public buildings service sustaining world-class facilities and services the office of facilities...

Public Buildings Service

sustaining world-class facilities and services

the office of facilities management and services programs

Strategic Vision for GSA EnergyAugust 2015Mark Ewing

sustaining world-class facilities and servicesthe office of facilities management and services programs


Overview

• Current status towards existing goals• Significant actions GSA has taken in the last few years and

major plans moving forward.• Major obstacles we face with regard to federal

energy management and suggestions for overcoming these obstacles.

• Ideas for accelerating action on federal energy management.• Additional Challenges

2



Current StatusJanuary OMB Scorecard

3

• 43% reduction in Scope 1&2 GHG Reduction surpassing target of 28.6% by 2020:

• 53% reduction in Scope 3 surpassing target of 14.6% by 2020• 31% reduction in energy intensity in goal-subject facilities

compared with 2003 surpassing target of 30%.• 32.5% use of renewable energy as a percent of facility electricity

use surpassing 10% goal with 3.75% from new sources.• 29% reduction in potable water intensity compared with 2007

surpassing 26% target for 2020. • 15.8% of buildings sustainable surpassing 15% target by 2015



FY 2003 Baseline btu/gsf 78,636 90,866 86,407 65,935 88,329 82,384 57,251 87,438 56,634 60,082 93,865 77,102

FY 2015 btu/gsf reduced by Source Credits 63,392 79,621 62,619 50.361 60,496 55,877 46,183 55,872 41,292 42,919 43,681 53,135

3Blueprint/EISA 2007 Target btu/gsf 62,670 81,358 61,829 51,097 62,629 57,735 46,272 60,608 41,876 45,726 49,404 53,971

% change from baseline -19.39% -12.38% -27,53% -23,.62% -31.51% -32.17% -19.33% -36.10% -27.09% -28.57% -53.46% -31.08

EISA 07 FY 2015 Agency Mandate: -30.00%



MONTH

FY14 Reduction

Compared to 2003 Baseline

FY15 Reduction

Compared to 2003 Baseline

September 24.79% 26.47%October 25.20% 26.89%November 25.40% 27.25%December 24.65% 28.72%January 24.19% 29.74%February 23.54% 29.80%March 23.86% 31.08%April 24.48% May 24.69% June 25.10% July 25.56% August 25.87%



Significant GSA Actions• Power Purchase Agreements

– Grid based– Federal assets

• Performance contracting – ESPC– UESC

• State-of-the-art methods to measure energy savings which increase the credibility of the reported savings.– Advanced Metering– Data Analytics (virtual audits)

6



GSA Power Purchase Agreements – Grid based

GSA contracted with MG2 Tribal Energy, LLC in September 2014 for 140 MWs of output from a wind farm that will be constructed in Bureau County, Illinois. The contract term is 10 years. Operations are scheduled to begin in late 2016.

GSA contracted with Great Bay Solar I, LLC in April 2015 for 75 MWs of output from a solar farm that will be constructed in Somerset County, Maryland. The contract term is 10 years with a 10 year option. Operations are scheduled to begin before the end of 2016.

GSA contracted with OneEnergy Sunfish Solar, LLC in April 2015 for 6 MWs of output from a solar farm that will be constructed in Queen Anne County, Maryland. The contract term is 10 years. Operations are scheduled to begin before the end of 2016.



8

Power Purchase Agreements – Federal assets

• Northern California and Northern Nevada– GSA issued a Request for Proposal (RFP) seeking an experienced solar

developer to award a power purchase agreement (PPA) as part of its Federal Aggregated Solar Procurement Pilot

– a strategic sourcing project that combines several small to mid-size photovoltaic (PV) installation opportunities into a single procurement.

• Washington DC– GSA issued RFP last week to implement as many cost-effective solar projects as

possible at multiple federal sites – Purchase energy at prices lower than current total delivered electric price

(approximately 11 cents/kWh)– Defined cost and procedure to facilitate roof replacement during the PPA term – Approximately 3-4 megawatts



Performance Contracting• Presidential Memorandum -- Implementation of Energy

Savings Projects and Performance-Based Contracting for energy savings – Issued December 2, 2011.• The Federal Government shall enter into a minimum of $2 billion in

performance-based contracts in Federal building energy efficiency within 24 months from the date of this memorandum.

• GSA’s phase 1 commitment was $175 million in improvements and delivered $191 million.

