South Carolina Efficiency in the South

Published on March 2017 | Categories: Documents | Downloads: 36 | Comments: 0 | Views: 384
of 9
Download PDF   Embed   Report

Comments

Content

 

 

ENERGY EFFICIENCY IN THE SOUTH APPENDIX G

STATE PROFILES OF ENERGY EFFICIENCY OPPORTUNITIES IN THE SOUTH: SOUTH CAROLINA

Marilyn A. Brown,1 Joy Wang,1 Matt Cox, 1 Youngsun Baek,1 Rodrigo Cortes,1 Benjamin Deitchman, 1 Elizabeth Noll, 1 Yu Wang, 1 Etan Gumerman,2 Xiaojing Sun2 

April 13, 2010 1Georgia

Institute of Technology

 

2Duke University



 

 

A Profile of Energy-Efficien Energy-Efficiency cy Opportunities in South Carolina The economic recession, climate change concerns and rising electricity costs have motivated many states to embrace energy efficiency as a way to create new local jobs, lower energy bills and promote environmental sustainability. With this surge of interest in energy efficiency,  policymakers are asking: “how much energy can be saved?” This profile addresses the opportunity for energy-efficiency energy-efficiency improvements in South Carolina’s residential, commercial and industrial sectors. It draws on tthe he results of a study of Energy of Energy Efficiency in the South conducted  by a team of researchers at the Georgia Institute of Technology and Duke University. University. The study  study   presents primary and in-depth research of the potential for energy-efficiency improvements, 1 using a modeling approach based on the EF-NEMS (National Energy Modeling System).

South Carolina has a population of about 4.5 million.2  The population of South Carolina represents about 1.5% of the U.S. population, 1.1% of the nation’s Gross Domestic Product, Product, and 3 1.7% of U.S. energy consumption (Figure (Figure 1).   Thus, compared to the rest of the nation, South Carolina has a higher than average level of energy intensity.i 

South Carolina 1,692 TBtu South Region 43,650 TBtu United States 101,600 TBtu 0

20,000

40, 000

60, 000

80,000

100, 000

120,000 3

Figure 1: South Carolina, South, and United States Energy Consumption, 2007

South Carolina’s use of industrial energy as a percentage of o f its overall energy consumption exceeds that of the nation, but this is largely true of the South as a region, which the S State tate closely resembles. Climate and a heavy reliance on electricity for both heating and cooling needs has contributed to South Carolina’s high per capita energy consumption, ranked 17th nationally.3 The State consumes more nuclear power and relatively less natural gas than the South and the nation as a proportion of overall energy consumption. South Carolina is a net exporter of other fuels (Figure 3). The State’s electricity electricity is largely generated generated from nuclear power (53%) and coal (39%), with smaller portions from natural gas (5%), hydropower (2%), and biomass (1%). South Carolina is a national leader in nuclear generation.4 i

 Energy intensity is the ratio of the state’s energy consumption to its Gross State Product (GSP)   2 

 

 

South Carolina 1,692 Tbtu

21.2%

South Region 43,650 TBtu

15.6%

19.5%

United States 101,600 TBtu

16.0%

21.4% 0%

36.7%

37.6%

18.1%

20% Residential

26.5%

26.9%

31.8%

40% Commercial

28.6%

60% 80% Industrial Transportation

100%

Figure 2: South Carolina, South, and United States Energy Consumption by Sector, 2007

South Carolina 1,692 Tbtu

-9.6%

26.2%

South Region 43,650 TBtu

23.0%

United States 101,600 TBtu

22.4%

-20% Coal

10.7%

34.1%

22.5%

5.7%

33.0%

40.7%

8.2%

1.4% 4.1%

0% Natural Gas

23.3%

20% Petroleum

39.1%

4 0% 60% Nuclear Electric Power

8.3% 6.7% 0.2%

8 0% Renewables

10 0% Other  

Figure 3: South Carolina, South, and United States Energy Consumption by Fuel Type, 2007

