| Air Pollution Prevention Forum Meeting
May 31 - June 1, 2000, San Francisco, CA
The AP2 Forum met in San Francisco, CA on May 31 - June
1, 2000. This was the fifth full meeting of the Forum.
Joining co-chairs Hap Boyd (Enron Wind Corporation) and
Jeff Burks (UT-DNR) at the meeting were the following Forum
members: Alan Davis (MT DEQ); Rich Ferguson (CEERT); Trisha
Frank (Manzanita Tribe); Cathy Ghandehari (representing Bill
Becker - DOE Denver Regional Office); Van Jamison (Jamison
Consulting); John Nielsen (LAW Fund); Terry O'Connor (Arch
Coal); Amanda Ormond (AZ Energy Office); Julie Simpson (Nez
Perce Tribe). New Forum members attending the meeting included:
Carl Blumstein (LBNL); Bob Green (Kennecott Energy); John
Savage (OR Energy Office); Rich Sperberg (Onsite Energy);
and Dick Watson (NWPPC).
Also in attendance were Doug Larson and Dale DeCesare of
the Western Interstate Energy Board who are providing technical
support to the Forum. Others attending and participating
in the meeting included: Blair Swezey from the National Renewable
Energy Laboratory; Mark Case a consultant from the State
of Utah; and Kathy Augustine from the Nevada State Controller's
office who was representing the WRAP Communications Committee.
The Forum also listened to presentations provided by: Brad
Barber (Utah Office of Planning and Budget); Steve Cochrane
(Regional Financial Associates); Ernst Worrell (Lawrence
Berkeley National Laboratory); Mike Messenger (California
Energy Commission); David Goldstein (Natural Resources Defense
Council); David Nichols (Tellus Institute); Jim McMahon (Lawrence
Berkeley National Laboratory); Fred Palmer (Greening Earth
Society); and Jonathan Koomey (Lawrence Berkeley National
- Rich Ferguson agreed to incorporate the
information from the impact analysis spreadsheets developed
by John Nielsen into the Forum's renewables report.
The Forum also agreed to include the spreadsheets and
supply curve information in an appendix to the report.
- The Forum agreed that co-chairs Hap Boyd and
Jeff Burks would send a letter to the
WRAP discussing the fact that transportation and mobile
source energy efficiency recommendations need to be
developed by the WRAP, but that the AP2 Forum is not
the appropriate avenue to use in developing such recommendations.
- John Nielsen agreed to contact
Kevin Golden concerning the work of the WRAP Modeling Forum
and how the AP2 Forum's renewable energy/energy efficiency
recommendations can be translated into visibility benefits.
Nielsen will then discuss with the AP2 Forum co-chairs
the possibility of drafting a formal letter of request
to the Modeling Forum to conduct such work.
- Blair Swezey agreed to address
the following issues in refining the supply curve analysis
for renewables which was presented at the meeting:
- What are the land requirements for the amount of
new wind facilities involved?
- Are all of the four sub-regions included in the supply
- In order to more accurately determine costs, the Forum
requested more detailed information of where wind resources
are located within the sub-regions and what the quality
of those resources are. The Forum was also interested
in knowing the amount of Class 6 or above wind power
which is located in each of the sub-regions discussed
in the supply curves.
- Jeff Burks agreed to provide
a write up on net metering for Section III of the Forum's
The meeting began with an overview provided
by co-chair Jeff Burks concerning the Air Pollution
Prevention (AP2) Forum's work.
Burks also provided an overview of:
- The Grand Canyon Visibility Transport Commission;
- The Western Regional Air Partnership; and
- The Environmental Protection Agency's Regional Haze Rule.
The Forum next heard from two panelists concerning
changes in the demographics and economy in the WRAP region.
Brad Barber (Utah Office of Planning and Budget) discussed
numerous demographic and societal trends which are likely
to impact the future of the West, including: changing political
institutions, changing family/household compositions, increasing
life expectancy, increasing ethnic diversity, changing technologies,
increased globalization and global competition, and rising
standards of living. Barber also stated that:
- The Rocky Mountain region is the fastest growing region
in the country. The 5-17 age group in this region has grown
by 10 percent in recent years. The West will be impacted
by the "third wave" (the children of the baby
boomers starting to have children).