• Phase 2 of the PPCC doubled the challenge to $4 billion for the Federal Government

• GSA’s additional commitment is $169,500,000 for a total of $344,500,000.

2



State of the Art Methods to measuring energy which increases the credibility of the reported savings Advanced Metering

% building coverage Data Analytics

Exporting data for virtual energy analysis results

Significant Actions con’t



Coverage statistics: Natural Gas

# of facilities: 324 % Consumption: 78%

Electric # of facilities: 480 % Consumption: 87.1%

Water: # of Facilities: 286 % Consumption 45.43%

Advanced Metering



Advanced Metering



Data Analytic - Virtual Audits



Plans moving forward

• Optimize Advanced Metering Analytics• Expand Virtual Audits• Explore COTS smart building solutions

– GSA HQ Building example

15



COTS Smart Buildings Solutions• Converged network infrastructure

lowers building systems footprint• Unified user interface improves

O&M response time• Digital Signage connects tenant to

building performance

16

• Daylight Harvesting, PV electricity, Solar Hot Water, Gray Water Cistern and other green technology lower building footprint

• Hoteling integration improves tenant behavior around space sharing

• Demand Response and Load Shedding



Recent Audit Findings on ESPCs Decision on NEPA and grid based power IT security requirements impact cloud based analytics

Major Obstacles



Audit Finding #1• Agencies should work with contractors to determine the best way

to obtain estimates of cost and energy savings that are not achieved, including savings lost due to agency actions, changes in utility prices, and other factors beyond contractors' control, in accordance with Department of Energy (DoE) guidance, for projects that have already been implemented.

2



Audit Finding #2

Agencies should establish a process to systematically evaluate ESPC projects - including baseline assumptions about facilities' energy use, utility prices and interest rates - to identify ESPCs that are not achieving expected savings, and determine if they should be modified or terminated. Agencies could consider conducting such evaluations either after a certain number of years, or in response to events, such as changes in utility prices or market interest rates, or appropriations becoming available that could be used for modifications or terminations.

2



NEPA Requirements

• GSA’s grid based wind contract court decision– Contract award brought lawsuit– GSA represented by DOJ– Remanded to GSA for further consideration on whether NEPA applies – Categorical exclusion to NEPA was deemed arbitrary and capricious. – Implications for all grid based, private new renewable production

facilities– Currently assessing level of NEPA response

20



Current requirements related to securing agency network limit potential benefits to cloud based servicing of data analytics.

Data sharing between agencies is onerous between and limits potential best practice technology transfers

GHG data warehousing for scope 3 with suppliers and between agencies Green Button Download My Data program participation could be solution

around security requirements Agency energy data can be assessed directly by 3rd parties from utility websites

Agency IT Security Requirements



Authority to contract for utility services from existing 10 years to 20-30 years for renewable power.

Requirement to retain Renewable Energy Credits from onsite or offsite plants

Federal Production Tax Credit for wind energy Extend the Production Tax Credit (PTC) and the Investment Tax

Credit (ITC) for the longest practical term

Ideas for accelerating action on federal energy management



Right fit for new technologies

Utility Regulation Activities

EO Implementation Guidance

Additional Challenges



There are plenty of energy policies in place, however, understanding how new technologies fit into dynamic and geographic disparate markets is often lacking. So that we end up with a good or unproven technology in the wrong location. There is a strong need for better business cases that incorporates the dynamic and geographically different business environments. For example what works in NYC and California, may not be effective in VA, TX,GA or MO.




Across the country, utilities are pursuing policies at the grid and distribution level that would tend to discourage the development of distributed generation technologies and renewable energy. Standby charge policies as well as capacity rule changes at RTO level will have a negative effect on renewable energy and distributed generation. While the utilities do raise some valid arguments, particularly for the residential sector, these policies tend to support the status quo rather than a future state - the smart grid with a much more dynamic energy environment. Energy policy leaders should encourage Federal involvement in regulatory matters where Federal policy goals may be thwarted by state/Federal regulatory action




Ensure specific implementation instructions of EO are issued so that agencies comply with intent of Executive Order On March 19, 2015, the President issued a new Executive Order

to Federal agencies on cutting energy use and greenhouse gas emissions in their operations. The EO states that “priority should first be placed on reducing energy use and cost, then on finding renewable or alternative energy solutions”

What methodology would agencies use to implement this operational decision making?


U.S. General Services Administration

Conclusion

presented byMark Ewing

public buildings service sustaining world-class facilities and services the office of facilities...

Documents