Electricity Factoids

According to the EIA:

In 2005
Emissions from electric plants amounted to 2,513,609,000 Metric Tons of CO2

Electricity Production:
Coal produced: 2,013,179,000 megawatt hours

Natural Gas: 757,974,000 megawatt hours

Nuclear: 781,986,000 megawatt hours

Hydro-electric: 269,587,000 megawatt hours

Renewables: 94,932,000 megawatt hours

Nuclear, hydro and most renewables produce no greenhouse gas emissions.

Between 1994 and 2005:
We increased renewable energy production by 18,400 megawatt hours
We increased coal production by 322,485 megawatt hours

Emissions from Coal

From a National Environmental Trust report on "Sources of Greenhouse Gases in the United States":

Coal accounts for about half of electricity generation in terms of kilowatt hours, but 83% of carbon dioxide emissions from the electricity sector, the largest piece of the pie in terms of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions.

Natural gas, in contrast, generates nearly 20% of the country’s electricity but is responsible for 12% of emissions in this sector because it is a less carbon-intensive fuel.

CT Rewards Residents Who Cut Electricity

Innovation Awards
CT gets the award for coming up with a plan after Green Factoids’ heart:

Summer Saver - Rewards Program
Save Energy This Summer and Earn a Credit on Your Electric Bill. That's OneThing!

OneThing your utility company is doing to help you conserve energy is giving you a reward for saving! If you use less electricity this summer than you did last summer, you can earn a credit on your electric bill.
Summer Saver Rewards Program

You are eligible if:

* You are a residential or commercial customer of CL&P or UI.
* You will be an active customer for the entire period of July 1, 2007 through September, 2007.
* You were an active customer for the entire period of July 1, 2006 through September, 2006.
* You have had continuous service at the same location for both time periods.

How it works:
Your electric utility company will compare how much electricity you used this summer (from July 1 through September 30, 2007) to how much you used last summer (July 1 through September 30, 2006). If you're able to reduce your usage by at least 10%, you earn a credit on your electric bill!

What you can earn:

* Use at least 10% less electricity this summer and earn a credit equal to 10% percent of the billed generation charges for the eligibility period.
* Use at least 15% less electricity this summer and earn a credit equal to 15% percent of the billed generation charges for the eligibility period.
* Use at least 20% less electricity this summer and earn a credit equal to 20% percent of the billed generation charges for the eligibility period.

Comment: This plan gets it right for several reasons. First, it rewards people who cut electricity during the critical summer months, using a fair, sensible scheme. It is only available to people who have lived in the same house for the past two years and are thus in the position to track their use and make real cuts. However, what Green Factoids especially appreciates is that the plan should motivate people to UNDERSTAND THEIR ELECTRICITY, which regular readers know has been the subject of most of this summer's posts. You won't have much success cutting unless you know how much power your appliances actually use. Hopefully, participants will quickly realize that junking their 300 watt halogen fixtures and turning off their 3500 watt central A/C will get them to their goal a lot faster than unplugging their 2 watt "vampire" VCR on standby. CT should throw in a 'Kill-a-watt' meter for good measure.

More Coal Factoids

More on Coal from the Pew Center on Global Climate Change:

Coal plays a major role in meeting U.S. energy needs, and is likely to continue to do so in coming decades.

* Coal can provide usable energy at a cost of between $1 and $2 per MMBtu compared to $6 to $12 per MMBtu for oil and natural gas, and coal prices are relatively stable.

* Coal is inherently higher-polluting and more carbon-intensive than other energy alternatives.

* 50 percent of the electricity generated in the United States is from coal.

* U.S. coal-fired plants have over 300 GW of capacity. Of these, approximately one-third date from 1970 or earlier, and most of the rest from 1970-1989. Only 12 coal-fired plants have been built in the United States since 1990.

