ENERGY ACTION NETWORK REPORT TO REDUCE CO2 IN VERMONT

Vermont has a Comprehensive Energy Plan, CEP. The capital cost for implementing the CEP would be in excess of $1.0 billion/y for at least 33 years, per Energy Action Network annual report. See URLs.

 

http://eanvt.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/EAN-2015-Annual-Report-... 

https://outside.vermont.gov/sov/webservices/Shared%20Documents/2016...

ENERGY ACTION NETWORK

 

Energy Action Network, EAN, claims $800 million/y energy cost savings, if its measures to reduce CO2 by 2.281 million metric ton to meet the Paris Agreement were implemented by 2025. See page 4 of EAN URL

https://www.eanvt.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/EAN-report-2020-fi...

 

The measures are a multi-billion-dollar wish list of EAN members with a cost exceeding $15.536 billion during 2020 – 2025, about $3.107 billion/y. EAN members want these heavily subsidized measures, because it is good for RE businesses.

It took about 20 years (2000 – 2020) to achieve the existing conditions by spending about $210 million/y, including Efficiency Vermont. The annual spending to achieve Paris would be at least 10 times greater.

These measures would be major burdens on the stagnant Vermont economy, its businesses, ratepayers, taxpayers, etc., while in the middle of a major recession, with decreasing tax collections by state government (room & meals, sales, income, gasoline, etc.), due to the coronavirus.

Table 1 shows the EAN measures to achieve Paris.

Table 1/Paris CO2

Existing

Addition

Total

CO2 reduction

CO2 Reduction

Year

2019

2025

2025

2025

million Mt

%

EVs/plug-in hybrids

3,541

90,000

93,541

0.405

Fleet mileage increase

0.187

Solo driving increase

0.172

Total

0.764

33.5

ASHPs, space heat

17,717

90,000

107,717

0.370

Adv. wood. heat

21,421

25,000

46,421

0.258

Building retrofits

27,186

90,000

117,186

0.160

ASHPs, DHW

11,687

90,000

101,687

0.106

Total

0.894

39.2

Electricity; in-state

MWh

MWh

MWh

Wind

161,198

250,000

411,198

Solar

502,949

700,000

1,202,949

Hydro

513,183

50,000

563,183

Total

1,177,330

1,000,000

2,177,330

0.373

16.4

Miscellaneous

0.250

11.0

Total

2.281

100.0

 

Table 2 shows the cost of the EAN measures to achieve Paris

 

Table 2/ Costs

EVs

ASHPs

Adv. Wood Heat

Wind/Solar/Storage

Hydro

Total

$billion

$billion

$billion

$billion

$billion

$billion

EVs

8.483

Deep retrofits

2.700

Wind

0.095

Chargers

0.318

ASHPs, space

0.900

Solar

0.570

ASHP, DHW

0.360

Grid

0.100

Storage

0.900

8.801

3.960

0.250

1.665

0.860

15.536

Annual

3.107

 

CONCLUSIONS

 

Based on the below analysis:

 

- Costs of $15.536 billion during 2020 – 2025, about $3.107 billion/y

- More wind, solar, hydro, etc., increasing the average price/kWh of the Vermont electricity mix.

- Amortizing the cost of the short-life assets, at 3.5% over 15 years, would require annual payments of $1.333 billion, or $1.081 billion over 20 years, more than offsetting the $800 million/y energy cost savings.

 

http://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/cost-shifting-is-the-na...

https://www.myamortizationchart.com

NOTE:

Source energy, SE, is from mines, wells and forests, etc.

Primary energy, PE, is finished fuel/energy fed to power plants

Upstream = SE – PE

SE basis includes Upstream

PE basis excludes Upstream

Wall meter = WM

Vehicle meter = VM

Metric ton = Mt

ELECTRIC VEHICLES

 

The complete analysis of EVs is described in this article.

http://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/vermont-co2-reduction-o...

 

Result of Analysis: This analysis found, to reduce CO2 by 405,000 Mt in 2025:

 

- About 4.50/3.58 x 90000 = 113,128 EVs would be needed during 2020 – 2025, each reducing about 3.580 Mt/y, if LDV mix gasoline vehicles were replaced (which is unlikely, because the required EV mix likely would not yet be marketed during 2020 – 2025)

 

- About 4.50/1.92 x 90000 = 210,938 EVs would be needed during 2020 – 2025, each reducing about 1.920 Mt/y, if small gas vehicles were replaced (which is more likely, because such EVs are marketed and bought. See table 3)

 

Capital Cost

Cost for EVs; about 210,938 x $40000/small EV = $8.483 billion

Cost for private and public chargers; about 210,938 x $1500 = $0.318 billion

Total = 8.483 + 0.316 = $8.801 billion

AIR SOURCE HEAT PUMPS FOR SPACE HEAT

The EAN report claims CO2 reduction/ASHP = 405000/90000 ASHPs = 4.500 Mt/y.

