Dynamic Model to Integrate Capital Planning with Energy Conservation Measures to Meet GHG Goals Frederick Kincheloe, PE, LEED AP, Savin Engineers, P.C.James Fisk, Savin Engineers, P.C.

Keith O’Hara, PE, CEM, New York Power AuthorityMatthew Carroll, PE, New York Power Authority

New York Water Environment Association88th Annual MeetingFebruary 6, 2019

2

Thank You!NYPAMatthew Carroll, P.E.Keith O’Hara, P.E.Eric Park, P.E.

Savin Engineers, P.C.Christian Bratina, P.E.James FiskFrederick Kincheloe, P.E., LEED APSteve Martino, P.E., LEED AP, CEMTimothy Shadi, P.E.

CDM SmithChris Korzenko, P.E.Eric Staunton, Ph.D., E.I.Megan Messmann, P.E.Vincent Apa, P.E.

ArcadisEric Auerback, P.E.Mary JohnDimitri Katehis, Ph.D.Sally KramerMatthew Yonkin, P.E., BCEE, CEM, ENV SPSilvia Marpicati, P.E., BCEE, CEMCatherine MoskosShayla AllenJames Pynn

3

Integrated SOGR/ECM Plan for 14 WRRFs – Project Summary Integrate SOGR projects with ECMs to

• Leverage capital plan, optimize operating costs, and reduce GHGs• Prioritize energy projects around SOGR needs• Target programmatic short and long term goals

Costs, GHGs, Resource Recovery, Energy Neutrality

Integration Workshops

Sensitivity Analysis

Integration Plan

Establish Baseline PlanPrepare ECM Reports

Approach Key Project ChallengeManaging a Dynamic Program• Capital Plan Updates Associated with

Risk and Prioritization• Evolving Goals and Policies• GHG Coefficient Projections• Operational Changes/Interim Outages

A tool was needed to keep up

4

Overview of ECM Integration Process

Already Included

Cost Effective

Do Not Compete

Integrate

246 ECMs (2012 AECOM ECM Reports)

212 New ECMs(2017 Savin/CDM Smith/Arcadis ECM Reports)

Integrated Plan175 ECMs Considered

458 ECMsIdentified

307 ECMsEvaluated

ECMs to be selectedbased on Client goals and available funding

Capital Plan, Priority, and

Funding Changes

5

Key GoalsSimple to use• EXCEL based spreadsheet toolModular • Allow baseline data and coefficient updates• Allow the addition/removal of Capital/Energy projectsThorough• Coordinate projects to ensure no double counting

Model Development

6

Baseline Metrics Reportfinal draft August 2016

Ener

gy U

se a

nd P

rodu

ctio

n

Ope

ratin

g Co

sts

GHG

s

Plant specific usage, unit costs, and GHG

coefficients were established for

developing ECMs

12

Where do we start?

7Where do we start? – Excel Set Up

FY Start FY 14' Baseline YearlyMonthly

7/1/2010 8/1/2010 9/1/2010

2014Baseline

Electricity (kWH) 34,574,691 2,881,224 2,881,224 2,881,224Fuel Oil (gal) 449,793 37,483 37,483 37,483Natural Gas (ft3) 71,765,860 5,980,488 5,980,488 5,980,488ADG Produced (ft3) 207,419,883 17,284,990 17,284,990 17,284,990ADG Used (ft3) 207,419,883 17,284,990 17,284,990 17,284,990ADG Flared (ft3) 0 0 0 0ADG Vented (ft3) - 0 0 0Sodium Hypochlorite (gal) 759,262 63,272 63,272 63,272Dewatering Polymer (gal) 83,372 6,948 6,948 6,948Thickening Polymer (gal) - 0 0 0Ferric Chloride (gal) 92,700 7,725 7,725 7,725Caustic Soda (gal) 626 52 52 52Methanol (gal) 0 0 0 0Glycerol (gal) 0 0 0 0Residuals (cuft) 182,250 15,188 15,188 15,188Sludge (tons) 8,125 677 677 677Maintenance/ Personnel ($) 0 0 0 0

GHGs (MT) 21,657 1,805 1,805 1,805

Unit Costs - 2014Electricity ($/kWH) $0.11Fuel Oil ($/gal) $3.29Natural Gas ($/mmBTU) $8.44Sodium Hypochlorite ($/gal) $0.74Dewatering Polymer ($/gal) $7.85Thickening Polymer ($/gal) $8.21Ferric Chloride ($/gal) $0.56Caustic Soda ($/gal) $2.01Methanol ($/gal) $1.70Glycerol ($/gal) $1.81Residuals ($/cuft) $1.97Sludge ($/tons) $418.80

