Ten Years at the Calif. Energy Commission & White Roofs to Cool your Building, your City and

(this is new !) Cool the World

St. Petersburg Polytechnical University June 15, 2011

Arthur H. Rosenfeld, Former Commissioner California Energy Commission.

Distinguished Scientist Emeritus Lawrence Berkeley National Lab.

AHRosenfeld@LBL.gov 510 495-2227

Presentation available at www.ArtRosenfeld.org

Filename Russian Talk 6-5-11 + DR from EE Summit Sactp. . Path DinnerTalk Life at CEC. ARPA-E

Energy Intensity (E/GDP)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1949

1952

1955

1958

1961

1964

1967

1970

1973

1976

1979

1982

1985

1988

1991

1994

1997

2000

2003

2006

E/

GD

P

[th

ou

san

d B

tu/

$ (

in $

20

00

)]

Actual 1972 - 2007 Intensity drops at 2% per year

If US intensity dropped at pre-1973 levels of 0.4% per year

$1.2 Trillion =Actual Energy Costs: 9% of GDP in 2007

$2.1 Trillion =15% of GDP in 2007

OPEC Embargo

Oil Price Collapse

$14 Trillion= 2007 GDP ($2007)

(off-scale)

United States

Russia (E/GDP) in PPP

Per Capita Electricity Consumption

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

14,00019

60

1962

1964

1966

1968

1970

1972

1974

1976

1978

1980

1982

1984

1986

1988

1990

1992

1994

1996

1998

2000

2002

2004

2006

year

kWh

per p

erso

n

United States

California

California has avoided building Forty 500 MW power plants

kWh

per p

erso

n

Arthur Rosenfeld, 4

Projections of California Peak Power Demand Planned in 1974 vs. Actual to 1984

(Goldstein and Rosenfeld, at Calif. Energy Commission, Dec. 1975)

David Goldstein, NRDC and Pat McAuliffe, CEC

Energy Use per Unit

Refrigerator Size (cubic feet)

Refrigerator Price Dollars (2001 $)

$ 1,270

$ 481

0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

1,400

1,600

1,800

2,000

1947

1950

1953

1956

1959

1962

1965

1968

1971

1974

1977

1980

1983

1986

1989

1992

1995

1998

2001

2004

2007

Ave

rage

Eer

ngy

Use

per

Uni

t Sol

d (k

Wh

per y

ear)

0

5

10

15

20

25

Ref

riger

ator

vol

ume

(cub

ic fe

et)

United States Refrigerator Use v. Time

6

Air Conditioning Energy Use in Single Family Homes in PG&E The effect of AC Standards (SEER) and Title 24 standards

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

4,000

1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015

Ann

ual k

Wh

per n

ew h

ome

for c

entr

al A

C

If only increases in house size -- no efficiency gainsChange due to SEER improvementsSEER plus Title 24

7

0

50

100

150

200

250

3  Gorges  Dam Appliance  Efficiency

TWh/year

2000/05Stds

Post-­‐05  Stds

Refrigerators

Air  C

onditio

ners

2000/05Stds

Post-­‐05  Stds

Annual generation from China’s Three Gorges Dam compared to annual savings in 2020, from 20 years of sales of refrigerators and ACs with increasing energy efficiency

3  Gorges  Dam Appliance  Efficiency0

4

8

12

16

20

Value  (billion  $/year)

Refrigerators

Air  C

onditio

ners

Appliance efficiency savings are calculated on the basis of annual savings in 2020. “Post-05” standards accounts for China’s periodic standards revision schedule of 4 to 5 years. Source: LBNL China Energy End-Use Model, David Fridley and Nina Zheng, 2010

Wholesale (3 Gorges) at $0.046/kWh

Retail (AC + Ref) at $0.092/kWh

8

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

3  Gorges  Dam Appliance  Efficiency

TWh/year

2000/05 Stds

Post-­‐05 StdsRefrigerators

Other  Products*

Post-­‐05 Stds

2000/05 Stds

2000/05 Stds

Post-­‐05 Stds

Air  Conditioners

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

3  Gorges  Dam Appliance  Efficiency

Value  (billion  $/year)

