It’s no wonder that in Texas we have come to expect our lights to turn on, our computers to be charged, and our offices and businesses to have power everyday.  Why would we expect anything less?  Everything from our power generation, to our wires and transmission companies, are the most reliable in the world.  Texas’ grid operator, ERCOT, manages the grid with precision and accountability.

Texas is the only state in the Union with it’s own electric grid, managed by Texans, for Texans.  Take a minute to watch this video and visit www.texasishot.org to learn what you can do to conserve energy, easing demand on the Texas Electric grid, and save money on your electric bill.

The Story of What Powers Your Life

Senate Business and Commerce Testimony August 2010

It’s time our state government got serious about energy efficiency and consolidated its random energy efficiency efforts into one agency that will focus on nothing else. Because what we have now is not working.

It’s an annual fact of life in Texas: When the mercury creeps toward triple digits, our electric bills soar, too.

It’s also a fact that the cheapest kilowatt of electricity is the one you don’t have to use. Now, no one is suggesting that Texans go without our air-conditioning — or even that we set our thermostats so high that we spend the summer perspiring and panting like a dog under a shade tree. But staying comfortable doesn’t mean we should simply bite the bullet as our electric bills continue to climb.

Study after study shows that a dollar invested in energy efficiency pays off 2 or 3 to 1. And that’s money in Texans’ pockets. We’re not talking about deprivation here, we’re talking about maintaining our lifestyles and saving money. We’re talking about better insulation, double-paned windows, better circulation, timer thermostats, energy-efficient appliances, innovations like rooftop water heaters, even strategically placed shade trees that will not just keep your dog cooler but your house, too, and dozens of other commonsense measures we can do as alternatives to soaring utility bills and building more and more power plants.

Our state government has paid lip service to energy efficiency (EE) but to say it’s been a low priority is putting it mildly. Municipally owned utilities like Austin Energy and San Antonio’s CPS Energy are doing a good job of promoting energy efficiency. They provide home energy audits and give generous rebates and other incentives to customers who want to invest in efficiency measures that will cut their electric bills. Some customer-owned rural electric co-ops are also ahead of the curve in promoting greater efficiency. But private, investor-owned utility companies are another story. Perhaps because they profit from increased consumption, most power companies lag far behind municipal and co-op utilities in helping their customers use less electricity.

Under current law, the Public Utility Commission (PUC), the agency in charge of regulating most of the state’s “poles and wires” companies, is supposed to review and approve the EE programs of the utilities. But other state agencies oversee EE programs, too, including the Department of Housing & Community Affairs and the State Energy Conservation Office, a division of the Comptroller’s Office. Consolidating these efforts into one agency with a clear mandate to promote EE would streamline state regulation and create more savings potential for Texas consumers and businesses. As things stand now, the PUC’s negative attitude toward energy efficiency is holding Texas back.

Over the past year and a half, the PUC staff has worked on plans to increase the state’s EE goals. On July 30, however, the three PUC commissioners, all appointees of Gov. Rick Perry, slashed the staff proposal dramatically. They reduced the efficiency goal from 1 percent of peak demand by 2014 to just one-third of the growth in demand by 2013 — a much smaller increase and, in fact, barely above the goal already in place. The PUC has even proposed curtailing the amount utilities can spend on efficiency measures. This makes no sense. In the past four years, there have been at least four internal PUC and independent reports that show Texas can achieve more energy efficiency. Every one shows that efficiency saves consumers money and has an investment payback of 2 or 3 to 1. It’s time for the Legislature to take control and create a new, independent state agency that can put consumers first. Water and natural gas efficiency programs could also be included to create a one-stop shop for efficiency information. If Texans are given the facts and affordable ways to increase their efficiency and cut their bills, they’ll do the smart thing.

[Jim Marston is director of Environmental Defense Fund’s Texas office and is national director of EDF’s Energy Program.]

Retail customers reported increased satisfaction levels and high power supplier switching rates , thanks to a mix of innovative new energy programs, customer service, lower wholesale electricity prices and deals that will save Texas consumers millions of dollars over the next few years while helping to stimulate clean energy technology.

