1. Conference on Green Building, The Economy, and Public Policy Berkeley, California December 2, 2009 Arthur H. Rosenfeld, Commissioner California Energy Commission (916) 654-4930 ARosenfe@Energy.State.CA.US

2. 2 Does Anyone See A Problem With This Picture?

3. 3 California 10 th Largest World Economy $1.5 Trillion (2004-ppp) Energy Consumption ~295,000 GWh (2006) Peak Demand ~64,000 MW (2006) Population-35 million; growth rate-1.5%/year, Electricity growth for last decade 1.6%/yr

4. Abatement cost <$50/ton U.S. mid-range abatement curve – 2030 Source:McKinsey analysis 0 30 60 90 -120 -220 -30 -60 -90 3.2 0 Cost Real 2005 dollars per ton CO 2 e 1.01.21.41.82.00.22.22.42.62.83.01.60.40.60.8 -230 Residentia l electronic s Commercial electronics Residenti al buildings – Lighting Commercial buildings – LED lighting Fuel economy packages – Cars Commercial buildings – CFL lighting Cellulosic biofuels Industry – Combine d heat and power Existing power plant conversion efficiency improvemen ts Conservation tillage Fuel economy packages – Light trucks Commercial buildings – Combined heat and power Coal mining – Methane mgmt Commercial buildings – Control systems Distribut ed solar PV Residenti al buildings – Shell retrofits Nuclea r new- build Natural gas and petroleum systems manageme nt Active forest management Afforestation of pastureland Reforestatio n Winter cover crops Onshore wind – Medium penetration Coal power plants – CCS new builds with EOR Biomass power – Cofiring Onshore wind – High penetration Industry – CCS new builds on carbon- intensive processe s Coal power plants – CCS new builds Coal power plants – CCS rebuilds Coal-to-gas shift – dispatch of existing plants Car hybridi- zation Commerci al buildings – HVAC equipment efficiency Solar CSP Residentia l buildings – HVAC equipment efficiency Industri al process improve -ments Residentia l water heaters Manufacturin g – HFCs mgmt Residential buildings – New shell improvemen ts Coal power plants– CCS rebuilds with EOR Potential Gigatons/yea r Commercial buildings – New shell improveme nts Afforestati on of cropland Onshore wind – Low penetration 4

5. 5

6. 6

8. In 2009, approximately 31% (17,896 GWh) of California’s energy savings are achieved through appliance efficiency standards. This saves $2.5 billion in electrical bills annually. [2009 Integrated Energy Policy Report] Impact of Appliance Efficiency Regulations 8

9. 9 Source: David Goldstein ~ 1 Ton CO2/year~ 100 gallons Gasoline/year

10. 10 = 80 power plants of 500 MW each In the United States

11. 11 In the United States

12. The residential energy consumption due to televisions rapidly increased from 3-4% in 1990s to 8-10% in 2008. Television energy will grow up to 18% by 2023 without regulations. The projected growth does not include the residential energy use by cable boxes, DVD players, internet boxes, Blue Ray, game consoles etc. Televisions Represent Significant Energy Use 12

13. Technically Feasible Standards Each point may represent several TV models *Consumers can expect to save between $ 50 - $ 250 over the life of their TV *A 50 inch plasma can consume as little as 307 kWh/yr and as much as 903 kWh/yr 13

14. General Purpose Lighting – Proposed Regulations (cont.) Rated Lumens RangeMaximum rated Wattage Minimum Rated Life Time Proposed California Effective Date 1490-2600 Lumens72 Watts1,000 hoursJan, 1, 2011 1050-1489Lumens53 Watts1,000 hoursJan 1, 2012 750-1049 Lumens43 Watts1,000 hoursJan 1, 2013 310-749 Lumens29 Watts1,000 hoursJan 1, 2013 Proposed Table K-8: Standards for State-regulated General Services Incandescent Lamps -Tier I Lumens RangeMaximum Lamp Efficacy Minimum Rated Life Time Proposed California Effective Date All45 lumens per watt1,000 hoursJan, 1, 2018 Proposed Table K-9: Standards for State-regulated General Services Lamps -Tier II

15. Source for following two Slides: – Lester Lave and Maxine Savitz. Relative Costs for 95 new production homes at Premier Gardens in Sacramento. Report of Panel on Energy Efficiency in the United States. National Academies Press. (November 2009) WWW.NAS.EDU WWW.NAS.EDU 15

16. 0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 Premier Gardens Wheat Ridge Armory Park del Sol Smith Passivhaus Hathaway House Livermore Lakeland $/kWh eq saved $/kWh eq of efficiency investment $/kWh of PV $/kWh eq including both efficiency and PV

17. -5,000 0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000 35,000 010,00020,00030,00040,00050,00060,00070,00080,000 Incremental Cost of Efficiency Measures and PVs in $ Annual kWh(eq) including heating load with natural gas converted at 10,000 Btu/kWh Premier Gardens Wheat Ridge Armory Park del Sol Smith Passivhaus Lakeland Indifference

18. Published in Climatic Change 2009. Global Cooling: Increasing World-wide Urban Albedos to Offset CO2 July 28, 2008 18 Hashem Akbari and Surabi Menon Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, USA H_Akbari@lbl.gov Tel: 510-486-4287 Arthur Rosenfeld California Energy Commission, USA Arosenfe@energy.state.ca.us Tel: 916-654 4930 A First Step In Geo-Engineering Which Saves Money and Has Known Positive Environmental Impacts

19. 1000 ft 2 of a white roof, replacing a dark roof, offset the emission of 10 tonnes of CO 2 19

20. 20 CO2 Equivalency of Cool Roofs White Roofs alone offset 24 GT CO2 Worth > €600 Billion To Convert 24 GT CO2 one time into a rate Assume 20 Year Period Results in 1.2 GT CO2/year Average World Car Emits 4 tCO2/year So rate is 300 Million Cars Off the Road for 20 years.