Refrigerators

Other  Products*

Air  Conditioners

Annual generation from China’s Three Gorges Dam compared to annual savings in 2020, from 20 years of sales of equipment subject to China’s energy efficiency standards

*Other products include: clothes washer, TV, fans, stand-by power, electric water heater, electric cooktop, fluorescent lamp ballasts, rice cooker, microwave ovens, laser printers, fax, copiers, computer monitors, HID lamps and ballasts, motors, air compressors, transformers, servers, computers, double-capped fluorescents, heat pump water heater, rangehoods, ventilating fans, external power supply, vending machines, LED lamps, grid lighting, commercial AC chillers, water-cooled chillers, unitary AC

Source: LBNL China Energy End-Use Model, David Fridley and Nina Zheng, 2010

Wholesale (3 Gorges) at $0.046/kWh

Retail (equipment savings) at $0.092/

kWh

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

35,000

40,000

45,000

50,000

1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006

GW

h Residential and Commercial

Cumulative Conservation Savings 1980 - 2006

Title 24 Building Standards

Title 20 Appliance Standards

Utility Programs and Market Effects

~19% of Residential and

Commercial Electricity Use in California in 2006

Source: Art Rosenfeld, California Energy Commission

0

5

10

15

20

25

1990 2000 2007 2015 2025 2035

Figure 113. CO2 emissions per capita by selected country and region, 1990-2035 (metric    tons  per  person)  

Projections

United States

Russia

OECD Europe

Middle East

China Brazil India

2011

History

11

Impact of Standards on Efficiency of 3 Appliances

Source: S. Nadel, ACEEE,

in ECEEE 2003 Summer Study, www.eceee.org

75%

60%

25% 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

100 110

1972 1974 1976 1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 Year

Inde

x (1

972

= 10

0)

Effective Dates of National Standards = Effective Dates of State Standards =

Refrigerators

Central A/C

Gas Furnaces

SEER = 13

12

United States Refrigerator Use, repeated, to compare with Estimated Household Standby Use v. Time

0 200 400 600 800

1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000

1947

1949

1951

1953

1955

1957

1959

1961

1963

1965

1967

1969

1971

1973

1975

1977

1979

1981

1983

1985

1987

1989

1991

1993

1995

1997

1999

2001

2003

2005

2007

2009

Aver

age

Ene

rgy

Use

per

Uni

t Sol

d (k

Wh

per

year

)

Refrigerator Use per Unit 1978 Cal Standard

1990 Federal Standard

1987 Cal Standard 1980 Cal Standard

1993 Federal Standard 2001 Federal

Standard

Estimated Standby Power (per house)

2007 STD.

The residential energy consumption due to televisions rapidly increased from 3-4% in 1990s to 8-10% in 2008. Television energy will grow up to 18% by 2023 without regulations. The projected growth does not include the residential energy use by cable boxes, DVD players, internet boxes, Blue Ray, game consoles etc.

Televisions Represent Significant Energy Use

0  

2,000  

4,000  

6,000  

8,000  

10,000  

12,000  

14,000  

16,000  

18,000  

20,000  

1975   1979   1983   1987   1991   1995   1999   2003   2007   2011   2015   2019   2023   2027  

GWh/yr  

Year  

California  Energy  Consump7on  from  TVs    (Forecast  with  and  without  proposed  standards)  

With  a  Title  20  Standard  

no  standard  

Tier 2 Tier 1

10%  of  Res.  Use  in  2007  

13

CEC Tier 1 (Effective 1/1/2011)

CEC Tier 2 (Effective 1/1/2013)

25" 32" 37" 42" 50"

CEC Max Screen Area (1400 in2 or ~57.4 diagonal inches)

Energy Star 3.0 TVs (10/2/09)

0

100

200

300

400

0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000

On

Mod

e Po

wer

(W)

Screen Area (square inches)

TV Power Consumption Levels

Technically Feasible Standards

Each point may represent several TV models

*Consumers can expect to save between $ 50 - $ 250 over the life of their TV *A 50 inch plasma can consume as little as 307 kWh/yr and as much as 903 kWh/yr 14

General Purpose Lighting – Proposed Regulations (cont.)