* Steep and volatile natural gas prices and high nuclear power costs have led to an estimated 130 new coal-fired plants now on the drawing boards

Coal Factoids

From the Pew Center on Global Climate Change:
One 500-MW coal-fired power plant produces approximately 3 million tons/year of carbon dioxide (CO2).

The United States produces close to 2 billion tons of CO2 per year from coal-burning power plants.

Greenhouse Gas emissions from coal-fired electricity, now 27 percent of total U.S. emissions, are projected to grow by a third by 2025.

Agreement for Efficiency Standards

The American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy announced last month that transformer equipment manufacturer ABB has agreed to increase the efficiency of its transformers, which are installed on countless electric poles throughout the country. The Council estimates that improving the transformers' efficiency could save 26 billion kilowatt-hours annually, which according to their numbers is enough electricity to power 2.3 million U.S. households in 2005. The savings will reduce annual emissions from electric power plants by 15 million metric tons, about equal to the average annual emissions of 2.7 million automobiles.

The agreement gives helpful insight into the importance of efficiency standards and the crucial role of corporations, manufacturers, government bodies, and environmental groups in promoting efficiency. A change in the manufacturing standards of one type equipment has the potential to reduce U.S electricity use by 2%.

Seriously lower energy bills: A philosophy of Air-Conditioning

Despite the risk of sounding like a braggart, I feel impelled to boast for a minute about my last electric bill. For the month of June we used only 575 kWh, down from 630 kWh in May and 759 in April. For the month we hit what must be our lowest daily average ever, 18 kWh per day. That is less than half our average of 38 kWh/day from last June. I should add that I was working from home that month and we were not away on vacation.

In case you have no idea what your own usage is, the average American household uses 800 kWh per month. According to the EIA, the middle-Atlantic region, which includes my home city of NY, averages about 650 kWh/month; presumably that number is higher in the summer because of A/C.
How did we cut our electricity use by half? Since I started boning up on all things electrical, I have made the following changes:

1. I have continued to switch our remaining incandescent bulbs to CFLs
2. I do not leave any lights on in rooms I am not in or when I leave home
3. I avoid turning on our halogen sconces (450 watts) as much as possible
4. I have become much more careful about turning off things like fans in rooms that are not being used
5. I set my computer to go to sleep after 5 minutes of inactivity
6. I set up surge-protectors so I can easily turn off my computer, modem, and printer at night
7. I replaced our oldest (12+ years) air-conditioner with an Energy Star model
8. We were lucky with the weather--I don't think there were any days in June where the temperature went over 90.
9. MOST IMPORTANT: I DID NOT USE THE AIR-CONDITIONER UNLESS IT WAS REALLY HOT--during that billing period, I think I only turned it on twice and only for a short time.

There is no question that the final three made the biggest difference.

If you are serious about cutting your electricity use, the quickest and most dramatic way is to rethink your air-conditioning. In my case, this is not about suffering for a good cause. There is a reason people love air-conditioning. I can't stand feeling hot and sweaty, and when I overheat, my productivity and sense of well-being take a dive.

Here is the Green Factoids environmental philosophy in a nutshell:

we are going to have make changes, but I prefer not to think of them as sacrifices; I genuinely see them as improvements.

So with air-conditioning here is my new philosophy:
1. fans work amazingly well, especially ceiling fans in your bedroom and T.V. viewing room; I rarely feel uncomfortably warm with a fan blowing directly on me

2. if the temperature is below 85, you probably don't need A/C--again this is not martyrdom; you will adjust to this a lot quicker than you think

3. 75% of the air-conditioned homes or stores I spend time in are much too cold--(I think we should complain--it is one way to get businesses to be more responsible; congratulations to Starbucks for leading the way by seriously rethinking the appropriate use of air-conditioning)

4. when you do use A/C, blast it for a few minutes and then turn it to the lowest possible setting and hit the energy-saver button--usually when you turn the A/C on, you are overheated; once you cool down, you don't need it on high, or sometimes even at all