  

The CADMUS survey of 77 ASHPs at 65 sites showed, average Vermont free-standing houses with ASHPs have about 27.6% of space heat from ASHPs and 72.4% of space heat from traditional systems

https://publicservice.vermont.gov/sites/dps/files/documents/2017%20...

 

Table 6/Space heat, per CADMUS

Sites

Million Btu/site

 Million Btu

%

Heat to sites

65

92.00

5,980

 See URL, page 22

ASHPs

 Million Btu/ASHP

 

Heat from ASHPs

1648/5980

77

21.40

1,648

27.6

See URL, page 21

Heat from traditional

 4332/5980

4,332

72.4

.

Million Btu/site

%

Heat from ASHPs, on average

1648/65

25.35

27.6

Heat from traditional, on average

92.00 – 25.35 

66.65

72.4

92.00

27.6% space heat from ASHPs, per CADMUS

Building space heat demand would be about 2,323,154 Btu/h at -10F

Building space heat demand would be about 1,016,380 Btu/h at 35F, or 15,637 Btu/h from ASHPs/site.

The ASHP capacity could have delivered about 590,000 Btu/h at -10F, or 9,077 Btu/h/site, but did not, because owners had turned them off. See figure 14 in CADMUS report

 

An owner with one ASHP (output 9,077 Btu/h at -10F) in an average Vermont free-standing house, would have a loss of $220/y, and reduce CO2 by 2.260 Mt/y, or 19.6%

 

58.5% space heat from ASHPs, per EAN

The EAN CO2 reduction goal is 4.500 Mt/y, which can be achieved, if 58.5% of space heat is from ASHPs

The ASHP capacity would deliver about 1,200,000 Btu/h at -10F, or 18,462 Btu/h from ASHPs/site

This would require at least 2 ASHPs/site.

 

An owner with 2 ASHPs (output 18.462 Btu/h at -10F) in an average Vermont free-standing house would have a loss of $665/y, and reduce CO2 4.505 Mt/y, or 39.6%

 

100% space heat from ASHPs

Minimum required ASHP capacity would be 2323154/590,000 = 3.94 greater than CADMUS, or 3.94 x 9077 = 35,741 Btu/h/site, at -10F. This would require 3 or 4 ASHPs/site.

 

An owner with three or four ASHPs (output 35.741 Btu/h at -10F) in an average Vermont free-standing house, would have a loss of $1,719/y, and reduce CO2 by 7.128 Mt/y, or 62.6%.  

http://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/cost-savings-of-air-sou...


Table 7 summarizes the results

Table 7/Results

 Displ. fuel

Fuel cost

 Elect. cost

Energy cost

 Amort.

Total

Min. Loss

CO2

CO2

CO2

$2.75/gal

$0.19/kWh

5%/y, 15y

Reduction

Reduction

%

$/y

$/y

$/y

$/y

$/y

$/y

Mt/y

Mt/y

%

Before ASHP

0

2,455

0

2,455

0

2,455

11.390

After ASHP

27.6

1,779

469

2,248

427

2,675

220

9.130

2.260

19.8

After ASHP

58.5

1,019

1153

2,172

949

2,966

665

6.885

4.505

39.6

After ASHP

100.0

0

2,277

2,277

1,898

4,175

1,719

4.262

7.128

62.6

Table 8 shows three alternatives for space heating, SE basis

Annual average efficiency of 0.75 covers existing heating systems at the 65 sites; some systems are more efficient than others.

On average, each ASHP uses 2085 kWh to provide 21.40 million Btu, per CADMUS, or 2470 kWh for 25.35 million Btu.

Table 8/CO2 Reduction

Before ASHP

After ASHP

After ASHPs

After ASHP

ULS, <50 ppm S, fuel oil

100% Fuel oil

72.4% Fuel oil

41.5% Fuel oil

0% Fuel oil

Purchased fuel oil

gal/y

892.9

646.9

370.6

Annual average efficiency

0.75

0.75

0.75

Available heat

gal/y

669.7

485.1

277.9

.

