300 likes | 388 Views
Market Research. Energy Efficiency Baseline and Opportunities. Based on preliminary results of a report commissioned by Efficiency Maine Trust and completed by;. Study Scope. Baseline Study Energy efficiency opportunities assessment Distributed generation opportunities assessment.
E N D
Market Research Energy Efficiency Baseline and Opportunities Based on preliminary results of a report commissioned by Efficiency Maine Trust and completed by;
Study Scope • Baseline Study • Energy efficiency opportunities assessment • Distributed generation opportunities assessment
Baseline Study • Visited 133 sites • 103 commercial • Random sample of 69 plus additional surveys in key segments - Restaurants, Grocery, Retail • 30 industrial • Collected baseline information on equipment saturations, efficiency levels, efficiency attitudes • Inform assessment of opportunities
Baseline Study (cont) • Overall Commercial – 90/10* • Overall Industrial – 90/15 • Key Commercial Segments ≈ 90/20 • Grocery • Office • Restaurant • Retail * 90% confidence that results are accurate with a ±10% margin of error
Residential Sector Baseline Data • Utilized existing, available data sources including: Efficiency Maine evaluation • Reports, utility appliance saturation data, and regional survey data Efficiency Maine Trust Residential Lighting Program Evaluation: Interim Report (Cadmus)
Types of DSM Potential • Technical Potential • Complete Saturation of all technically feasible electric efficiency measures • Economic Potential • Complete saturation of all cost-effective technical potential • Used Maine-specific 2011 Avoided Cost Forecast from AESC Study for 2011-2041 • Achievable Potential • Subset of economic potential that is achievable given market barriers and length of analysis
Energy Efficiency Measures Considered • Measure list compiled based on current measures/programs currently offered by Efficiency Maine • Analysis also includes additional technologies offered by similar programs across the region • Measure list reviewed and revised by Efficiency Maine Trust prior to analysis • Total of 245 measures included across all customer classes • Residential: 37 measures • Commercial: 127 measures • Industrial: 81 measures
Quantifying Efficiency Opportunities Technical Potential Calculation Example • 530,011 * 39.5% = 209,354 homes with freezers • 209,354 * 88% = 184,232 homes with inefficient freezers • 184,232 * 100% = 184,232 (all applicable) • 184,232 * 673 kWh = 123,988,136 kWh (freezer usage) • 123,988,136 kWh * 10% = 12,398,814 kWh (savings) • 530,011 Existing Year-Round SF Homes • 39.5% of homes have stand-alone freezers • 12% of all freezers are energy efficient • 100% applicability • 673 kWh ; Standard New Freezer • 10% ; Percent savings of ENERGY STAR freezer
Determining Cost-Effectiveness • Total Resource Cost (TRC) Test • Benefits Include: • Avoided Electric Energy (including RPS, and carbon) and Capacity Costs, • Avoided non-electric fuel benefits, Water. • Costs Include: • Incremental measure costs • Program delivery costs • Administrative cost $ Benefit $ Cost > 1 Every measure with a B/C Ratio greater than 1 is cheaper than buying energy from the grid.
Maximum Achievable Potential Definition: Maximum Achievable Potential describes the economic potential that could be achieved over a given time period under the most aggressive program scenario. To reach maximum achievable potential, study assumes: 1) Very high penetration levels over the 10-yr period 2) High Incentive levels. 3) Primarily assumes a replace-on-burnout approach. 4) Assumes that installed efficiency measures persist throughout the 10-year study period
2021 Electric Energy Efficiency Opportunity Summary (All Sectors)
2021 Industrial Maximum Achievable Potential Energy Savings (as a % of 2021 Sales) by End-Use
Combined Heat and Power • Fuels considered: • Natural gas • Biogas • Biomass • Includes combined cooling heat and power (CCHP), which uses thermal output with absorption chiller for cooling • Evaluated cost effectiveness (based on TRC) • For measures with TRC B/C >1, estimated technical and achievable potential
CHP Cost Effectiveness Screening • Cost effective for most configurations: • Natural gas-fueled • Gas turbine • Reciprocating engine • Biogas-fueled • Gas turbine & microturbine • Reciprocating engine • Biomass-fueled steam turbine • Not found to be cost effective: • Natural gas-fueled microturbines • Fuel cells
CHP Analysis • Used CMP customer data to determine C&I facility types and sizes in the state • Applied data on best facility types for CHP (based on coincidence of thermal and electric loads) to determine total technical potential • Used data from other states to estimate achievable potential as a percent of technical • California Self Generation Incentive Program • Also compared with activity in Massachusetts, Vermont, New Hampshire
Biogas & Biomass CHP Analysis • Evaluated variety of sources: • EPA Landfill Methane Outreach Program • 10 sites in Maine with CHP potential • Wastewater treatment facilities • None in Maine meet recommended minimum of 5 million gallons per day • Agricultural opportunities • 8 Maine dairy farms meet recommended size for CHP • Paper/wood product manufacturing facilities • CMP data shows 18 with current demand 1+ MW • Assumed achievable potential is 10% of biomass/biogas technical potential, higher percentage than natural gas due to higher cost effectiveness
CHP – Achievable Opportunities • Likely installations over 10 years: • 22 with 12.5 MW capacity • Natural gas – 5.6 MW (18 installations) • Biogas – 700 kW (1 landfill, 1 dairy farm) • Biomass – 6.2 MW (2 paper/wood waste) • Strong outreach efforts, especially to large facilities, could further increase the installed capacity • 90 facilities in Maine with technical potential for systems of 1 MW or more