Reliant Energy rolled out a “Cap-and-Save” program that caps customers’ rates when they sign up and automatically cuts their rates when the market price of natural gas drops, no matter how low prices go. The pilot program combines the assurance of a fixed contract with the flexibility of competitive market prices.

Earlier this summer, NRG Energy announced the first “all-you-can-eat” electricity plan for customers with electric vehicles. The plan will provide unlimited charging at home and at public charging stations throughout Houston for a fixed monthly rate.

The City of Dallas also recently took advantage of competitive market pricing to save seven million dollars per year. COMPETE member companies TXU Energy and Priority Power Management teamed up to customize a three-year contract that fits the city’s load shape throughout the year by buying separate blocks of energy. This represents more than 2.2 million megawatt hours (MWh), will power over 800 city-owned facilities, encourages energy efficiency through rebate funds and includes 40 percent wind energy through renewable energy credits generated at Texas wind farms.

Competition’s positive effect on energy costs are nothing new to the Lone Star State. The Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT)’s 2009 State of the Market Report reported average wholesale electricity prices dropped 56 percent in 2009 from 2008 levels, helping consumers cope with the economic downturn.

The latest news out of Texas once again shows how competition creates economic and environmental benefits when consumers are empowered to shop for innovative energy plans.

[Joel Malina]

According to the report, the U.S. used significantly less coal and petroleum in 2009 than in 2008, and significantly more wind power. There also was a decline in natural gas use and increases in solar, hydro and geothermal power according to the most recent LLNL energy flow charts.

“Energy use tends to follow the level of economic activity, and that level declined last year. At the same time, higher efficiency appliances and vehicles reduced energy use even further,” said A.J. Simon, an LLNL energy systems analyst who develops the energy flow charts using data provided by the Department of Energy’s Energy Information Administration. “As a result, people and businesses are using less energy in general.”

Estimated U.S. energy use in 2009 declined by approximately 4.5 percent from 2008, LLNL reported. Energy use in the residential, commercial, industrial and transportation arenas all declined by 1.95, 1.06, 9.92 and 3.27 percent, respectively.

Wind power used for primary power generation increased dramatically in 2009 by 37.25 percent from 2008 levels. Most of that energy is tied directly to electricity generation and thus helps decrease the use of coal for electricity production.

“The increase in renewables is a really good story, especially in the wind arena,” Simon said. “It’s a result of very good incentives and technological advancements. In 2009, the technology got better and the incentives remained relatively stable. The investments put in place for wind in previous years came online in 2009. Even better, there are more projects in the pipeline for 2010 and beyond.”

The significant decrease in coal used to produce electricity can be attributed to three factors: overall lower electricity demand, a fuel shift to natural gas, and an offset created by more wind power production, Simon said.

Nuclear energy use remained relatively flat in 2009. No new plants were added or taken offline, and the existing fleet operated at slightly lower levels than in 2008.

Of the total power consumed by Americans in 2009, 42.25 percent ended up as energy services, according to the report. These services, such as lighting and machinery output, are harder to estimate than fuel consumption, Simon said.

The ratio of energy services to the total amount of energy used is a measure of the country’s energy efficiency, the report said.

Carbon emissions data are expected to be released by LLNL later this year, but Simon suspects they will tell a similar story.

“The reduction in the use of natural gas, coal and petroleum is commensurate with a reduction in carbon emissions,” he said. “Simply said, people are doing less stuff. Therefore, they’re burning less fuel.”

[Environmental Leader]

The new 48 MW CHP plant enables TECO – an International District Energy Association (IDEA) member – to meet the heating and cooling needs of its mission-critical customers without tapping the electric grid.

“On Aug. 23, demand on the Texas electric grid hit nearly 66,000 MW, an all-time record,” says TECO President and CEO Stephen K. Swinson. “The result was that electricity prices soared to approximately $2,200 per megawatt-hour, compared to the $50 per megawatt-hour average. The good news is that during that period of peak demand, TECO didn’t have to buy any power from the grid. So we avoided the extreme price peaks – all because our new combined heat and power plant is now on line.”