- The West is facing an "urban/rural" conundrum
whereby technology advances (such as the Internet and increased
telecommuting opportunities) and increased wealth have
caused some migration from urban to rural areas. At the
same time however, in other areas of the West where there
are few opportunities for employment, many people are moving
from rural to urban areas.
- Many "edge communities" around western metro
areas are growing at the fastest rates. This may be due
to the fact that many people want to get away from the
city but still stay close enough to services which urban
areas can provide. Such spread out growth is already causing
sprawl and increased driving and pollution impacts.
- The West is well positioned to take advantage of the "New
Economy." According to Utah's "State New Economy
Scores," five of the top ten states are in the West,
which is much higher than any other single region in the
country. The West will need to rethink tax structure and
how Internet sales impact the tax base of state and local
governments. The region will also likely need to wrestle
with how to take care of infrastructure development needs
in the face of potential reduced tax revenues.
- By implementing intelligent growth strategies, emissions
can be reduced. Infrastructure costs can be reduced as
well (fewer roads, smaller roads, a better linked transit
system, reduced sewage building). Growth will likely not
be managed successfully by some "regional growth czar" or
by some regional solution arrived at by "experts." Effective
solutions are likely to best evolve at the local level.
- With increased wealth, new problems have been created
by the demand for larger homes on larger lots. It is very
expensive to provide infrastructure for this type of spread
out lifestyle which creates heavy demands on water, energy,
and land-use needs. The cost of constructing additional
highways can also be enormous. Awareness of such infrastructure
costs comes largely through increased property taxes. Major
discussions on tax increases to accommodate growth are
coming in the near future. The booming economy in the West
has helped to handle some of these issues for the time
being, but major problems could occur if and when the economy
- Growth in the West brings many challenges. Barber outlined
five major strategies to deal with such growth:
- Co-invest in developing appropriate workforce skills;
- Co-invest in developing an infrastructure for innovation
(fiber optics, transportation, etc...);
- Foster transformation to the "new digital economy;"
- Promote more innovative and consumer-oriented government
(including such measures as streamlining the regulation
of high-tech industries); and
- Promote civic collaboration to maintain quality
- See the following address for more information: http://www.nga.org/Pubs/IssueBriefs/2000/GrowingPains.asp
Steve Cochrane (Regional Financial Associates) also
gave a presentation (PPT)
on economic trends in the West.
Cochrane stated that:
- No state in the nation is currently losing jobs and that
most major western metro areas are also growing as well.
- More than half of the new "Internet Economy" is
in the West and seventy percent of market capitalization
for Internet related firms comes from the Western region.
This heavy Internet presence is a big advantage that the
West should enjoy over the long term, however this also
means there will be more volatility in the region's economy.
The West continues to lead the country in high-tech jobs
and is projected to continue to do so out until 2030.
- Venture capital funds are important to the West in particular.
Public policies should be designed to accommodate venture
capitalists. Venture capital is focusing particularly on
Colorado, California and Washington.
- Despite rising interest rates, construction of homes
in California will continue because supply has not met
demand in any of that state's metro areas. In most of the
rest of the West construction rates should slow down and
be more balanced in the next 4-5 years.
- Areas with low business costs will have a comparative
advantage. Such costs include labor, energy, tax burden
and office space rents. A stronger forecast of growth is
projected for mountain states, which currently have lower
costs than the Pacific West. The mountain states are expected
to see the fastest job growth in the country.
- Western population is projected to grow more than one
third in the next 30 years, shifting from 23% of the U.S.
total to 26% of the U.S. total.
- Over the next 30 years, the average age of the overall
population in the West will increase.
- The more traditional industrial sectors in the West (such
as mining) are employing fewer and fewer people all the
time. With regard to energy consumption, it appears that
the energy required to run equipment is being continually
reduced. Over time these industries will require less and
less energy per unit of output.