Rated  Lumens  Range Maximum  rated  Wa2age

Minimum  Rated  Life  Time

Proposed  California  

Effective  Date 1490-­‐‑2600  Lumens 100à72  Wa3s 1,000  hours Jan,  1,  2011 1050-­‐‑1489Lumens 75à53  Wa3s 1,000  hours Jan  1,  2012 750-­‐‑1049  Lumens 60à43  Wa3s 1,000  hours Jan  1,  2013 310-­‐‑749  Lumens 40à29  Wa3s 1,000  hours Jan  1,  2013

Proposed Table K-8: Standards for State-regulated General Services Incandescent Lamps -Tier I

Lumens  Range Maximum  Lamp  Efficacy

Minimum  Rated  Life  Time

Proposed  California  

Effective  Date All 45  lumens  per  wa3 1,000  hours Jan,  1,  2018

Proposed Table K-9: Standards for State-regulated General Services Lamps -Tier II

• McKinsey Russian Report:

• C02 abatement through EE

16

17

Russia’s baseline greenhouse gas emissions and the abatement

potential in 2030

844161

337

248 103

521

Reference case 2030

2,991

Growth 2005 to 2030

2,147

1,526

Abatement case 2030

51 48

CCS Fuel mix shift

252

Agricul- ture and forestry

377

Energy efficiency

682

-49%

Mt CO2e Money-saving measures

SOURCE: McKinsey

2005 Process changes

Emissions reduction measures

18

-160 -150

-120 -110 -100

-10

80

-140

100 0

-180

70 60 50 40 30 20 10

0 900 800 700

-170

600 500 400 300 200 1,500 1,400 1,300 1,200 1,100 1,000

Abatement cost €/t CO2e

-90 -80 -70 -60 -50 -40 -30

-200

-20

-190

-130

Cropland nutrient management

Greenhouse gas abatement cost curve 2030 Buildings

Petroleum and Gas

Agriculture

Other Industries

Power and Heat

Forestry

Road Transport

Waste

Improved insulation of non-residential buildings

Higher share of cogeneration (CHP)

Improved insulation of residential buildings

Grid losses reduction Large hydro

Carbon capture and storage in downstream Carbon capture and storage

at existing steel plants Stricter energy efficiency norms

for new residential buildings

Onshore wind energy

Usage of biomass

Carbon capture and storage at new steel production plants

Retrofit of residential buildings Building nuclear power station

Cropland afforestation

Cropland organic soils restoration of land in use Agronomy practices

Degraded land restoration

Cultivation based reforestation

Pastureland afforestation

Protective afforestation

Installing apartment heat meters and thermostats

Construction of energy efficient non-residential buildings

Improved fuel efficiency in transport

Improved insulation of heating grids

Distribution maintenance

Retrofit of HVAC controls, non-residential

Retrofit of HVAC, non-residential

More energy efficient new builds in upstream

General energy efficiency in iron and steel

Equipping existing nitric acid production plants with N2O decomposition facilities

Equipping new nitric acid production plants with N2O decomposition facilities

Recycling new waste

Biofuel

Energy efficiency measures in other industries

SOURCE: McKinsey

Abatement potential Mt CO2e

Economically attractive energy efficiency measures with an average IRR of more than 30%

19

-50

100

0 80 60 440 420

-550

Net cost € per tce

-250

240 220 260 280 300 320 340

150

360 380 40 400

-150

-100

-300

50

-200

200 20 180 160 140 120 100 0

Buildings

Petroleum and Gas

Other Industries

Power and Heat

Road Transport

Money-saving measures in other industries More energy efficient new builds in upstream