The new plant is not only cost-effective, but offers the highest-possible service reliability and energy efficiency – even at peak conditions – and reflects the company’s environmental stewardship. Burns & McDonnell, which provided design-build services for the project, and GE Power & Water, which supplied the CHP plant’s LM6000 PD Sprint^® gas turbine, also are IDEA members.

Combined heat and power technology dramatically increases power plant efficiency. Electricity and waste heat from TECO’s new plant will be used to produce steam and chilled water, which will be piped underground through TECO’s district cooling and heating network to more than 16 million sq ft of customer buildings for air conditioning, space heating, dehumidification, sterilization, kitchen and laundry processes, and domestic hot water use. The CHP plant will operate at 80 percent efficiency, cutting carbon dioxide emissions by more than 305,000 tons per year, the equivalent of taking 53,000 cars off the road.

“TECO’s new CHP plant demonstrates the immediate potential that combined heat and power holds, not just for the Texas Medical Center, but for the rest of the nation,” says Robert P. Thornton, president and CEO of the International District Energy Association. “Clearly, the $10 million that the U.S. Department of Energy allocated to TECO’s $ 370 million district energy/CHP project was an excellent investment, helping to generate more than 400 jobs in the process. On behalf of TECO and the rest of the industry, I sincerely thank DOE.

“There are hundreds more U.S. cities and campuses ready right now to expand and renew their district energy and CHP systems too. The extensive energy, environmental and economic benefits realized through TECO’s CHP project are evidence we shouldn’t wait a minute longer to help other systems put combined heat and power to work.”

There is tremendous interest in expanding the use of district energy and combined heat and power in the U.S. In 2009, DOE announced a funding program for district energy, combined heat and power and waste heat recovery through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. The program attracted more than 370 proposals with a total value of $9.2 billion, seeking to leverage $3.4 billion in federal funds with industry pledging $5.8 billion. At a funding level of only $156 million, the DOE CHP program was oversubscribed by a ratio of 25:1. This demonstrates pent-up market demand for proven clean energy technologies like CHP that can be immediately deployed in cities, universities, and healthcare campuses to increase energy efficiency, cut emissions, strengthen the grid and reduce dependence on foreign oil.

IDEA and the U.S. Department of Energy Regional Clean Energy Application Centers are working together to double the amount of electricity generated from CHP in the U.S., from 9 percent of all electricity generated today to 20 percent of all electricity generation by 2030. If CHP can reach the 20 percent threshold, it will save 5.3 quadrillion Btus of energy annually and cut emissions by 848 million metric tons, the equivalent of taking 154 million cars off the road.

“The impediments to CHP reaching a 20 percent market share in the U.S. are not technical,” says Thornton, “but related to regulatory policy gaps, uncertainty about carbon regulations and a lack of awareness of CHP’s benefits. Near term, CHP can achieve significant emissions reductions coincident with steep gains in energy efficiency and can be brought on line to deliver benefits long before technologies like carbon sequestration or nuclear. CHP is the low-hanging fruit of energy efficiency.”

In July, Sen. Al Franken, D-Minn.; Sen. Kit Bond, R-Mo.; and Rep. Betty McCollum, D-Minn., introduced bi-partisan energy legislation called the Thermal Renewable Energy and Efficiency Act (TREEA – S. 3626, H.R. 5805). TREEA would provide a production tax credit for renewable thermal energy; allow tax-exempt bonds to finance renewable thermal energy, CHP and other district energy production facilities; and modify the Energy Sustainability and Efficiency Grants for Institutions program to provide larger and more flexible grants to colleges, universities, cities, municipal utilities and public school districts.

“We encourage the Administration, Congress and the U.S. Department of Energy to focus more resources on district energy/CHP projects like TECO’s, which can quickly use U.S.-based technologies,” says Thornton. “Combining heat and power generation will dramatically increase energy efficiency, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, strengthen the power grid and enhance the reliability of energy supply to mission-critical customers like the M. D. Anderson Cancer Center. IDEA applauds the DOE, Thermal Energy Corporation, GE Power & Water, Burns & McDonnell and the Texas Medical Center for moving forward together toward a more efficient and reliable energy future.”