- Farming will continue to be very important in California
largely because many of its agricultural products are not
grown anywhere else. Agriculture in other parts of the
West is more open to global competition and may see greater
decline. An additional constraint in the West is the lack
of water in the region for irrigation.
- Manufacturing will likely remain stable in the West.
Manufacturing of higher added-value goods is more likely
to grow than manufacturing of lower added-value goods.
As goods become cheaper to produce, they will likely gravitate
towards being produced outside of the region or abroad.
- Commercial facilities such as warehousing are locating
in states where there is cheap employment and where there
are low or no sales taxes.
- RFA models are focused on employment figures, but do
not take into account quality of life measurements which
are important but difficult to measure. QOL can strongly
affect migration patterns within the country. The West
generally would rank high in QOL measurements.
Mike Messenger of the California Energy Commission gave
a presentation (PPT)
on new and emerging energy efficient technologies. Messenger
focused his discussion on commercial and residential emerging
energy efficiency technologies, and provided information
in his presentation concerning:
- The difficulty of predicting which new technologies will
be successful in the future. Of 20 emerging technologies
which California targeted as high priorities in 1992, only
five have been commercialized or incorporated into codes
or standards. The most common failure of these technologies
is that the energy savings were either overstated or that
the market for the technology failed to materialize. (See: "Review
of the Market Fate of the 21 high priority energy efficiency
technologies"for California in 1992 DOC )
- There are several promising emerging technologies, including:
ducts designed into conditioned space, aeroseal for duct
leakage improvements; cycling controls integrated into
billing/metering systems; and high efficiency dish washers.
With regard to industrial technologies, Messenger identified
the development of amorphous steel for motors which could
increase motor efficiency from 92% to 97%. This technology
is not yet available but could have tremendous efficiency
potential in view of the fact that motors consume approximately
15% of the power used in the U.S.
- Regarding emerging lighting technologies, Messenger stated
that innovations in lighting are being driven by technology
and not by standards.
- Energy efficiency services: Messenger stated that increased
efficiency potential can be found in commissioning programs
for residential and commercial buildings whereby buildings
are tested during construction to ensure that ducts and
thermostats are all functioning properly. Such inspections
are much cheaper to accomplish during construction rather
than waiting until after the building is completed. With
regard to promoting the use of building performance contractors,
Messenger stated that the government can help by certifying
a list of approved contractors in order to boost consumer
confidence in using such services.
- The electronic/information revolution is likely to drive
the growth in emerging efficiency technologies. Since energy
likely will remain a low priority for most projects, Messenger
pointed to the need for finding ways of bundling energy
efficiency technologies with growth sectors such as Internet/information
Ernst Worrell of the Lawrence Berkeley National
Laboratory discussed emerging energy efficiency
technologies in the industrial sector. According to Worrell:
- The U.S. has been slower than other countries in adopting
new energy efficiciency technologies. The efficiency of
generating power in the U.S. is still very low compared
to most other industrialized countries. This is due in
large part to the continued use of older, coal-fired power
- The "Clean Energy Futures Study" by LBNL is
due in July or August. The study looks at: scrap preheating
and thin slab casting (a technology originally developed
in Germany). These technologies also greatly reduced production
costs. Productivity, not energy efficiency, is what was
truly driving the development of these new technologies.
The technologies that reduce production costs are the ones
which tend to be the most successful. Any efficiency benefits
which accrue tend to be of secondary concern.
- There are numerous emerging energy-efficient technologies
identified in several industrial sectors, including aluminum,
electronics, food processing, glass, iron and steel, mining,
oil refining, plastics, pulp and paper, and textiles (see
presentation slide number 12).
- The use of "voluntary agreements" and other
supporting policies can be an effective tool for governments
or regulating agencies to use to encourage energy efficiency
practices and technologies (see presentation slides 15-18).
Worrell identified several "key policies"for
residential and commercial buildings as well as for the
transportation and electricity sectors (see slide 22).