Higher heat value

Btu/gal

137,381

137,381

137,381

Lower heat value

Btu/gal

131,579

131,579

131,579

Fossil heat/site

Btu/y

92,000,000

66,649,231

38,180,000

ASHP heat/site

Btu/y

25,350,769

54,740,000

92,000,000

COP

3.01

2.60

2.25

.

Combustion CO2

lb/gal

23.509

Upstream CO2, 25% of combustion

lb/gal

5.627

Total CO2, SE basis

lb/gal

28.123

Fuel oil CO2

Mt/y

11.390

8.252

4.727

.

Purchased electricity

Mt/y

2,470

6067

11,984

CO2, NE grid, WM, SE basis

g/kWh

356

356

356

CO2, NE grid, WM, SE basis

Mt/y

0.879

2.158

4.262

.

Total CO2, NE grid, WM, SE basis

Mt/y

11.390

9.130

6.885

4.262

CO2 reduction

Mt/y

2.260

4.502

7.128

CO2 reduction

%

19.8

39.6

62.6

.

 

 

 

 

 

COST

Fuel cost at $2.75/gal

$/y

2,455

1,779

1019

0

Electricity cost at $0.19/kWh

$/y

469

1153

2277

ASHP cost, turnkey

$

4,500

10,000

20,000

Amortizing at 5%/y for 15 y

$/y

427

949

1,898

Total cost

$/y

2,455

2,675

3,121

4,175

LOSS

$/y

 

220

665

1,719

Table 9 shows space heat energy sources of Vermont houses

 

Table 9/Housing units

Existing

Future, per CEP

Source

Description

Units

Source

%

Units

Cordwood/pellets

Primary fuel for space heat

65,000

Cordwood/pellets/biofuels

34

90,100

No. 2 fuel oil, propane or natural gas 

Primary fuel for space heat

190,000

ASHPs

63

166,950

Electricity

Primary energy for space heat

10,000

Fossil

3

7,950

Total

265,000

100

265,000

About 88,000 of Vermont's 100,000 free-standing houses, and about 59,000 of Vermont’s 66,950 apartments, condos, etc., are economically unsuitable for 100% space heat from ASHPs. 

 

Only well-sealed/well-insulated, highly sealed/highly insulated and Passivhaus-style houses are economically suitable for 100% space heat from ASHPs

http://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/air-source-heat-pumps-a...

 

Table 10/Vermont

Built

Area

Htg. Demand

Pk. Demand

Times

Air Leak

ACH

Unsuitable for ASHPs

%

ft2

(Btu/h)/ft2

Btu/h at -10F

Passiv

ft3/min

@ -50 pascal

Typical older house

1750 - 1990

68.4

2000

40.0

80,000

12.6

2667

10.0

Newer house

1990 - 2000

10.0

2000

24.0

48,000

7.6

1600

6.0

Newer house

2000 - 2012

10.0

2000

20.0

40,000

6.3

1867

7.0

Suitable for ASHPs

"WS/WI house" 

2012 - 2021

10.0

2000

15.0

30,000

4.7

800

<3.0

“HS/HI house” 

2000 - present

1.5

2000

8.5

17,000

2.7

400

<1.5

Passivhaus

1985 - present

0.1

2000

3.2

6,348

1.0

160

<0.6

100.0

Capital Cost

Retrofits: 90,000 x $30,000/housing unit = $2.7 billion

ASHPs for space heat: 90,000 x $10,000/housing unit = $0.9 billion

ASHPs for DHW: 90,000 x $4000/system = $360 million 

Total = 2.70 + 1.80 + 0.36 = $3.96 billion

 

WIND, SOLAR AND STORAGE

Moving to ASHPs and EVs would require increased generation

 

EAN does not mention any costs and subsidies for: 1) Expanding/augmenting the grid, 2) Increased wind and solar systems, which would require:

 

- Wind turbines costing about 250000/(8766 x 0.30) x $2.5 million/MW = $95 million

- Solar systems costing about 700000/(8766 x 0.14) x $3.5 million/MW = $570 million

- Expanding/augmenting of the grid costing about $100 million

- Storage costing about $900 million

 

Storage would mitigate/counteract:

 

Daily disturbances of distribution grids, due to 1) solar outputs impacted by variable cloudiness, 2) midday solar DUCK curves, and 3) daily disturbances of high voltage grids monitored by ISO-NE, due to larger solar systems, plus 4) year-round, random disturbances of high voltage grids monitored by ISO-NE, due to wind systems

 

The storage systems would store unused solar during low-demand, mid-day hours, and discharge solar during high-demand, late-afternoon/early-evening hours

 

NOTE: Battery storage loss is about 20% (100 in, 80 out), high-voltage-to-high-voltage basis.

http://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/vermont-is-going-to-hel...

