130,000)

1,600(830)

Community Plan: XI, XR, and E 2 home retrofits in Lakeport, California 2 new homes (Roundhouse design) in Ukiah

– One identical, one with conventional electric HVAC and smaller SHW system

15

Discussion

Subsidiary Metrics of Cost-Effectiveness

R

IIR C

CC

R

CC IIE

R

CC RRE

•CI: initial cost difference (USD 2009 $)

•CR: lifetime energy cost difference (2009 $)

•R: lifetime CO2 mitigation (metric tons

CO2e)

16

Discussion

Subsidiary Metrics of Cost-Effectiveness

R

IIR C

CC

R

CC IIE

R

CC RRE

•CIR: initial costs per unit lifetime energy cost savings

•CIE: initial costs per unit CO2e reduction

•CRE : Lifetime energy cost per unit CO2e reduction

17

Discussion & Conclusions

Subsidiary Metrics of Cost-Effectiveness– Roundhouse Engineered Systems

Initial Investments•Geothermal heat pump best•Photovoltaic array worst

Recurring expendituresPhotovoltaic array bestGeothermal heat pump worst

18

Discussion & Conclusions

Subsidiary Metrics of Cost-Effectiveness– Community Housing Plan

Initial investments Retrofit improvements best Cause: Inefficiency of existing

buildings

Recurring expenditures Retrofit improvements best Cause: Inefficiency of existing

buildings

19

Conclusions

Cost effectiveness of initial investments versus recurring expenditures

Tension between funding providers and Tribal members paying energy expenditures

Roundhouse: PV array saves the most in energy expenditures, costs most initially

GHP vice versa

20

Future Work

1. Database Expansion– Water Consumption– Renewable Energy Systems– Operation and Maintenance

2. Native American Energy Plan Optimization

3. New Partnerships with Other Nations– Building design– Renewable energy system design– Water conservation system design– Indoor Air Quality system design– Design of electric vehicle charging stations

21

Pinoleville Pomo Nation: Leona Williams, Carrie Williams, Don Williams Erika Williams, Deborah Smith, Monica Brown, Lenora Steele David Ponton, Angela James David Edmunds, Kimberly Tallbear (UCB), Michelle Baker (EPA)

UC Berkeley: Dr. Alice Agogino, Ryan Shelby, Yael Perez, Tobias Schultz Cindy Bayley, Che (Tommy) Liu, Han Chen, Larissa Korach, Alex

Langer, Kevin Haninger Francesca Francia, Bach Tuyet Nguyen, Dave Rhoads, Yao Yuan,

Aaron Chang

Acknowledgments

22

Web: http://www.planetcares.org/ http://pomo.planetcares.org/

Ryan Shelby website:http://www.ryanlshelby.com/

Contact: Tobias Schultztobias.schultz@berkeley.edu

http://best.berkeley.edu/~schultz

23

Back-Up Slides

24

Innovation Workshop 2008 Goal: Understand needs and brainstorm concepts with PPN. Split Groups:

– Elders– Adults– Youth

Brainstorming

Introduction

25

Introduction

Retrofit Investigation Investigated retrofit options for homes in Lakeport, California Need to perform energy audits

Energy consumption of various improvements in insulation.

26

NAEPA Methodology

User Interface in Excel Spreadsheet•Database of engineering systems constructed from prior work

•Currently data only for home design

•Designed to interface with software tools (climate, heating load calculations, etc.)

•Parameter list in Appendix

27

Introduction

Other Projects– Design of Renewable Energy Portfolio System Underway

Wind Solar

Micro-hydro

Go Back

28

Electricity Mix

Scope Includes Data Source

Scope 1 Natural Gas and Propane Combustion

Emission Factors from Energy Information Administration (8)

Scope 2 Electricity Consumption (PG&E)

Electricity Source Factors from (20), with PG&E Fuel Mix (21)

Scope 3 New Equipment, Construction, Manufacture of Natural Gas and Propane

EIO-LCA model (2)

2) Carnegie Mellon University Green Design Institute. (2009) Economic Input-Output Life Cycle Assessment (EIO-LCA) US 1997 model [Internet], Available from: <http://www.eiolca.net/> [Accessed 18 Nov, 2009]

8) Energy Information Administration. “Voluntary Reporting of Greenhouse Gases Program: Fuel and Energy Source Codes and Emissions Coefficients.” Web. Nov. 18, 2009. <http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/1605/coefficients.html>.