The Forum also heard presentations from a series of three
additional experts on energy efficiency. David Goldstein
of the Natural Resources Defense Council discussed
several issues, including:
- Certain policies, such as building standards, can only
be pursued at the state level. In California, building
standards are making large energy savings and are an effective
policy. States should consider adoption of National Model
Standards. States should also consider going beyond the
- With regard to appliance and equipment efficiency standards,
states are not preempted by the federal government in several
areas. Such standards can be an effective policy mechanism
for promoting energy efficiency (eg., elimination of inefficient
and unsafe halogen torchiere lamps).
- The development of public benefits charges to support
energy efficiency is an effective tool which can be enacted
at the state level and which can generally produce a two-to-one
- Market transformation programs need to provide large
targets and last for a long period of time to produce any
real change in industrial practices. Market transformation
can be done in the utility system through public benefits
charges. Tax incentives can also be provided at either
the state or federal levels to encourage market transformation.
Currently the NRDC is proposing a 6-year tax incentive.
- With regard to the transportation sector: Legislation
taxing higher emitting vehicles higher than lower emitting
vehicles can be an effective policy tool. Such legislation
passed in California but was later vetoed by the governor.
Varying urban design can also drastically reduce the number
of miles driven per year. Also, location-efficient mortgages
have been introduced in San Francisco, Los Angeles and
soon in Chicago. Such mortgages take into account cost
savings from location in offsetting the monthly mortgage
Jim McMahon of Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory followed
with an additional presentation (PPT)
According to McMahon:
- Forecasting models do not take into account attitudes
and consumer behavior. Consumers seem to be very concerned
about the environment however it is not clear that this
attitude is impacting behavior significantly as of yet.
- To be effective, policies need to be very product specific
and should include an examination of the market involved.
The success with increasing the efficiency of refrigerators
should be used as a model for other technologies.
- Labels and appliance standards work well together and
should be designed to work in tandem to create greater
- Policies must be of sufficient duration to cause the
private sector to make the desired changes/improvements.
- It can be important to determine whether different age
groups will be impacted differently by the proposed policy.
David Nichols of the Tellus Institute was
the final presenter of the day.
- Slide Presentation DOC
- "What is a Policy Maker To Do?: A Selective Discussion
of Policies on Efficiency" (DOC)provided
by Nichols at the meeting.
Nichols' presentation focused on several areas, including:
- Two areas on which policymakers should focus their efficiency
efforts are new construction and combined heat and power
opportunities. One option is for states to develop a combined
heat and power portfolio standard.
- State building codes and standards and state public benefit
funding are two major policy tools available to states
to promote energy efficiency.
- Market interventions should be examined as a means of
Following the panel presentations, the Forum conducted a
question and answer session. Several comments were offered,
- Rich Sperberg commented that there has not been a cogeneration
market in California since 1988. There is interest in combined
heat and power, but there is not presently a viable market
for it in the U.S.
- Mike Messenger stressed the need to understand the market
before doing an intervention and the need to set clear
goals that encourage innovation at the implementation level.
He also advised that programs should not be funded until
it is clear what the indicators are to measure/prove the
success of the program. Messenger indicated that greater
opportunity for efficiency gains can be found in the transportation
sector as opposed to the electricity generation sector.
He recommended several policy strategies to promote energy
- Change the way the next generation of consumers thinks
about energy and the environment and how using energy
impacts air and the environment. This would include
adoption of school-age education programs.
- Implement specific courses for architects and engineers
in state universities and create state-sponsored competitions
on designing buildings.
- Seniors are in an ideal position to lead growth planning
seminars at the local level. Take advantage of demographic
data to determine where seniors will stand with a particular
- Certify energy construction techniques in home building
(something equivalent to Energy Star).
- Adopt a policy where residential customers can see
time-of-use prices. This will allow people to actually
adjust their energy uses accordingly.
- Support adoption of public benefit charges. Private
companies cannot capture certain types of benefits
because they will not be able to recover these investments
in today's market. Messenger recommended a 2-3% charge.
- David Nichols had three major policy recommendations:
- Implement public benefits charges to promote energy
- Implement a statewide building standards program
similar to California's; and
- Create a cluster of programs promoting combined heat
and power programs. Nichols did not believe focusing
on seniors to lead growth seminars at the local level
as suggested by Mike Messenger would be as effective.