 

Capital cost = 0.095 + 0.570 + 0.100 + 0.900 = $1.665 billion

 

IN-STATE HYDRO GENERATION   

 

EAN recommends about 50,000 MWh/y of additional in-state, hydro generation, likely under a Standard Offer at 13 c/kWh; i.e., additional cost shifting to rate payers.

The NE wholesale rate has averaged about 5 c/kWh starting in 2009

Capital cost = 50000/(8766 x 0.40) x $6 million/MW = $86 million

 

APPENDIX 1

NE Electric Grid CO2

 

ISO-NE uses fuel/energy fed to power plants, PE, to calculate CO2/kWh.

ISO-NE does not include CO2 of upstream energy

Upstream is about 10.2% of PE CO2

https://www.iso-ne.com/static-assets/documents/2020/01/draft_2018_e...

 

Fed to grid becomes 299 x 1.102 = 329 g CO2/kWh, SE basis.

Fed to wall meter becomes 323 x 1.102 = 356 g CO2/kWh, SE basis.

 

For analysis purposes, 356 g/kWh should be used for electricity via any wall meter in NE.

Table 11 shows:

 

Source energy required for a quantity of electricity at wall sockets.

Values for Tesla vehicles based on real-world conditions for a year.

Value for the LDV mix was assumed at 0.350 kWh/mile from the battery.

Table 11/NE grid for 2018

LDV mix

Tesla

Tesla

Grid CO2

Grid CO2

Model S

Model 3

PE

SE

kWh/mile

kWh/mile

kWh/mile

g/kWh

g/kWh

Source energy

1.2291

1.1713

0.8315

Upstream for extraction, processing, transport, etc., 10.2%

0.1138

0.1084

0.0770

Primary energy

1.1153

1.0629

0.7545

Conversion loss, 55.5%

0.6078

0.5793

0.4112

Gross electricity generation

0.5075

0.4836

0.3433

Plant self-use loss, 3.0%

0.0152

0.0145

0.0103

Net electricity generation = Fed to grid

0.4922

0.4691

0.3330

299

329

T&D loss, 7.5%

0.0369

0.0352

0.0250

Fed to wall meters, as AC

0.4553

0.4339

0.3080

323

356

Charging loss, 15% of WM

0.0683

0.0651

0.0462

Loss due to self-use, NE road/climate

0.0370

0.0359

0.0169

In batteries of a mix of LDVs, as DC

0.3500

0.3329

0.2449

420

463

APPENDIX 2

Vermont Electricity Sector CO2

 

Based on Physics, per ISO-NE: Electricity, via any wall socket, would have the NE mix of electricity; CO2 of 323 g/kWh, WM basis, PE basis, in 2018. See table 12

  

Vermont grid load is about 6 billion kWh/y

User consumption is about 6 x (1 – 0.075) = 5.55 billion kWh/y

CO2 would be 5.55 billion kWh x 323 g/kWh x 1 lb/454 g x 1 Mt/2204.62 lb = 1,791,043 Mt/y, PE basis, WM basis, in 2018

 

Based on PPAs, per VT-DPS: CO2 of the “Vermont electricity mix”, based on PPAs, yields an artificial/political value of 190,000 Mt/y in 2018, or 190000/1791043 x 323 34 g/kWh, WM basis, PE basis, in 2018 

  

See URL for GHG estimates for 2017 and 2018

https://dec.vermont.gov/sites/dec/files/aqc/climate-change/document...

 

APPENDIX 3

GMP and VT-DPS Reduce CO2

 

No CO2 is reduced by GMP signing paper PPAs with electricity generators, in-state or out-of-state.

It is unscientific for VT-DPS to calculate CO2 of the electricity sector, and CO2/kWh, based on paper PPAs, and for EAN to base CO2 reduction of ASHPs and EVs on VT-DPS numbers.

https://www.eanvt.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/EAN-report-2020-fi...