5. test how high a temperature setting is comfortable for you

6. this one should be obvious, but never leave the A/C on when you are not home; there is absolutely no efficiency advantage to running it all the time--quite the opposite it is a massive waste that luckily is simple to eliminate

7. if you feel you must leave it on for a pet, keep it to one room, with the door shut, on the lowest possible energy mode--your dog does not need it set to 68; the low 80s should be fine; make sure your rooms are shaded and that your dog has access to plenty of cold water

8. don't beat yourself up for using it when it is really hot

As far as the final point goes, instead of feeling like we have to quit A/C like some sort of evil addictive drug, I think we should be looking to change our assumptions about when and how we use it. The closest parallel I can think of is seat-belts. When I was growing up, I don't think my parents ever once told us to wear a seat-belt. They would do things like ride with a baby in their lap in the front or let me and a bunch of friends smush into the front passenger seat--no one ever wore a seat belt. Now, seat-belt compliance in the U.S. is above 90%--far higher than Europe by the way. My kids have never ridden in the front seat. I don't even back up my car without a seat-belt on. Attitudes change. 20 years from now, I may be marveling with my grandchildren about how you needed to wear an overcoat in the supermarket in July because they kept the temperature so darn low--now we know better.

Wind in Europe

From the Earth Policy Institute:

Europe continues to lead the world in total installed capacity with over 40,500 megawatts, or two-thirds of the global total. These wind installations supply nearly 3 percent of Europe’s electricity and produce enough power to meet the needs of over 40 million people. The European Wind Energy Association (EWEA) has set a target to satisfy 23 percent of European electricity needs with wind by 2030. EWEA also notes that Europe has enough wind resources to meet the electricity demands of all of its countries.

Germany, the country with the most installed wind-generating capacity, now gets 6 percent of its electricity from its 18,400 megawatts of wind power. Spain, in second place with over 10,000 megawatts of capacity, gets 8 percent of its electricity from wind.

Denmark’s 3,100 megawatts of wind capacity meet 20 percent of its electricity needs, the largest share in any country. It ranks fifth in the world in installed capacity. Denmark is also the global leader in offshore wind power installations, with 400 megawatts of existing capacity. Globally, over 900 megawatts of offshore wind capacity will be installed by the end of 2006, all in Europe.

Comment: Denmark obviously deserves enormous admiration for managing to produce 20% of its electricity from wind, but as a country of only 5 million people, it is hard to see it as a model for the U.S. That Germany, with its population of more than 82 million, gets 6% of its electricity from wind is far more striking. However, according to Greenpeace, the average European household uses 4,667 kWh/year whereas the average US household uses 11,209 kWh/year, so unless we make some progress tackling our efficiency problems, we will have a very hard time achieving European percentages of renewable electricity.

How much does wind energy cost?

From the American Wind Energy Association:

Over the last 20 years, the cost of electricity from utility-scale wind systems has dropped by more than 80%. In the early 1980s, when the first utility-scale turbines were installed, wind-generated electricity cost as much as 30 cents per kilowatt-hour. Now, state-of-the-art wind power plants can generate electricity for less than 5 cents/kWh with the Production Tax Credit in many parts of the U.S., a price that is competitive with new coal- or gas-fired power plants.

Worldwide Wind Energy in 2006-2007

According to the World Wind Energy Association:

In 2006, 14,900 MW of wind power were added, bringing the global installed capacity to 73,904 MW by the end of December. The added capacity equals a growth rate of 25 %, after 24 % in 2005.

WWEA is predicting that another 16,000 MW will be brought on line in 2007, bringing the total to 90,000 MW, followed by another 19,000 MW in 2008.

Based on the accelerated development, WWEA has increased its prediction for 2010 and expects now 160,000 MW to be installed by the end of 2010.

More numbers for 2006: Five countries added more than 1000 MW: the United States of America (2,454 MW), Germany (2,194 MW), India (1,840 MW) and Spain (1,587 MW) were able to secure their leading market positions and China (1,145 MW) joined the group of the now top five markets and is now number five in terms of added capacity, showing a market growth of 91 %.