- Jim McMahon made several recommendations to promote energy
- Consumers need to be able to see and be aware of
energy prices for markets to work properly;
- Mandatory government agency energy efficiency standards
can help by displaying a positive example of the importance
of implementing energy efficiency measures;
- Change the way the next generation of consumers thinks
about energy and the environment and how using energy
impacts air and the environment. This would include
adoption of school-age education programs;
- Place an emphasis on developing combined heat and
- Implement public benefits charges to promote energy
efficiency programs. Such charges can be coordinated
on a regional basis to achieve more market leverage;
- Building codes and standards continue to be valuable
tools to increase the efficiency with which energy
is consumed; and
- Performance-based solutions are generally the most
- Ernst Worrell recommended that:
- A portfolio of both long and short-term policies
is needed to make significant energy efficiency gains;
- States should explore implementation of voluntary
agreements to promote energy efficiency;
- Labeling programs can be effective especially with
regard to energy efficiency in appliances;
- Combined heat and power programs can be effective;
- Training and education is important especially for
changing long-term attitudes with regard to energy
- Research and development funded by public benefit
charges is an effective policy option as long as funding
is channeled to the proper places; and
- Energy audits and other follow up activities are
necessary to ensure that any required changes are implemented
- Steve Cochrane re-emphasized that the West will continue
to be the largest growth area in the country, and that
the region will see a continuing need for new infrastructure.
This fact provides numerous opportunities with regard to
land-use planning and urban development. Cochrane also
indicated that the large size of western states translates
to larger state markets and greater opportunities to use
market-based policies to solve problems.
- Van Jamison indicated that most legislatures are not
aware of the successes involved with some current energy
efficiency policies. Jamison pointed to the improvements
achieved with refrigerators as an example of a successful
efficiency policy and said it would be helpful to make
policymakers aware of such successes.
- Alan Davis stated that he believes the key is to create
markets for efficiency, and to develop policies that create
and enhance an energy efficiency market.
- David Goldstein was not certain that markets would work
properly by themselves to adequately promote efficiency
and that government programs such as rebates and mandates
are still necessary. Goldstein also believed increasing
the education of the public on energy issues could be an
important way to promote energy efficiency.
- Amanda Ormond and John Savage agreed that, in developing
policies to promote energy efficiency, the Forum's focus
should be on state-level policies as opposed to region-wide
On the second day of the meeting, the Forum heard from a
panel discussing alternate views on the impact of the
Internet on energy consumption in the West. The panelists
included Fred Palmer from the Greening Earth
Society and Jonathan Koomey from Lawrence
Berkeley National Laboratories.
Palmer stated that:
- Demand for power in the U.S. is outstripping supply.
Supply side electricity problems have clearly been developing
over the past few years.
- There is a close correlation between electricity usage
and wealth. The large supply of cheap electricity, provided
in large part by coal-fired power plants, has helped fuel
the boom of productivity in the economy. Such cheap electricity
will be needed to maintain the country's current economic
- The National Academy of Sciences in 1986 called for a
focus on reducing the price of electricity. This resulted
in construction of many of the new coal-fired plants in
the late 1970s early 1980s.
- Retirements of nuclear plants and increasing energy demands
which are being created by the booming economy and the
growth of the Internet mean that many more new power plants
will need to be built. At the current time, many of these
new plants are likely to be natural gas-fired plants. The
report by Mark Mills' ("The Internet Begins
with Coal.") shows that Intel projects one billion
people online in approximately the next seven years. This
would result in an average of a new 197,000 Internet customers
per day coming online. This massive increase in Internet
use will mean that more cheap electricity will be needed.
Jonathan Koomey (LBNL) presented an alternative
view on the impact of the Internet on energy consumption.
Koomey stated that:
- His work has focused on energy usage in office equipment.
The aggregate net impact of office equipment in the U.S.
is at 2%. LBNL is examining the issues of power usage by
all computers, and is not limiting its analysis to the
energy consumed by usage of the Internet alone. LBNL has
come up with estimates of energy usage for all office equipment
across the country. This data should be produced in the
next few weeks.