  

VT-DPS calculates CO2 of the electricity sector at 32 g/kWh for 2018, based on PPAs

ISO-NE calculates CO2 at 299 g/kWh for 2018, based on CO2 of fuel combustion. See URL page 18

 

https://dec.vermont.gov/sites/dec/files/aqc/climate-change/document...

https://www.iso-ne.com/static-assets/documents/2019/04/2017_emissio...

 

Table 12/Grid CO2/Year

1990

2000

 2015

2016

2017, est.

2018, est.

Electricity fed to VT grid, GWh

6,000

6,000

6,000

6,000

6,000

6,000

Vermont electrical sector CO2, million Mt

1.09

0.43

1.00

0.81

0.49

0.19

Total CO2, all sectors

8.65

9.7

 10.19

9.76

9.41

9.02

CO2, per VT-DPs based on PPAs, PE basis

72

167

135

82

32

CO2, per VT-DPs based on PPAs, PE basis

78

180

146

88

34

.

NE generation fed to grid, GWh

110,199

107,916

105,570

102,562

103,740

NE grid CO2, lb//MWh, PE basis

726

747

710

682

658

NE grid CO2, g/kWh, PE basis

330

339

322

310

299

NE grid CO2, g/kWh, SE basis

363

374

355

341

329

Views: 284

Comment

You need to be a member of Citizens' Task Force on Wind Power - Maine to add comments!

Join Citizens' Task Force on Wind Power - Maine

Hannah Pingree on the Maine expedited wind law

Hannah Pingree - Director of Maine's Office of Innovation and the Future

"Once the committee passed the wind energy bill on to the full House and Senate, lawmakers there didn’t even debate it. They passed it unanimously and with no discussion. House Majority Leader Hannah Pingree, a Democrat from North Haven, says legislators probably didn’t know how many turbines would be constructed in Maine."

https://pinetreewatch.org/wind-power-bandwagon-hits-bumps-in-the-road-3/

 

Maine as Third World Country:

CMP Transmission Rate Skyrockets 19.6% Due to Wind Power

 

Click here to read how the Maine ratepayer has been sold down the river by the Angus King cabal.

Maine Center For Public Interest Reporting – Three Part Series: A CRITICAL LOOK AT MAINE’S WIND ACT

******** IF LINKS BELOW DON'T WORK, GOOGLE THEM*********

(excerpts) From Part 1 – On Maine’s Wind Law “Once the committee passed the wind energy bill on to the full House and Senate, lawmakers there didn’t even debate it. They passed it unanimously and with no discussion. House Majority Leader Hannah Pingree, a Democrat from North Haven, says legislators probably didn’t know how many turbines would be constructed in Maine if the law’s goals were met." . – Maine Center for Public Interest Reporting, August 2010 https://www.pinetreewatchdog.org/wind-power-bandwagon-hits-bumps-in-the-road-3/From Part 2 – On Wind and Oil Yet using wind energy doesn’t lower dependence on imported foreign oil. That’s because the majority of imported oil in Maine is used for heating and transportation. And switching our dependence from foreign oil to Maine-produced electricity isn’t likely to happen very soon, says Bartlett. “Right now, people can’t switch to electric cars and heating – if they did, we’d be in trouble.” So was one of the fundamental premises of the task force false, or at least misleading?" https://www.pinetreewatchdog.org/wind-swept-task-force-set-the-rules/From Part 3 – On Wind-Required New Transmission Lines Finally, the building of enormous, high-voltage transmission lines that the regional electricity system operator says are required to move substantial amounts of wind power to markets south of Maine was never even discussed by the task force – an omission that Mills said will come to haunt the state.“If you try to put 2,500 or 3,000 megawatts in northern or eastern Maine – oh, my god, try to build the transmission!” said Mills. “It’s not just the towers, it’s the lines – that’s when I begin to think that the goal is a little farfetched.” https://www.pinetreewatchdog.org/flaws-in-bill-like-skating-with-dull-skates/

Not yet a member?

Sign up today and lend your voice and presence to the steadily rising tide that will soon sweep the scourge of useless and wretched turbines from our beloved Maine countryside. For many of us, our little pieces of paradise have been hard won. Did the carpetbaggers think they could simply steal them from us?

We have the facts on our side. We have the truth on our side. All we need now is YOU.

“First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.”

 -- Mahatma Gandhi

"It's not whether you get knocked down: it's whether you get up."
Vince Lombardi 

Task Force membership is free. Please sign up today!

© 2020   Created by Webmaster.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service