Five countries added more than 500 MW and showed excellent growth rates: France (810 MW, 107 % growth), Canada (768 MW, 112 %), Portugal (628 MW, 61 %) and the United Kingdom (610 MW, 45 %). The most dynamic market in 2006, Brazil, faced its long expected take off and added 208 MW which equals a sevenfold increase of installed capacity within one year.

Wind Energy in 2007

The American Wind Energy Association estimates that more than 3000 MW of wind power will be added to the U.S. market in 2007, a 20% increase over last year’s 2400 MW of added capacity. Wind power will generate about 31 billion KWHs this year, or enough electricity to power about 3 million homes, impressive but still less than 3% of the U.S. total.

Using a common conversion rate, each MW can provide the power needs of about 200 homes. At its current rate, wind power is adding generating capacity for about 600,000 homes a year. BUT that is still less than 0.5 % of the more than 113 million households in this country.

Wind Energy Growth

From The Union of Concerned Scientists:

As wind power costs become more competitive, demand is growing exponentially all over the world. Global wind power capacity rose from just over 6,000 MW in 1996 to more than 59,000 MW by the end of 2005–almost a ten-fold increase. Growth has recently been most significant in Northern Europe, Spain, and India, but markets in Asia and the Pacific region are emerging as well.

Comment:
Robert Socolow and Stephen Pacala, designers of the stabilization wedge for the Princeton University Carbon Mitigation Initiative, recommend that we increase our reliance on wind by 50-fold by 2054 in order for wind power to provide one of their wedges. Each wedge = 1 billion tons of emissions avoided; they believe we need 7 wedges to stabilize atmospheric CO2 levels. A 50-fold increase would mean adding world-wide wind capacity at the rate of about 61,000 MW every year.

Wind Energy in The U.S.

Wind Energy Today is:

* Able to power the equivalent of 3 million homes in the US: 11,603 megawatts installed
* Providing less than 1% of US electricity today, while public support remains high
* Second largest new source of power generation in the US, after natural gas
* Saving emissions by 19 million tons of carbon dioxide per year
* Saving water by more than 600 billion gallons this year

Some Companies getting their power from Renewable sources:
Wells Fargo, Whole Foods, Johnson & Johnson, Starbucks, Pepsico (100%), Sprint Nextel, Nike, Staples

Wind Energy Works!

Wind vs. Coal #2: Water

From the Union of Concerned Scientists:

A typical 500-megawatt coal-fired power plant draws about 2.2 billion gallons of water each year from nearby water bodies, such as lakes, rivers, or oceans, to create steam for turning its turbines. This is enough water to support a city of approximately 250,000 people.

Wind power generates electricity with...

* No cooling water
* No water pollution

Coal vs. Wind

Coal generates 54% of our electricity, and is the single biggest air polluter in the U.S.

Wind Week: Wind vs. Coal Emissions

From the Union of Concerned Scientists:

Burning coal is a leading cause of smog, acid rain, global warming, and air toxics. In an average year, a typical coal plant generates:

* 3,700,000 tons of carbon dioxide (CO2), the primary human cause of global warming--as much carbon dioxide as cutting down 161 million trees.

* 10,000 tons of sulfur dioxide (SO2), which causes acid rain that damages forests, lakes, and buildings, and forms small airborne particles that can penetrate deep into lungs.

* 500 tons of small airborne particles, which can cause chronic bronchitis, aggravated asthma, and premature death, as well as haze obstructing visibility.

* 10,200 tons of nitrogen oxide (NOx), as much as would be emitted by half a million late-model cars. NOx leads to formation of ozone (smog) which inflames the lungs, burning through lung tissue making people more susceptible to respiratory illness.

* 720 tons of carbon monoxide (CO), which causes headaches and place additional stress on people with heart disease.