- In addressing the assumptions made by Mark Mills' with
regard to the Internet's impact on electricity consumption,
LBNL found that: 1) Claims in computer usage by the Mills'
article were flawed. The Mills' article claimed that, including
all the "behind the wall" networking equipment,
electricity usage would be around 1,000 watts per computer.
LBNL studied its own extensive office network and came
up with around 140 or so watts per PC (including network
equipment); 2) Claims of electricity used by telephone
systems and mainframe computers were also too high.
- The LBNL analysis reduced Mills' energy use prediction
values by a factor of eight.
- In addition, the potential "systemic effects" of
information technology (reduced office space due to telecommuting,
reduced retail space in favor of increased warehouse space
used by Internet-based businesses) could have far-reaching
societal effects that actually reduce the overall amount
of energy consumed by the nation.
- Growth in the economy is not necessarily dependent on
growth in electricity use. In recent years growth rates
in electricity has slowed while at the same time GDP has
gone up (although potentially 25% of this reduction in
energy use may be due to mild weather patterns).
- Growth in the use of smaller computers and laptops (which
use less electricity than larger machines) could also decrease
the future amount of energy consumed.
- For more information, visit the Network for Energy, Environment,
Efficiency and the Information Economy at http://n4e.lbl.gov.
Both panelists also responded to several questions from
- In response to a question on whether the Forum should
pursue recommendations to increase energy efficiency measures
in the computing/information technology arenas, Koomey
recommended that the Forum tie into national programs such
as the Energy Star label. Palmer advised that the Forum
talk to people in the information technology sector to
see what can be done to develop energy efficiency measures.
- In response to a question on the Internet's impact on
land use patterns, Koomey said that LBNL is currently examining
anecdotal case studies on this subject but does not have
any hard data as of yet. Koomey said that more data collection
is needed to better determine the Internet's impact on
land usage. He added that AT&T is currently putting
together pilot studies on the impact of telecommuting,
and that companies generally turn to telecommuting for
economic reasons and not to save energy. Palmer stated
that he believes it may be too late to focus efforts into
land-use planning because much of the West has already
been built out.
Following this panel, the Forum heard a presentation
from Forum member Rich Ferguson on "The Public Value
of Load Reductions in the California Market."
Forum Discussion on Energy Efficiency Measures to
Offset Fossil Generation and to Reduce Regional Haze
- Van Jamison proposed that the Forum's work should proceed
along two lines: 1) Promote policies to promote energy
efficiency throughout the West; and 2) Address how state
air directors can integrate potential energy efficiency
recommendations into their SIPs for the Regional Haze Rule.
States will need assistance with the accounting procedures
necessary to show "reasonable progress" towards
reaching the 60 year glide path goal of reducing emissions
under the Rule.
- Rich Ferguson stated that the Forum should focus its
work on recommending energy savings, and not attempt to
quantify the effects on haze from reduced emissions.
- The Forum agreed that mobile source emissions were a
key area to address in reducing regional haze, however
a consensus was reached that the AP2 Forum was not the
appropriate venue for addressing such issues. The Forum
agreed that a letter should be sent from the co-chairs
to the WRAP recommending that mobile source concerns be
- The Forum discussed the importance of developing and
incorporating marketing strategies for promoting energy
efficiency measures. Such marketing strategies would focus
on highlighting other benefits which accrue from implementing
energy efficiency programs (aside from saving energy) such
as increased employee retention, reduced absenteeism and
others. Such benefits would all have higher value to private
companies than saving energy and could therefore be more
easily marketed. Focusing on improving the workplace by
building a "quality work environment" (in which
energy efficiency measures are used) may be more politically
saleable as well. It was suggested that Margaret Gardner
of the Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance would be a
good source of knowledge on these issues. Forum members
could also visit http://www.betterbricks.com for
additional ideas. It was also suggested that the Forum
should examine recommendations which could place suppliers
of energy efficiency with timely information on those products
which are needed the most.