South Carolina has many energy-efficiency policies already in place. For instance, the State has  passed legislation requiring many public buildings to reduce energy consumption 20% by 2020, with annual requirements and guidelines guidelines to be met along the way. The State has also supported the growth of energy-efficiency-related energy-efficiency-related industries. For example, Clemson University has also recently landed $98 million to research the next generation of wind turbines an and d drive trains. More state initiatives are described in recent Southern States Energy Energ y Board and National 4,5 Association of State Energy Officials publications.  Nevertheless, the 2009 State Energy Efficiency Scorecard  from  from the American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy suggests that additional policy initiatives could be implemented in the State to encourage households, businesses, and industries to utilize energy more effectively. Specifically, the ACEEE study rated South Carolina 37th of the 50 states and DC for its adoption and implementation of energy energy efficiency policies. This score is based on the state’s performance performance in six energy efficiency policy areas: utility and public benefits, transportation, building energy codes, combined heat and power, state government initiatives, and appliance efficiency standards.6 3 

 

  Chandler and Brown reviewed South Carolina’s Carolina’s energy-efficiency energy-efficiency studies in the Meta-Review of  Efficiency Potential Studies and Their Implications for the South (2009). Potential electricity savings range broadly from 8-27% from projected energy en ergy consumption in these studies.7  South Carolina’s overall energy-efficiency energy-efficiency potential would be higher than this range with the implementation of all cost-effective opportunities, but the number of studies with such estimates is limited. An ACEEE study of South Carolina’s energy efficiency and water savings potential was conducted in 2010. It estimated that the State could save almost 17,000 GWh or about 18% of the projected demand for the state in 2025 through energ energy y efficiency policies and utilities  programs.8  Energy Efficiency Potential by Sector The State’s total energy consumption (residential, commercial, industrial, and transportation sectors) is projected projected to increase 6% from 2010 to to 2030. This profile describes the ability of nine energy policies to curb this growth in energy energ y use by accelerating the adoption of cost-effective energy-efficient technologies in the residential, commercial, and industrial sectors of South Sou th Carolina. Altogether, these policies policies offer the the potential to reduce reduce South Carolina’s Carolina’s energy consumption by approximately 11% of the energy consumed by the State in 2007 (180 TBtu in

2030) (Figure 4). 4). With these policies, policies, South Carolina’s projected energy consumption could be reduced over the next two decades. For complete policy descriptions, refer to Energy Efficiency in the South by Brown et al. (2010). 1,550   n   o    i    t    )   p   u    t   m    B 1,450   u   s    T   n   (   o    C  s   r   o   y   t   g   c   r   e   e   S   n   l 1,350    l    E    l     a   A    t   o    T

1,250 20 10 Baseline

20 15

2 020

Residential

Commercial

2 025

2 030 Industrial

Figure 4: Energy Efficiency Potential in South Carolina ( Note: The baseline includes projected transportation sector consumption, as well as residential, commercial and industrial consumption.) 

The commercial and residential sectors offer the greatest energy efficiency efficienc y potential in South Carolina (Figure 5). In 2020, savings from all three sectors is about 7% (120 TBtu) the total 4 

 

  energy consumed by the State in 2007. Electricity related ssavings avings constitute 110 TBtu of this amount. With these policies, the electricity generated by three 500-MW power plants in 2020 and five such plants in 2030 could be avoided. 9  800    ) 700   u    t 600    B    T    ( 500   n   o    i    t 400   p   m 300   u   s   n 200   o    C

100 0 20 20 2030 2020 203 0 2020 2030 Commercial R e s i d e n t i a l Industrial Cons Consum umpt ptio ion n wit with h Po Poli licy cy Pa Pack ckag ages es Savi Saving ngss Po Pote tent ntia iall fro from mB Bas asel elin inee

Figure 5: Energy Efficiency Potential by Sector in South Carolina, 2020 and 2030  Residentiall Sector  Residentia

Four residential energy efficiency policies were examined: more stringent building codes with third party verification, improved appliance standards and incentives, an expanded Weatherization Assistance Program, and retrofit incentives with increased equipment standards. Their implementation could reduce South Carolina’s C arolina’s projected residential consumption by about 10% (38 TBtu) in 2020 and 16% (62 TBtu) in 2030 (Figure 6). 425    ) 400   u    t    B    T 375    (   n    i   o 350    t   p   m   u   s 325   n   o    C 300

16% 10%

  v   a 40    S   y   g   r   e   n 20    E    l   a    t   o    T 0

275 2010 2015 Ba Basselin elinee For Forec ecaast

   ) 80   u    t    B    T    ( 60   s   g   n    i

202 0 Electricity

202 0 20 25 2 030 Ener Energy gy Effi Efficcienc iency y Sc Scen enar ario io

Figure 6: Residential Sector Savings

Natural Gas

2 030 Other  

Figure 7: Residential Sector Savings by Fuel Type

In 2020, the residential energy required by about 180,000 households in South Carolina can be avoided by these policies, representing about $310 in annual energy savings per household. The 5 