Energy efficient office electronics Energy efficient appliances

Improved maintenance and process control in downstream

Replace electric resistance heating to electric heat pump, residential

Decrease T&D losses General energy efficiency in iron and steel

Stricter energy efficiency norms for new residential buildings

Improved insulation of heating grids

Energy efficiency projects requiring capex at process unit level in upstream oil and gas

Distribution maintenance

Construction of energy efficient non-residential buildings

Improved HVAC maintenance - residential

Improved maintenance and process control in upstream

Installing apartment heat meters and thermostats

Energy efficiency projects requiring capex at process unit level in downstream Planning

Retrofit of HVAC, non-residential Increased share of CHP

Retrofit of HVAC controls, non-residential

Improved insulation of non-residential buildings

Energy efficient consumer electronics Lighting - switch incandescent to LEDs, residential

Saving of primary energy

Mtce

SOURCE: McKinsey

Energy efficient motor systems at new chemical plants

Cogeneration in steel (BOF gas), new build

Improved insulation of residential buildings

Improved fuel efficiency in transport

Retrofit of residential buildings

Net cost measures in other industries

Energy Efficiency curve 2030

Economically attractive energy efficiency measures with an average IRR of more than 30%

20

8% 17% 25% 33% 42% 50% 58%

20

Abatement cost <$50/ton

U.S. mid-range abatement curve – 2030

Source: McKinsey analysis

0

30

60

90

-120

-220

-30

-60

-90

3.2 0

Cost Real 2005 dollars per ton CO2e

1.0 1.2 1.4 1.8 2.0 0.2 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0 1.6 0.4 0.6 0.8

-230

Residential electronics

Commercial electronics

Residential buildings – Lighting

Commercial buildings – LED lighting

Fuel economy packages – Cars

Commercial buildings – CFL lighting

Cellulosic biofuels

Industry – Combined heat and power

Existing power plant conversion efficiency improvements

Conservation tillage

Fuel economy packages – Light trucks

Commercial buildings – Combined heat and power

Coal mining – Methane mgmt

Commercial buildings – Control systems

Distributed solar PV

Residential buildings – Shell retrofits

Nuclear new-build

Natural gas and petroleum systems management

Active forest management

Afforestation of pastureland

Reforestation

Winter cover crops

Onshore wind – Medium penetration

Coal power plants – CCS new builds with EOR

Biomass power – Cofiring

Onshore wind – High penetration

Industry – CCS new builds on carbon-intensive processes

Coal power plants – CCS new builds

Coal power plants – CCS rebuilds

Coal-to-gas shift – dispatch of existing plants

Car hybridi-zation

Commercial buildings – HVAC equipment efficiency

Solar CSP

Residential buildings – HVAC equipment efficiency

Industrial process improve-ments

Residential water heaters

Manufacturing – HFCs mgmt

Residential buildings – New shell improvements

Coal power plants– CCS rebuilds with EOR

Potential Gigatons/year

Commercial buildings – New shell improvements

Afforestation of cropland

Onshore wind – Low penetration

21

White roofs to cool your buildings, your cities, and

(this is new) to cool the earth.

22

23 23

Summer in the city

23

summer urban heat island

24 24

Bird’s eye view of urban land use

Tree Cover 13%

Sidewalk 5%

Barren Land 8%

Misc. 6%

Road 22%

Parking Area 12%

Grass 15%

Roof 19%

Area by Land-Cover Category Above the Canopy

~ 1 km2!

The  surface  of  Sacramento,  CA  is  about  

•   20%  roofs  •   30%  vegeta7on  •   40%  pavement  

24

25 25

ReflecGve  roofs  stay  cooler  in  the  sun  

50  

40  

30  

20  

10  

0  

0.0   0.2   0.4   0.6   0.8   1.0  

Tempe

rature  Rise  (°C)  

Galvanized Steel

IR-­‐Refl.  Black  

Black  Pa

int  

Green  Asph

alt  S

hingle  

Red  Clay  Tile  

Lt.  R

ed  Paint  

Lt.  G

reen

 Paint  

Whi

te A

spha

lt Sh

ingl

e

Al R

oof C

oat.