- It was suggested that the Forum should start by looking
at what types of energy efficiency programs are already
in place in western states. The Forum could use this baseline
to then better gauge the appropriate areas to emphasize
in making its recommendations. Cathy Ghandehari has provided
Forum staff with initial information on state energy efficiency
- The Forum agreed that its energy efficiency recommendations
should not focus solely on the demand side, but on the
supply side as well. As an example, Terry O'Connor pointed
out that Senator Frank Murkowski has proposed a bill to
provide tax credits for coal producers that implement certain
energy efficiency measures.
- Co-chair Jeff Burks suggested that a small work group
be formed to develop a work plan for the entire Forum to
utilize in developing its energy efficiency recommendations.
The Forum next discussed the Third Draft
of its renewables report.
- Blair Swezey (NREL) gave a presentation
on renewable energy supply curves which have been developed
by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory for the AP2
Forum's work. Swezey said the supply curve models were
built for carbon analysis and only compare renewables to
existing fossil generation. The analysis does not include
nuclear plants. Swezey said that the analysis shows that
there are sufficient renewable resources in the West to
supply and replace fossil fuels. However, the supply curves
do not take into account important factors such as transmission
constraints or other infrastructural costs and restraints
that would be involved. Click here
for Swezey's presentation. (Other materials supplied
by Swezey, including the supply curve assumptions and analysis
were included in the briefing materials.)
The Forum developed a series of additional questions for
NREL to address regarding the supply curves. These questions
are included in this summary under the "Forum Actions" heading.
- The Forum discussed several suggested changes to the
renewables report offered by Forum member Bill Becker.
With regard to the inclusion of solar thermal heating systems
for buildings, the Forum decided to attempt to address
these technologies in its energy efficiency recommendations.
With regard to assessing whether new renewables would be
competing mostly with new natural gas power plants, the
Forum decided that to make a thorough assessment of this
topic would require an extensive modeling effort that would
be beyond the Forum's means at the current time. With regard
to including information on Federal programs in the report,
the Forum decided not to include such information in order
to maintain the focus on state government-level programs.
With regard to the suggestion to move the Forum's recommendations
to the front of the renewables report, the Forum discussed
the fact that the recommendations are currently included
in the document's executive summary. Cathy Ghandehari agreed
to discuss this item with Bill Becker.
- John Nielsen discussed an updated spreadsheet
analysis which he has developed to help determine
the costs and benefits associated with the implementation
of the Forum's major recommendations with regard to renewables.
Nielsen said that the spreadsheet shows that an aggressive
RPS/SBC would be needed in order to achieve significant
growth in renewable energy production. These findings
support the recommendations which are already in the
Forum's renewables report. The RPS/SBC should be additionally
bolstered by effective green marketing and federal agency
purchasing programs. The Forum discussed the possibility
of including in the final renewables report more information
on how dollars generated from a SBC should be spent. Rich
Ferguson agreed to work on incorporating the information
in the spreadsheets into the renewables report.
The Forum also agreed to include the spreadsheets and
supply curve information into an appendix to the report.
The meeting was adjourned.
AP2 Forum Scoping of Energy Efficiency in the WRAP Region
Marines Memorial Club Hotel
San Francisco, California
May 31-June 1, 2000
Wednesday, May 31
8:30 a.m. - Background on the Western Regional Air Partnership
and the Air Pollution Prevention (AP2) Forum's energy efficiency
- Jeff Burks/Hap Boyd, Co-Chairs, AP2 Forum
9:30 a.m. - Changes in the economy in the WRAP region The
purpose of this discussion is to understand the future demographic
and economic changes in the WRAP region that could significantly
affect energy consumption patterns and thus opportunities
to improve the efficiency with which energy is used. To understand
these changes the Forum will be briefed by Brad Barber, Director
of the Utah Office of Planning and Budget. The Forum will
also be briefed by a representative of the financial community.
As with all of the presentations at the meeting, the speakers
are asked to focus on both the near-term (e.g., 2005) and
the longer term (2015, 2020).
Key Questions: Will the WRAP states continue
the rapid growth in population of recent years? What will
be the age and income distribution of the population in
the WRAP region? What will be the geographic distribution
(by state and by urban, suburban, and rural)? Are we likely
to see significant changes in the places people live (e.g.,
city-based lofts as opposed to green field, urban fringe
subdivisions) and work? What will be the major changes
in the economy in the WRAP region? Will the trend away
from extractive industries (e.g., mining, logging) continue?