 

   principal savings are from electricity (Figure 7). 7). With these policies, the projected growth in residential energy consumption could be eliminated. Commercial Sector

The implementation of appliance standards and retrofit policies in South Carolina’s commercial sector could reduce projected energy consumption in 2020 by approximately 14%, and by 21% in 2030 (Figure 8). In 2020, the commercial sector could save about 41 TBtu , which is equivalent to the amount of energy energ y that 1,200 Wal-Mart stores use a year.  Each business in South Carolina could save $52,000 on average. 10  The principal energy savings are from electricity, with natural gas and other fuels providing additi additional onal savings (Figure 9). The rapid growth of commercial energy consumption forecasted for South Carolina could be stalled and slightly reduced with these policies. 350

   )   u    t 325    B    T    ( 300   n   o    i    t 275   p   m 250   u   s   n   o 225    C

21% 14%

200

80

  s   g   n    i   v 60   a    S   )   u   y   t   g   r   B40   e   T   n   (    E    l 20    t   a   o    T

0

2010

2015

Ba Base seli line ne Fo Fore reca cast st

2020

2025

2030

2 020 Electricity

Ener Energ gy Eff Efficie icienc ncy y Sc Scen enar ario io

Figure 8: Commercial Sector Savings

Natural Gas

2 030 Others

Figure 9: Commercial Sector Savings by Fuel Type

 Industrial Sector

The implementation of plant utility upgrades, process improvements, and improved i mproved combined heat and power policies in South Carolina’s industrial sector can reduce projected consumption  by about 6% (41 TBtu) in 2020 and 7% (49 TBtu) in 2030 (Figure 10). The industrial energy required by about 59 average industrial facilities could be avoided in 2020, roughly $64,000 in annual energy savings per industrial facility. The principal energy savings are from electricity (Figure 11). These three energy efficiency policies could reduce the growing consumption of industrial energy projected over the next two decades.



 

  750

80

   )   u 725    t    B    T 700    (   n   o    i    t 675   p   m   u   s 650   n   o 625    C

  s   g   n 60    i   v   a    S   )   u   y   t   g 40   r   B   e   T   n   (    E    l   a    t   o 20    T

6% 7%

600 2010 2 015 Base Baseli line ne Fo Fore reca cast st

0 2020 2025 2 030 Ener Energ gy Effi Effici cien ency cy Sc Scen enar ario io

Figure 10: Industrial Sector Savings

2020 Electricity

Natural Gas

20 30 Other  

Figure 11: Industrial Sector Savings by Fuel Type

Efficient Technology Opportunities The projected energy efficiency potential can be realized through an array of new and existing technologies.  Energy Efficiency in the South describes a number of these.

 New residential products can provide greater energy savings without sacrificing performance. For instance, recently available heat pump water heaters can cut annual eenergy nergy costs for water 11 heating up to 62%.   Opportunities for commercial energy efficiency may be obtained through technologies like the geothermal heat pump (ground-source heat pump), which can reduce energy consumption by up to 44% when compared to air-source heat pumps and by up to 72% when compared to electric resistance heating with standard standard air-conditioning equipment. Though the installation cost is 12 higher, the long lifetime of 20-25 years ensures energy bill savings.

Super boilers, which represent over 95% fuel-to-steam efficiency, can be implemented in the industrial sector. This technology is able to improve improve heat transfer through the use of advanced firetubes with extended surfaces that help achieve a compact design by reducing size, weight, and footprint. The advanced heat recovery system system combines compact economizers, a humidifying air heater, and a patented transport membrane condenser. 13  These technologies are illustrative.  Please refer to Energy to Energy Efficiency in the South for South for additional technology descriptions and examples.  Economic and Financial Impacts   The nine energy efficiency policies evaluated in Energy Efficiency in the South could reduce energy costs for South Carolina consumers and could co uld generate jobs in the S State tate (Table 1). Residential, commercial and industrial consumers could benefit from total energy savings of $1.8