[BusinessWire]

Despite these findings, U.S. corporate fleets are expected to be among the steadiest customers of electric vehicles, including cargo vans, as they come to market.

The study, “Electric Vehicles: The Future of Driving,” finds that consumers are concerned about several disadvantages with electric vehicles. Fifty percent of respondents are concerned about mileage potential before needing to recharge and 34 percent are worried about battery life. Other key concerns include cost of the vehicle, reliability and availability of charging station.

The study finds running out of battery power on the road (71 percent), lack of charging stations and/or not being able to recharge (66 percent) and limited mileage (59 percent) are the most common perceived disadvantages with electric vehicles.

Home charging stations may also impact purchase decisions, say CEA analysts, with 51 percent of consumers reporting that they would be less likely to consider purchasing an electric vehicle if they would have to install special charging equipment for the batteries.

Yet, the study finds that consumers are open to considering an electric vehicle in the future, with 42 percent reporting they are likely to follow news reports about electric vehicles. But overall awareness of the various types of alternative vehicles remains low. While nearly one-third (32 percent) report they are familiar, or very familiar, with hybrid vehicles, only about one-quarter are familiar with electric-powered vehicles (25 percent), according to the report.

Those consumers who are open to buying an electric vehicle cite the positive environmental impact and potential cost savings as primary reasons for purchasing electric vehicles. More than three-quarters of those surveyed (78 percent) said the vehicle’s ability to run without gasoline is the greatest advantage, followed by less pollution (67 percent), and the lack of need for oil changes and tune-ups (60 percent).

[Environmental Leader]

What do you think?  Let us know on twitter or facebook.

ENVIRONMENTAL asceticism has created a vogue for upgrading light-bulbs and tweaking thermostats. But according to a new piece of research, many of these actions—however virtuous—arise from faulty perceptions of energy savings.

Shahzeen Attari of Columbia University and her colleagues used Craigslist, an online marketplace, to recruit 505 volunteers from across America. Each was asked to estimate the energy consumption of nine household devices (such as stereos and air conditioners) as well as the energy savings incurred by six green activities (like swapping incandescent bulbs for fluorescent ones). The researchers then compared the volunteers’ estimates with the actual energy requirements or savings in question.

Their results, published this week in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, suggest that although people do grasp basic energy trends, they are decidedly hazy on the details. On average, participants underestimated both energy use and energy savings by a factor of 2.8—mostly because they undervalued the requirements of large machines like heaters and clothes dryers. As a result, they failed to recognise the huge energy savings that can come from improving the efficiency of such appliances.

Miscalculations like these hinder conservation efforts. When asked to rank the single most effective way to save energy, participants typically endorsed activities with small savings, such as turning off lights, while ignoring what they could economise on larger devices. This suggests that people misallocate their efforts, fretting over an unattended lamp (at 100 watts) while neglecting the energy they could save by nudging their washer settings from “hot” to “warm” (4,000 watt-hours for each load of laundry).

A quirk of human psychology could help to explain these persistent underestimates. When calculating such things, people often adopt a familiar unit as a mental yardstick and then generate predictions based on that unit. As a side-effect, their estimates cluster too closely around the yardstick measure—a phenomenon called “anchoring”. In Dr Attari’s study, for example, the survey provided a reference measure by stating the amount of energy used by a standard light bulb. Participants may have responded by unconsciously anchoring their estimates to this value, compressing their predictions into the relatively low range of an incandescent bulb.

This suggests an obvious criticism: by providing the light-bulb figure, the researchers primed their subjects to underestimate energy consumption. But the authors argue that rather than introducing a methodological flaw, they simply acknowledged a shared point of reference. When it comes to an accessible, quantitative measure of energy, consumers are uniquely familiar with the 100W bulb. As a result, Dr Attari expects bulbs to exert an anchoring effect on the general population as well as on her volunteers, contributing to widespread underestimates of the energy demands of large appliances.

Fortunately, increased information seems to combat such miscalculations. In the study those who were better at maths made more accurate predictions, as did those with broadly pro-environmental attitudes. Ways of making energy consumption clearer, such as devices that constantly monitor household appliances, could therefore help people make better decisions about how to save energy.