* 220 tons of hydrocarbons, volatile organic compounds (VOC), which form ozone.

* 170 pounds of mercury, where just 1/70th of a teaspoon deposited on a 25-acre lake can make the fish unsafe to eat.

* 225 pounds of arsenic, which will cause cancer in one out of 100 people who drink water containing 50 parts per billion.

* 114 pounds of lead, 4 pounds of cadmium, other toxic heavy metals, and trace amounts of uranium.


Wind power generates electricity with...

* No air emissions


Coal vs. Wind

Comment: A typical coal plant produces about 500 megawatts or electricity for about 100,000 households. There are about 600 in the U.S.

For a discussion of this year's victory in halting the construction of 8 new coal fired plants in Texas, see the following article from Environmental Defense.

http://environmentaldefense.org/article.cfm?contentID=5983

For some spectacular photos of off-shore wind farms check out:
Dark Roasted Blend's piece on wind-power-in-stormy-waters.

Total U.S. Carbon Emissions for 2006

The U.S. emitted 5.887 billion metric tons of CO2 in 2006.

Here are some Department of Energy Numbers on U.S. Emissions and their change over the last 16 years.

MMT= Million Metric Tons.

U.S. carbon dioxide emissions fell 1.3 percent in 2006, from 5,955 million metric tons of carbon dioxide (MMTCO2) in 2005 to 5,877 MMTCO2 in 2006.

Changes Between 1990-2006
In the residential sector, emissions increased from 954 mmt to 1197 mmt.
In the transport sector, emissions increased from 1567 mmt to 1965 mmt.
In the industrial sector, emissions decreased from 1684 mmt to 1669 mmt.
In the commercial sector, emissions increased from 781 mmt to 1046 mmt.

Through 2006, total U.S. energy-related carbon dioxide emissions have grown by 17.9 percent since 1990.

The commercial sector has grown the most, 33.9% or 1.8%/year. The residential sector has grown by 25.6% or 1.4%/year. The transport sector has grown 25.4% or 1.4%/year. The industrial sectors decreased .9% over the period, or .01%/year.

Both the commercial and the residential sectors are dominated by electricity. 2006 emissions from the electric power decreased 46.4mmt (2%) and generation decreased by .1%.

Energy Information Administration

Comment:
We have a lot of work ahead of us. If the U.S. were to ratify the Kyoto treaty, we would be committed to reducing our emissions to 7% below our 1990 levels. Many scientists are recommending that we reduce our emissions by half by 2055, or basically avoid emitting 200 billion tons of carbon, or 7 billion tons/year, worldwide. However, increasing appliance and lighting efficiency in all buildings to Energy Star standards could reduce total emissions by 1/7 the amount needed.

Fans vs. AC

Straight from Mr. Electricity himself:
A window unit AC uses 500 to 1440 watts, while a 2.5-ton central system uses about 3500 watts. That's a lot of energy. A floor fan uses only 100 watts on the highest speed, and ceiling fans use only 15 to 95 watts depending on speed and size.

Comment: Michael Bluejay, aka Mr. Electricity, runs a site devoted to saving electricity. Green Factoid has spent many happy hours on his site, literally spellbound by his wealth of technical data: the site can only be described as nirvana for the factoid loving.

As far as fans and ACs go, here are a few numbers. We currently pay about $.18/kWh. So a single 1000w air-conditioner costs the seemingly low $.18/ hour. Running that AC 24/7, however, would cost us a not-so-modest $130/month. Using the same numbers, with central, you will pay $.63/hour and $453/month.

While no one but my father runs their AC round the clock (and his is central!), in our profligate days we would often run three ACs at a time to cool our apartment. That could easily add up to more than 24/7 use in July and August, especially since I work at home during those months.

One the other hand, running a 100 watt fan for the same period costs less than .02/hour and a whopping $13/month. Ceiling fans are even less.