Opt

ical

Whi

te

Whi

te P

aint

Whi

te C

emen

t Coa

t.

Solar  Absorptance  

26

White roofs, cool-colored roofs save money

flat,  white  

pitched,  white  

pitched,  cool  &  colored  

OLD   NEW  

AC  savings  ≈  15%  

AC  savings  ≈  10%  

AC  savings  ≈  5%  

Chicago Heat Wave 1995, 739 Deaths The most lethal floor was the top floor of a building

with a black roof

27

European Heat Wave 2003, 30,000 Deaths Moscow-Centered Heat Wave 2010,15,000 Deaths

28

White roofs around the world

30 30

…in  Santorini,  Greece  

30

31 31

…in  Hyderabad,  India  

…and  widely  in  the  state  of  Gujarat,  India.  

31

32 32

Walmart  store  in  northern  California  

32

33 33

CongratulaGons  to  UC  Davis  

33

34 34

White  roofs  are  popular  in  Tucson,  AZ  

34

35 35

Washington,  DC  (Federal)  has  problems  

35

36 36 36

Pentagon

Rostov on Don, white roofs

Baku, dark roofs

Cooling our planet

40 40

Solar-­‐reflecGve  surfaces  cool  the  globe  via  “negaGve  radiaGve  forcing”  

Source:  Intergovernmental  Panel  on  Climate  Change  (IPCC)  

40

41 41

GLOBAL  COOLING:  making  100  m2  (1000  [2)  of  gray  roofing  white  offsets  the  emission  of  10  t  of  CO2  

42

How much CO2 equivalent is offset if we whiten all eligible urban flat roofs world-

wide? (i/ii) • Answer:  24  Gigatonnes  (Gt)  

– 2/3  of  a  year’s  worldwide  emission  – Gigatonne  =  billion  metric  tons  

• If  implemented  over  20  years  (the  life  of  a  roof  or  a  program)  this  is  ≈  1.2  Gt/year.  

43

How much CO2 equivalent is offset if we whiten all eligible urban flat roofs world-wide? (ii/ii)

•  Offset  is  equivalent  to  taking  300  million  cars  off  the  road  for  20  years.    – There  are  about  600  million  passenger  cars  world  wide,  and  they  each  emit  ≈  4  t  CO2/year.  

In terms of avoided power plants

Full white roof potential can offset the emissions from 500 medium-sized coal fired power plants or 1,000 medium-sized gas fired power plants.

That is just the albedo effect – if the building is air conditioned, it will avoid comparable real CO2 back at the power plant. 44

45

46

Progress in energy efficiency standards

•  In  2005,  California’s  “Title  24”  energy  efficiency  standards  prescribed  white  surfaces  for  low-­‐sloped  roofs  on  commercial  buildings.  Several  hot  states  are  following.  

•  In  2008,  California  prescribed  “cool  colored”  surfaces  for  steep  residenGal  roofs  in  its  5  hofest  climate  zones.  

•  Other  U.S.  states  &  all  countries  with  hot  summers  should  follow.    

47

Recent cool roof progress (2005 – 2011) •  2005

–  California Title 24 – “Flat roofs shall be white” (15 out of 16 climate zones). Walmart adopts white roofs for ALL stores.

–  EPA ENERGY STAR lists Cool Roof Materials

•  2010 –  June 1st, 2010 – Memo from U.S. Energy Secretary Steven Chu

calls for all DOE Buildings to have white roofs, if cost-effective –  June 16th, 2010 – Marine Corp follows suit, Pentagon following slowly –  June 19th, 2010 – RetroFIT Philly announces winner of “coolest block”

contest to white-coat black roofs of row houses.