21. Solar Reflective Surfaces Also Cool the Globe Source: IPCC 21

22. 22 White is ‘cool’ in Bermuda

23. 23 and in Santorini, Greece

24. Cool Roof Technologies 24 flat, white pitched, white pitched, cool & colored Old New

25. 25 Simulated Meteorology and Air-quality Impacts in LA

26. 26 Potential Savings in LA Savings for Los Angeles – Direct, $100M/year – Indirect, $70M/year – Smog, $360M/year Estimate of national savings: $5B/year

27. 27 California is a Summer Peaking Area

28. 28 California peak electricity demand is growing  In 2000, 72% population lived along coast.  By 2040, nearly 40% of population will live inland.  Need for more peaking plants or demand response measures to meet the higher summer peaks.

29. 29 Three Necessary Components for Demand Response and Utility Modernization Advanced Metering Infrastructure – Digital meters with communication Dynamic Tariffs – Enable customers to be able to respond to hourly prices – The structure of these tariffs is critically important as customers are hoping to reduce total energy costs Automated Response Technology at customer locations – Enable residential and small commercial customers to respond to price automatically – Larger customers with energy management systems linked to pricing signals over the internet or through other communication channels And, when coupled with energy efficiency programs and policies the result can be reduction in total consumption as well as peak period consumption

31. 31 Critical Peak Pricing (CPP) with additional curtailment option 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Price (cents/kWh) Standard TOU Critical Peak Price Standard Rate Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday Extraordinary Curtailment Signal, < once per year CPP Price Signal 10x per year ? Potential Annual Customer Savings: 10 afternoons x 4 hours x 1kw = 40 kWh at 70 cents/kWh = ~$30/year

32. 32 Average Residential Response to Critical Peak Pricing kW 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 Noon2:307:30Midnigh t CPP Event CPP with Controllable Thermostat Control Group Fixed Incentive with Controllable Thermostat 69% 65% 73% 61% 69 % 22% 30% 20% 26% 17% 0%20%40%60%80%100% Total TOU CPP-F CPP-V Info Only 1 1 91% 93% 87% 86% Should dynamic rates be offered to all customers? Definitely Probably 95% Key Results from Residential Pilot 12% average load reduction for CPP rate alone Up to 40% with rate + enabling tech Most participants preferred the pilot rates

33. 33 Automated Demand Response Commercial Customers * Source: Demand Response Research Center, Global Energy Partners

34. Federal Property Assessed Clean Energy (PACE) Legislation American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) – Included some measures specifically intended to promote PACE programs American Clean Energy and Security Act (ACES) – Authorized federal government to provide guarantees or other indirect financial support to PACE program bonds, potentially reducing the costs of capital to the program dramatically H.R.3525 – Introduced by Rep. Mike Thompson in July 2009 (in House Committee on Ways and Means) – Allows issuance of federally tax-exempt bonds for PACE programs to finance the following: Renewable energy (solar, wind, geothermal, marine and hydrokinetic renewable energy, incremental hydropower, biomass and landfill gas) Energy conservation/efficiency (energy efficient retrofits of existing buildings and/or efficient storage, distribution, or transmission, including smart grid technologies) Water conservation/efficiency (reduce demand, improve efficiency of use, reduce losses, improve land management practices that conserve water); does not include water storage Zero emission vehicles (no tailpipe emissions, evaporative emissions, or onboard emission-control systems that can deteriorate over time) A facility or project used for the manufacture of the above resources

35. Federal PACE Legislation (cont.) H.R.3836 – Introduced by Rep. Steve Israel in October 2009 (in House Committee on Energy and Commerce) – Purpose is to promote access to affordable financing and provide credit support for accelerated and widespread deployment of: (1) clean energy technologies; (2) advanced or enabling energy infrastructure technologies; and (3) energy efficiency technologies in residential, commercial, and industrial applications, including end-use efficiency in buildings. – Clean energy technology: Technology related to the production, use, transmission, storage, control, or conservation of energy that will contribute to a stabilization of atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations thorough reduction, avoidance, or sequestration of energy-related emissions and for which, as determined by the Administrator, insufficient commercial lending is available at affordable rates to allow for widespread deployment. – “Credit support” is defined as: (A) direct loans, letters of credit, loan guarantees, and insurance products; and (B) the purchase or commitment to purchase, or the sale or commitment to sell, debt instruments (including subordinated securities).

36. States with PACE Legislation California Colorado Florida Hawaii Illinois Louisiana Maryland Nevada New Mexico New York Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Texas Utah Vermont Virginia Wisconsin AB 811 (2008), AB 474 (2009) HB 08-1350 (2008) Pre-existing authority to form PACE districts SB 583 (2009) SB 224 (2009) HB 1567(2009) SB 358 (2009) SB 647 (2009) S66004a (2009) [same as A40004A] HB 1 (2009) SB 668 (2009) HB 2626 (2009) HB 1937 (2009) Pre-existing authority to form PACE districts H 446 (2009) SB 1212 (2009) AB 255 (2009)

37. The End For More Information: http://www.energy.ca.gov/commissioners/rosenfeld_docs/index.html or just Google “ Art Rosenfeld ” 37