pls workshop september 18, 2012 greg miller ice energy terry andrews calmac manufacturing corp

PLS WORKSHOPSeptember 18, 2012

Greg MillerIce Energy

Terry AndrewsCALMAC Manufacturing Corp.

A SUCCESSFUL PLS PROGRAM FOR “BEHND THE METER” CUSTOMERS WILL INCLUDE:

• INCENTIVES THAT ARE LARGE ENOUGH TO ENCOURAGE PRIVATE COMPANIES– $1,000 PER kW SHIFTED FOR CHILLER BASED PLANTS– $2,000 PER kW SHIFTED FOR PACKAGED ROOFTOP INSTALLATIONS

• SIMPLE PROGRAM DESIGN– MEASURE LOAD SHIFTED FROM PEAK– kW OFFSET METHODOLGY (2008 & 2012 utility programs)– MEET CA BUILDING CODE, TITLE 24

• ABILITY TO COMBINE UTILITY PROGRAMS

• CPUC/IOU’s REBATE PROGRAMS OVERLOOKING SCALE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITIES FOR ENERGY STORAGE IN CALIFORNIA

2

INCENTIVE LEVELS• OVER THE LAST DECADE THE VAST

MAJORITY OF INSTALLATIONS IN CA ARE IN PUBLICALLY OWNED FACILTIES

• PRIVATE FACILTIES (BEHIND THE METER) EVALUATE TECHNOLOGIES BASED ON THE RETURN ON INVESTMENT (ROI)

• PROPOSED INCENTIVE LEVELS WILL IMPROVE ROI SLIGHTLY, WILL NOT IMPACT MARKET DEVELOPMENT SIGNIFICANTLY

3

INCENTIVE LEVELS• FOR CHILLER BASED SYSTEMS THE

INCENTIVE NEEDS TO BE AT LEAST $1,000 PER kW SHIFTED FOR PRIVATE COMPANIES TO INVEST IN THE TECHNOLOGY

• FOR PACKAGED ROOFTOP TECHNOLOGIES THE INCENTIVE NEEDS TO $2,000 PER kW SHIFTED FOR PRIVATE COMPANIES TO INVEST IN THE TECHNOLOGY

4

PROGRAM DESIGN• FOCUS ON kW SHIFTED– EXTENSIVE ENERGY ANALYSIS

REQUIREMENTS WILL CAUSE SOME ENGINEERS TO AVOID THE PROGRAM

– THIS IS A LOAD SHIFTING PROGRAM, ENERGY USAGE IS FACTORED INTO THE PROCESS IN 2 WAYS:

– POORLY PERFORMING TECHNOLGIES WILL NOT PROVIDE SAVINGS TO THE BUILDING OWNER

– THE INSTALLATION MUST MEET CA CODE

• MEET CA BUILDING CODE5

COMBINE PROGRAMS GAIN PROGRAM EFFICIENCIES IMPROVING CUSTOMER ADOPTION – LESSONS

LEARNED

• 2008-2011 SCE PLS PROGRAM– $1110/kW Customer incentive (8-12 year ROI)– 3 TES system delivered in 3 years

• 2012 SCE EE/PLS PILOT (combine programs)– PLS combined with Energy Efficiency

• SCE HVAC Optimization PLS ($1800/kW + HVAC replacement EE rebates)• Construction costs are lowered, program admin costs reduced • 6 months, 15 TES Systems Qualified for Rebates - in construction phase• Commercial Lease Program added to offset capital investment

• LESSONS LEARNED• Rebates must achieve 3-5 year payback to encourage market

adoption• IOU customers have limited cash availability during economic

stagnation– OBF encourages energy measure without investment risk – SCE 2012 Pilot Program did not Qualify for OBF– Customer are willing to invest in PLS/EE measure with financing

6

PROGRAM DESIGN REQUIREMENTS FOR SUCCESS

• ELIMINATE ANNUAL ENERGY PENALTY (Sect. 4.1)– Why? This is a load shifting program, economics and code

compliance will eliminate inefficient systems.

• ELIMINATE REQUIREMENT TO REMAIN ON TOU RATE FOR 5 YEARS (Sect. 5)– Why penalize a building owner if he/she is still shifting peak

loads?

• INCLUDE COOLING TOWER LOAD FOR WATER COOLED PLANTS AS LOAD SHIFTED (Sect. 7.4)– For water-cooled chillers the cooling tower loads are also

shifted, need to be added to compressor efficiency to total the shifted load.

7

COST EFFECTIVENESS• PLS HAS GREATER COST AVOIDANCE VALUE FOR UTILITIES THAN END

CUSTOMERS – PUBLIC POWER UTILITIES ARE PURCHASING MW SCALE STORAGE AT $2000-$3000/kW

JUSTIFIYING INVESTMENTS WITH ROI MODELS– Public Power compares PLS investment against other utility solutions (peak

power, market energy investments over 20-30 year terms)– TRC utility models are not used for large scale utility asset purchases

• MW SCALE PROCUREMENT PROVIDES CONTRACTUAL, FINANCE, PRODUCT MFG, DESIGN, AND CONSTRUCTION EFFICIENCIES THAT REBATE PROGRAMS CAN NOT ACHIEVE IN ONE OFF DEPLOYMENT

• COMBINING PROGRAM FOR EFFIECIENCIES– PLS, EE HVAC REPLACMENT, DEMAND RESPONSE, SMART GRID INTEGRATION

• ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT VALUE IS OVERLOOKED BY IOU PROGRAMS– ICE ENERGY MOVED BUSINESS HQ TO CALIFORNIA IN 2012 – intent to captures SGIP to $400/kW

economic development incentive (not allowed SGIP program participation – ICE ENERY RE-INVESTS ~$1000/kW of $2170/kW MW scale Energy storage purchase

• i.e., $10 Million dollars of a 10 MW project is reinvested in engineering, – ICE ENERGY COMMITTED TO LIGHT MANUFACTURING/TESTING OF ICE BEAR PRODUCT WITH 6 MW

ENERGY STORAGE PURCHASE BY REDDING ELECTIRC UTILITY IN JUNE 2012– CITY OF REDDING ELECTRIC UTILITY RECOGNIZES UP TO 50% OF ENERGY STORAGE INVESMTENT GOES

BACK INTO THEIR COMMUNITY

8

GLIMPSE OF CA ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY AT UTILITY MW SCALE ADOPTION

9

Burbank Water and

Power

Glendale Water &

Power

Redding Electric Utility

Riverside Public Utility Distribution

Feeder

Azusa Pacific

UniversityPeak Load (MW) 320 328 250 7 10C& I Customers 6,536 5,625 4,560 125 bldgs 17 BldgsPackaged HVAC Units Identified 16,340 15,120 8,257 226 91TES Survey Results (MW) 96 105.8 70 2.264 1.147TEST % of Peak C&I (MW) 30% 32% 28% 32% 11%Example - TES Adoption (MW) 19.2 21.168 14 2.264 1.147Utility Scale Price ($/kW) 2,170$ 2,170$ 2,170$ 2,170$ 2,170$ Utility Turnkey Investment ($) 41,664,000$ 45,934,560$ 30,380,000$ 4,912,880$ 2,488,990$ Economic Dev Value (@ $1000/kW) 19,200,000$ 21,168,000$ 14,000,000$ 2,264,000$ 1,147,000$

UTILITY TARGETED SURVEY

Survey Results - Projections