•  2011 –  100 Cool Cities launched – see www.WhiteRoofsAlliance.org –  Spring 2011 – US will launch, at G20 Energy Ministers meeting, a

voluntary Cool Roofs initiative and may even offer technical assistance to developing countries who join early.

To come 2012…

•  Model codes will be modified to prescribe “flat roofs shall be white” –  ASHRAE for commercial buildings –  EECC for residential buildings

•  But states and cities have to adopt model codes

48

49

Global Cool Cities Alliance could unite many initiatives and trade associations

50

Resources on the web

•  Art  Rosenfeld’s  website  –  ArtRosenfeld.org  

•  Cool  Colors  Project  –  CoolColors.LBL.gov  

•  Heat  Island  Group  –  HeatIsland.LBL.gov    

•  Cool  Communi7es  Project  –  CoolCommuni7es.LBL.gov    

•  Roof  Savings  Calculator  –  RoofCalc.com    

•  Global  Cool  Ci7es  Alliance  −  GlobalCoolCi7esAlliance.org  

•  Cool  Roof  Ra7ng  Council  −  CoolRoofs.org  

•  Cool  California  –  CoolCalifornia.org  

•  EPA  Heat  Islands  –  epa.gov/hea7sland  

•  Energy  Star  Cool  Roofs  –  EnergyStar.gov  

February 2011

Demand Response

51

52

California is a Summer Peaking Area California Daily Peak Loads -- 2006

0

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

60,000

70,000

Jan-06 Mar-06 May-06 Jul-06 Sep-06 Nov-06

MW

Residential Air Conditioning

Commercial Air Conditioning

53

Three Necessary Components for Demand Response (The low-tech half of the smart grid; no Gee Whiz reliability)

•  Advanced Metering Infrastructure--recorded hourly –  Digital meters with communication; readings available in near-real time

•  Dynamic Tariffs –  Enable customers to be able to respond to hourly prices –  The structure of these tariffs is critically important as customers are hoping to reduce total

energy costs

•  Automated Response Technology at customer locations

–  Enable residential and small commercial customers to respond to price automatically –  Larger customers with energy management systems linked to pricing signals over the

internet or through other communication channels

•  And, when coupled with energy efficiency programs and policies the result can be reduction in total consumption as well as peak period consumption

54

Critical Peak Pricing (CPP) with Time of Use (TOU)

0!10!20!30!40!50!60!70!80!

Pric

e (c

ents

/kW

h)!

Standard TOU!Critical Peak Price!Standard Rate!

Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday!

Extraordinary Curtailment Signal, < once per year!

CPP Price Signal!10x per year!

?

Direct customer savings comes mainly be response to TOU. Customer response to CPP is mainly civic pride but avoids utility investment and expensive peak infrastructure. !

Prices are designed such that the average non-responder sees no bill change. !

55

Average Residential Response to Critical Peak Pricing

kW

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

Noon 2:30 7:30 Midnight

CPP Event

CPP with Controllable Thermostat

Control Group

Fixed Incentive with Controllable Thermostat

69% 65%

73% 61% 69%

22% 30% 20%

26% 17%

0% 20 40 60 80 100%

Total

TOU

CPP-F

CPP-V

Info Only

91%

93%

87%

86%

Should dynamic rates be offered to all customers?

Definitely

Probably

95%

Key Results from Residential Pilot

• 12% average load reduction for CPP rate alone

• Up to 40% with rate + enabling tech

• Most participants preferred the pilot rates

56

Automated Demand Response Commercial Customers

*Source: Demand Response Research Center, Global Energy Partners

Smart thermostat with universal communications interface at rear

Source: Tim Simons, Golden Power

Smart thermostat with U-SNAP Interface

Advantages of this configuration: 1.  Customer decides 2.  Flexible 3.  “plug and play” 4.  Capable of conveying lots of information

Source: Tim Simons, Golden Power