Playing with a Calculator #2: Appliance Emissions

For those who like Wonky sites, check out the "Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center"--yes there is such a center--which is part of the Oak Ridge National Laboratory for the Department of Energy. The site is a factoid lover's dream.

From their site:
Q. How much CO2 is emitted as a result of my using specific electrical appliances?

A. For this answer, we refer you to an excellent article, "Your Contribution to Global Warming," by George Barnwell, which appeared on p. 53 of the February-March 1990 issue of National Wildlife, the magazine of the National Wildlife Federation. The article, assuming that your electricity comes from coal, calculates CO2 emissions corresponding to the use of various electrical appliances. For example, one hour's use of a color television produces 0.64 pounds (lb) of CO2, and each use of a toaster produces 0.12 lbCO2, whereas a day's use of a waterbed heater produces 24 lb CO2.

In general, the coefficient is about 2.3 lb CO2 per kilowatt-hour (kWh) of electricity. You can calculate the kWh of electricity by multiplying the number of watts (W) the appliance uses times the number of hours (h) it is used, then dividing by 1000. For example a 60-W light bulb operated for 24 h uses

(60 W) x (24 h) / (1000) = 1.44 kWh.

This use of electricity would produce an emission of

(1.44 kWh) x (2.3 lb CO2 per kWh) = 3.3 lb CO2

if the electricity is derived from the combustion of coal.

Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center

Green Factoid has spent long hours, calculator in hand, fooling around with these equations. For example, our 1998 side-by-side GE fridge is rated at 71kwh/month or 852 kwh/year. That equals about 1960 lbs./year. Send Green Factoid some of your own calculations.

Should you go Carbon Neutral?

A lot of companies are advertising that they are “carbon neutral” and Al Gore’s site among others suggests that individuals calculate their impact and then buy offsets based on the number they get. There is obviously not much to debate if the purveyors of offsets are crooked, but assuming we are buying from legitimate “offsetters” the question still remains: do we think this is a good idea?

It does feel a little like a cocktail party conversation topic rather than a true solution: after all, how many people are really going to buy these? Enough to actually be useful? On the other hand, I can understand why big shots who have legitimate reasons to, say, fly hundreds of thousands of miles or people in the public eye who worry about their green credentials might want to buy some bragging rights/peace of mind, a la Richard Branson. However, I can’t say I think any number of offsets could ever excuse a 20,000 square foot house—I mean, really, how much space can one family possibly need? Ditto driving massive gas-guzzlers.

An argument I find more compelling concerns experimenting with and developing the market itself. I am convinced that we will need a variety of different solutions: voluntary, mandatory, market, government, industrial, residential. It is worth testing the market for offsets, if only to measure the levels of public commitment to voluntary solutions.

Personally, I will have to do more research to see if I think offsets give an adequate environmental bang for my buck—versus just giving the money to the Sierra Club or planting some trees. As far as Green Factoid is concerned, the highest priority for everyone should be curbing their own energy use. So screw in those CFL bulbs, turn off that A/C, and then rejoice in the savings on your electricity bill, and as a bonus, should you choose to go that route, you will have less emissions to offset.

For More Information:
Environment Defense has an excellent article discussing the principles behind carbon neutrality, the usual (mostly specious) arguments advanced against it, and recommendations for some legitimate places to buy offsets.

Carbon Offsets Count

Electricity Factoid Month

Since the northeast is expecting its first day of +90° weather, and I have finally turned on my (new energy-star) air-conditioner, I will kick off Electricity factoid month.

These numbers are a few years old, but the percentages should hold up.

U.S. HOUSEHOLD ELECTRICITY CONSUMPTION
Electricity consumption by 107 million U.S. households in 2001 totaled 1,140 billion kWh. The most significant end uses were central air-conditioning and refrigerators, each of which accounted for about 14 percent of the U.S. total.

From the Energy Information Administration


The EIA is part of the Department of Energy and is a goldmine for factoid-addicted environmentalists.