Tobias C. Schultz Ryan L. Shelby Dr. Alice M. Agogino

1. Analysis of Energy Investments with the Pinoleville-Pomo Nation:The Native American Energy Plan Analysis (NAEPA) Tool Tobias C. Schultz Ryan L. Shelby Dr. Alice M. Agogino ASME 2010 4th International Conference on Energy Sustainability May 19, 2010

2. Presentation Outline • Introduction • NAEPA Methodology • Results • Discussion • Conclusions • Future Research

3. Introduction The Pinoleville Pomo Nation (PPN) is a Native American Tribe located in Mendocino County

4. Introduction Motivation: Concerns of the Pinoleville Pomo Nation • 90,000 American Indian families are homeless or under-housed, 18% severely crowded • PPN part of these trends • HUD-financed housing provides only basic necessities • Rising heating and cooling costs • No representation of the cultural values

5. Introduction Pinoleville Pomo Nation Objectives • Financial security, for the Tribe and Tribal citizens. • Environmental stewardship and harmony. • Promotion of health and safety of Tribal citizens. • Tribal sovereignty. Tribal Energy and Land Use Sustainability (TELUS) Plan Sustainability Strategies • Retrofits to existing homes and buildings. • Construction of new homes and buildings. • Implementation of a renewable energy generation system on Tribal lands.

6. Introduction Pinoleville Pomo Nation and UC Berkeley Partnership • E10, Spring 2008 : freshmen engineering design class • Taught by Dr. Alice Agogino, GSI Ryan Shelby • Project goal: Assess the needs and design sustainable housing that could be integrated into the tribal community

7. Introduction Preliminary Roundhouse Design: completed during Spring 2008 semester Finalized Roundhouse Prototype Design • Finalized over Summer 2009; team led by Tobias Schultz and Yael Perez • Construction begins this month

8. Partnership Background Other Projects • Community Plan for Sozonni Property • Renewable Energy Generation System • Retrofit Recommendations in Lakeport Community Housing Plan Wind Solar Micro-hydro

9. NAEPA Methodology Inputs: • New Housing Design • Existing Housing Retrofits • Renewable Energy System Design Outputs: • Initial Costs • Lifetime Energy Costs • Lifetime CO2 Emissions Note: No Energy System in current version Goal: Offer design recommendations consistent with the TELUS strategies and objectives.

10. NAEPA Methodology Total Initial Costs, XI Federal Sources, Tribal Governments Construction New Equipment Tribal Members Lifetime Energy Expenditures, XR Electricity (PG&E) Propane

11. NAEPA Methodology Carbon Dioxide Emissions Components: • Equipment Manufacture: EIO-LCA • Electricity : Mix Info & Emissions Factors from Academic Research • Fuel: EIA Emissions Factors & EIO-LCA PG&E Electricity Mix Self Report: .289 kg CO2e/ kWh

12. Results Prototype Roundhouse Design Elements Geothermal Heat Pump Straw Bale Insulation Solar Hot Water Passive Home Design Photovoltaic A Solar Photovoltaic array (5 kW) will generate enough energy to power all of the home’s equipment and appliances.

13. Results Prototype Roundhouse Systems: XI, XR, and E

14. Results Community Plan: XI, XR, and E • 2 home retrofits in Lakeport, California • 2 new homes (Roundhouse design) in Ukiah • One identical, one with conventional electric HVAC and smaller SHW system

15. Discussion • Subsidiary Metrics of Cost-Effectiveness • CI: initial cost difference (USD 2009 $) • CR: lifetime energy cost difference (2009 $) • R: lifetime CO2 mitigation (metric tons CO2e)

16. Discussion • Subsidiary Metrics of Cost-Effectiveness • CIR: initial costs per unit lifetime energy cost savings • CIE: initial costs per unit CO2e reduction • CRE : Lifetime energy cost per unit CO2e reduction

17. Discussion & Conclusions • Subsidiary Metrics of Cost-Effectiveness • Roundhouse Engineered Systems Recurring expenditures • Photovoltaic array best • Geothermal heat pump worst • Initial Investments • Geothermal heat pump best • Photovoltaic array worst