GHG Coefficients

Electricity (MT CO2e / kWH) 0.000261

Fuel Oil (MT CO2e / gal) 0.0102

Natural Gas (MT CO2e / mmBTU) 0.0477

ADG Used (MT CO2e / cuft) 0.000158

ADG Flared (MT CO2e / cuft) 0.000158

ADG Vented (MT CO2e / cuft) 0.256

Annual Baseline Established

Capability for monthly baseline to capture change and determine lifecycle costs (not used)

8

Individual WRRF Reports• 2012 AECOM ECM Reports• 2017 Savin CIP Impacts Report

(referencing SOP reports where available)

• 2016/2017 Savin/CDM/Arcadis ECM Reports

How do we calculate change in metrics?

9How do we calculate change in metrics? – Excel Set Up

Capital Cost information included to track costs

If the capital project includes scope beyond “replace in kind” then the impacts on metrics are adjusted

Schedule incorporated to track costs and change in metrics over time

10How do we calculate change in metrics? – Excel Set Up

Each change is programmed into a master Excel calculations page

Programming must account for double counting!

Each change is

added in a step wise fashion and the

results are rolled up.

11Scenario Analysis

A switchboard is established to easily

add or delete projects

Contracting mechanisms can also

be considered

12Scenario Analysis

Results summary

allows user to make changes

and analyze results to

select optimum ECM

13

GHG Goals“OneNYC” GHG Goals• 35% of 2006 levels by 2025• 40% of 2006 levels by 2030• 80% of 2006 levels by 2050

0100200300400500

FY'14 CIP CIP with ECMs

464.8306.3

128.3CO2e

x 1

,000

MT

GHGS

2030 Goal=318.62025 Goal=345.2

2050 Goal=106.2

Distribution of CIP with ECMs GHGs by Source

Scenario Analysis – SAMPLE Scenario to Target GHGs

NOTE: This scenario is for presentation purposes and does not reflect an approved plan

Results can inform where Owners should direct future work to reduce GHGs

14

Energy Use and Recovery

Sour

ce E

nerg

y(M

MBT

U/y

r*10

12)

Gapof6.4T

Gapof5.5T

Gapof1.9T

Energy Neutrality Goals

FY14 CIP CIP w/ECMs

Scenario Analysis – SAMPLE Scenario to Target Energy Neutrality

NOTE: This scenario is for presentation purposes and does not reflect an approved plan

Results Identify Energy Neutrality Gap and help inform where energy savings and production can be targeted

15

Owners can use results to make programmatic decisions

Plant Specific ReportingModel Reporting

NOTE: This scenario is for presentation purposes and does not reflect an approved plan

16

0

100

200

FY'14 CIP CIP with ECMs

148 13785

Mill

ion

Dolla

rs P

er Y

ear Operation Costs

Integration SummaryEnergy Use and Recovery

01,0002,0003,0004,000

CIP CIP with ECMs

2.3B3.3B

Mill

ion

Dolla

rs

Capital Costs

0100200300400500

FY'14 CIP CIP with ECMs

464.8306.3

128.3CO2e

x 1

,000

MT

GHGS

2030 Goal=318.62025 Goal=345.2

2050 Goal=106.2

Sour

ce E

nerg

y(M

MBT

U/y

r*10

12)

Gapof6.4T

Gapof5.5T

Gapof1.9T

FY14 CIP CIP w/ECMs

Owners can use results to make programmatic

decisions.

NOTE: This scenario is for presentation purposes and does

not reflect an approved plan

Model Reporting

17

Summary

• A simple spreadsheet can be developed to assist in determining cost effective ways of implementing energy and GHG related projects

• Modular spreadsheet design allows for adjustments with needs and goals

• The spreadsheet tool can be made as detailed as necessary to meet your needs

• Reporting can be tailored to the necessary level fit for the user and decision maker

18

Thank You!

New York Water Environment Association88th Annual Meeting

February 6, 2019

Slide Number 1Thank You!Integrated SOGR/ECM Plan for 14 WRRFs – Project SummaryOverview of ECM Integration ProcessSlide Number 5Baseline Metrics Report�final draft August 2016Slide Number 7Individual WRRF ReportsSlide Number 9Slide Number 10Slide Number 11Slide Number 12GHG GoalsEnergy Neutrality GoalsPlant Specific ReportingIntegration SummarySummaryThank You!