Will manufacturing grow or shrink? What new industries
will arise? What impact will the "Internet" (i.e., information
technologies) have on the type and way in which work is
done? Will these economic changes be uniformly spread among
the WRAP states or wil they be focused in specific areas?
- Brad Barber, Utah Office of Planning and Budget
- Steve Cochrane, Regional Financial Associates
11:00 a.m. - New energy-efficient technologies
The purpose of this discussion is to understand the impact
of potential technology changes in the next five to 15-20
years on the efficiency with which energy is produced, transported
and used. Representatives of the Electric Power Research
Institute, the Gas Research Institute and the national labs
are being invited to brief the Forum on potential technological
Key questions: What new energy efficiency and
energy production technologies are likely to penetrate
the market place over the next five and 15-20 years? What
role will distributed generation play? To what extent is
the penetration of new technologies dependent on: (1) government
standards (e.g., appliance efficiency standards); (2) changes
in the market place to provide better price signals to
consumers (e.g., real-time electricity prices, individual
metering of office and apartment buildings, pay-at-the-pump
auto insurance); (3) information to consumers (e.g., product
labeling); (4) consumer education, government-sponsored
R&D; and (5) state and federal government financial incentives)?
What are the major uncertainties (natural gas prices, carbon
constraints, consumer tastes, economic growth and the attendant
turnover of existing equipment and building stocks)? Are
there any major technology breakthroughs that could radically
alter the outlook for energy production and use technologies
(e.g., widespread use of superconductivity, molecular-based
computer chips, "fusion in a jar")?
- Steven Gehl, Electric Policy Research Institute (tentative)
- Jonathan Koomey, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
12:30 p.m. - Lunch
1:30 p.m. - Expert Panel to Offer Views and Advice to
The purpose of this discussion is to tap the knowledge
and opinions of experts on the impact that demographic, economic,
environmental, lifestyle and technological changes in the
WRAP region will have on energy production and consumption
in 2005 and 2015. This information will provide the basis
for the Forum's decision on the direction of its work on
energy efficiency. The discussion will include several initial
presentations on topics that may not have been addressed
earlier in the day (e.g., policy options for increasing energy
efficiency such as tax policy and emissions policy, the feasibility
of construction of new generation and transmission). Thereafter,
the previous presenters on demographics, economics and technology
will address the key questions below. Substantial expertise
exists among members of the Forum and Forum members will
have an opportunity to offer their views on future opportunities
for energy efficiency given the changes underway in the WRAP
Key questions: How will the demographic, economic
and technological changes in the WRAP region affect energy
consumption patterns? What new opportunities for energy efficiency
result from changes in consumption patterns? What are the
barriers to capitalizing on those opportunities? What actions
could be taken to overcome those barriers?
What are the potential "drivers" that may affect the
interest in improving energy efficiency (e.g., power outages,
climate change concerns, money savings)? What are the future
energy efficiency opportunities in generation and end use
of energy, and what are the barriers to capitalizing on
such opportunities. What policies are available to overcome
those barriers (e.g., utility regulatory programs, market
transformation, state/national/industry standards, tax
policy, emission markets, system benefit charges)?
- Ralph Cavanaugh, Natural Resources Defense Council
- David Nichols, Tellus Institute
- Jim McMahon, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (tentative)
- Representative from the Rocky Mountain Institute (tentative)
Respondents: Brad Barber, Steve Cochrane, Steven
Gehl, Jonathan Koomey
5:00 p.m. - Recess
Thursday, June 1
8:30 a.m. - Alternative Views of How the Internet May
Affect Energy Consumption
- Fred Palmer, Greening Earth Society
- Joe Romm, Center for Energy and Climate Solutions (tentative)
10:00 a.m. - AP2 Forum discussion
- Next steps on energy efficiency
- Directions to staff
12:00 p.m. - Lunch
1:30 pm. - Review of the Third Draft of the Renewables
4:00 p.m. - Adjourn