20) Pacca, S., and A. Horvath. “Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Building and Operating Electric Power Plants in the Upper Colorado River Basin.” Environ. Sci. Technol., 2002, 36 (14).

21) Pacific Gas and Electric. “PG&E Corporation 2008 Corporate Responsibility Report.” Web. Nov. 19, 2009. <http://www.pgecorp.com/corp_responsibility/reports/2006/index.html>. Go Back

29

NAEPA Methodology

User Interface in Excel Spreadsheet•Database of engineering systems constructed from prior work

•Currently data only for home design

•Designed to interface with software tools (climate, heating load calculations, etc.)

•Parameter list in Appendix

Go Back

30

Prototype Roundhouse Design Elements

Go Back

Equipment Roundhouse ConventionalInsulation Material Straw Bale insulation Fiberglass Insulation

Photovoltaic Array 5 kW PV Array No PV Array

Solar Hot Water 2 collector SHW system No SHW system

HVAC GHP, closed loop Propane furnace, conventional air conditioning

Desuperheater Desuperheater No desuperheater

Water Heater Electric 91% AFUE Propane 59% AFUE

Fuel Type No fuel 500-gal propane tank

Solar Hot Water Other Equipment

119-gal water storage tank No extra storage

Tankless Water Heater 3.9 GPM electric No tankless water heater

Appliances Energy star appliances Not energy star appliances

31

Results

Community Plan: Retrofit Design ElementsDecision Index Retrofit 1 Retrofit 2

Base Heating Consumption (kWh/yr) 2,400 25,000

Base Cooling Consumption (kWh/yr) 600 11,000

“ Water Heating Consumption (kWh/yr)

14,000 16,000

Photovoltaic Array Installation(existing system)

No PV Array 4 kW PV array

Solar Hot Water Array Installation(existing system)

4 collector system(No SHW system)

4 collector system(No SHW system)

Heating Equipment Improvement(existing system)

Propane furnace 92% (Propane 80%)

Electric furnace 99%(Electric furnace 99%)

Cooling Equipment Improvement(existing system)

A/C 4.10(A/C 2.93)

A/C 4.10(A/C 2.93)

Water Heating Improvement(existing system)

Propane WH 59%(Propane WH 59%)

Electric WH 92%(Electric WH 87%)

Other Equipment(existing system)

2x 119-gal tanks(No SHWOE)

2x 119-gal tanks(No SHWOE)

Appliances(existing system)

Propane appliances(No change)

Electric appliances(No change)

Go Back

32

Results

Objective XI

(Savings)Annual XR

(Savings)

Lifetime XR

(Savings)

Lifetime E(Savings)

Units USD 2009$ USD 2009$ USD 2009$ MT CO2e

New Home 1

270,000(-70,000)

410(1,800)

5,200(22,000)

170(200)

New Home 2

270,000(-68,000)

700(1,500)

8,700(18,000)

200(170)

Retrofit 1 18,000(-18,000)

5,200(3,200)

64,000(40,000)

550(160)

Retrofit 2 43,000(-43,000)

7,500(3,800)

94,000(48,000)

670(300)

Community Plan by Housing Unit: XI, XR, and E

Back

33

Subsidiary Metrics CIE, CIR, CRE

Subsidiary metrics for roundhouse project.

ObjectiveCIR CIE CRE

Units 2009$ / 2009$ 2009$ / MT CO2e 2009$ / MT CO2e

PV Array 2.0 350 -180

SHW Array 1.2 82 -69

HVAC 0.3 20 -58

Subsidiary metrics for community housing plan project.

ObjectiveCIR CIE CRE

Units 2009$ / 2009$ 2009$ / MT CO2e 2009$ / MT CO2e

New Home 1 2.7 310 -120

New Home 2 2.6 290 -110

Retrofit 1

0.5 110 -240

Retrofit 2

0.9 140 -160

Back