18. Discussion & Conclusions • Subsidiary Metrics of Cost-Effectiveness • Community Housing Plan Initial investments • Retrofit improvements best • Cause: Inefficiency of existing buildings Recurring expenditures • Retrofit improvements best • Cause: Inefficiency of existing buildings

19. Conclusions Cost effectiveness of initial investments versus recurring expenditures • Tension between funding providers and Tribal members paying energy expenditures • Roundhouse: PV array saves the most in energy expenditures, costs most initially • GHP vice versa

20. Future Work • Database Expansion • Water Consumption • Renewable Energy Systems • Operation and Maintenance • Native American Energy Plan Optimization • New Partnerships with Other Nations • Building design • Renewable energy system design • Water conservation system design • Indoor Air Quality system design • Design of electric vehicle charging stations

21. Acknowledgments Pinoleville Pomo Nation: Leona Williams, Carrie Williams, Don Williams Erika Williams, Deborah Smith, Monica Brown, Lenora Steele David Ponton, Angela James David Edmunds, Kimberly Tallbear (UCB), Michelle Baker (EPA) UC Berkeley: Dr. Alice Agogino, Ryan Shelby, Yael Perez, Tobias Schultz Cindy Bayley, Che (Tommy) Liu, Han Chen, Larissa Korach, Alex Langer, Kevin Haninger Francesca Francia, Bach Tuyet Nguyen, Dave Rhoads, Yao Yuan, Aaron Chang

22. Web: http://www.planetcares.org/ http://pomo.planetcares.org/ Ryan Shelby website: http://www.ryanlshelby.com/ Contact: Tobias Schultz tobias.schultz@berkeley.edu http://best.berkeley.edu/~schultz

23. Back-Up Slides

24. Introduction Innovation Workshop 2008 • Goal: Understand needs and brainstorm concepts with PPN. • Split Groups: • Elders • Adults • Youth • Brainstorming

25. Introduction Retrofit Investigation • Investigated retrofit options for homes in Lakeport, California • Need to perform energy audits Energy consumption of various improvements in insulation.

26. NAEPA Methodology • User Interface in Excel Spreadsheet • Database of engineering systems constructed from prior work • Currently data only for home design • Designed to interface with software tools (climate, heating load calculations, etc.) • Parameter list in Appendix

27. Introduction • Other Projects • Design of Renewable Energy Portfolio System Underway Wind Solar Micro-hydro Go Back

28. Electricity Mix • 2) Carnegie Mellon University Green Design Institute. (2009) Economic Input-Output Life Cycle Assessment (EIO-LCA) US 1997 model [Internet], Available from: <http://www.eiolca.net/> [Accessed 18 Nov, 2009] • 8) Energy Information Administration. “Voluntary Reporting of Greenhouse Gases Program: Fuel and Energy Source Codes and Emissions Coefficients.” Web.Nov. 18, 2009. <http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/1605/coefficients.html>. • 20) Pacca, S., and A. Horvath. “Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Building and Operating Electric Power Plants in the Upper Colorado River Basin.” Environ. Sci. Technol., 2002, 36 (14). • 21) Pacific Gas and Electric. “PG&E Corporation 2008 Corporate Responsibility Report.”Web.Nov. 19, 2009. <http://www.pgecorp.com/corp_responsibility/reports/2006/index.html>. Go Back

29. NAEPA Methodology • User Interface in Excel Spreadsheet • Database of engineering systems constructed from prior work • Currently data only for home design • Designed to interface with software tools (climate, heating load calculations, etc.) • Parameter list in Appendix Go Back

30. Prototype Roundhouse Design Elements Go Back

31. Results Go Back Community Plan: Retrofit Design Elements

32. Results Community Plan by Housing Unit: XI, XR, and E Back

33. Subsidiary Metrics CIE, CIR, CRE Subsidiary metrics for roundhouse project. Subsidiary metrics for community housing plan project. Back