 

   billion in 2020 ($1.0 billion of which is specific to electricity), and and $3.0 billion in total energy savings in 2030. In comparison, South Carolina spent spent $5.9 billion on electricity in 2007.14 Using an input-output calculation method from ACEEE –  ACEEE  –  with  with state-specific impact coefficients and accounting for declines in employment in the electricity and natural gas sectors sectors –   –  we  we estimated that South Carolina would experience a net gain of 13,400 jobs in 2020, growing to 17,800 in 2030. In comparison, there there were 268,900 unemployed residents of South Carolina at 15 the end of 2009. While the South's economy would grow as a result of the energy-efficiency policies, South S outh Carolina’s Gross State Product would grow by $70 $ 70 million less in 2020 and $122 million less in 2030. This change is a small fraction fraction of South Carolina’s $126 $126 billion economy; the loss is due to the lower-than-average economic multiplier associated with energy-efficiency manufacturing and construction activities in South Carolina. 16  Table 1: Economic and Employment Impacts of Energy Efficiency Indicator Public Sector Policy Financial Incentives (in million $2007)

2020 401

2030 572

Private Sector/Household Productive Investment (in million $2007)

179

189

Change in Electricity Costs (in million $2007)

-994

-1,744

Change in Natural Gas Costs (in million $2007)  

-$178

-$248

Annual Increased Employment (ACEEE Calculator)

13,400

17,800

-70

-122

Change in Gross State Product (in million $2007)

Conclusions The energy efficiency policies described in this profile could set South Carolina on a course toward a more sustainable and prosperous energy future. future. If utilized effectively, the State’s substantial energy-efficiency resources could reverse the long-term trend of ever-expanding ever-ex panding energy consumption. With a sustained and concerted effort to use energy more wisely, South Carolina could create new job opportunities, and reduce its environmental footprint.

For more information on the methodology methodolog y used to derive this state profile, please see  Energy 1  Efficiency in the South.



 

  Acknowledgements This study project is funded with support from the Energy Energ y Foundation (www.ef.org), (www.ef.org), the Kresge Foundation (www.kresge.org) and (www.kresge.org) and the Turner Foundation (www.turnerfoundation.org). (www.turnerfoundation.org). The support of these three foundations is greatly appreciated.

Footnotes and References 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.

8. 9.

10. 11. 12. 13.

14.

Marilyn A. Brown, Etan Gumerm Gumerman, an, Xiaojing Sun, Youngsun Baek, Joy Wang, Rodrigo Cortes, and Diran Soumonni. (2010). Energy Efficiency in the South. Retrieved from http://www.seealliance.org/.  Census Bureau (2009). Retrieved from: http://www.census.gov/.   Energy Information Administration. (2009). State Energy Data System . Retrieved from: http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/states/_seds.html. Southern States Energy Board. (2009). Digest of Climate Change and Energy Initiatives in the South . National Association of State Energy Officials (2009). State Energy Program and Activity Update. American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy. (2009). The 2009 State Energy Efficiency Scorecard . Retrieved from http://aceee.org. Chandler, J. and M.A. Brown. (2009). Meta-Review of Efficiency Potential Studies and Their Implications for f or the South. Retrieved from the Georgia Institute of Technology School of Public Policy website at: www.spp.gatech.edu/faculty/workingpapers/wp51.pdf. American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy. (2010). South Carolina’s Energy Future: Minding its  Efficiency Resources. A power plant is approximated as as a 500 M MW W power plant as defined by Koomey, J. et al. (2010). Defining a Standard Metric for Electricity Electricity Savings. Environ. Res. Lett. 5 014017 Retrieved at http://iopscience.iop.org/1748-9326/5/1/014017.   http://iopscience.iop.org/1748-9326/5/1/014017. The Wal-Mart equiva equivalencies lencies are calculated using inf information ormation from Courtemanch, A. an and d L. Bensheimer. (2005). Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Wal-Mart Supercenter in Potsdam. Po tsdam. Conservation Biology. Energy Star. (2009). (2009). Save Money and More with ENERGY STAR Qualified Heat Pump Water Heaters . Retrieved from: http://www.energystar.gov/index.cfm?c=heat_ pump.pr_savings_benefits. Energy Efficiency Efficiency and Renewable Energy. (2008). Benefits of Geothermal Heat Pump Systems. Retrieved from: http://www.energysavers.gov/your_home/space_heating_cooling/index.cfm/ mytopic=12660. Energy Eff Efficiency iciency and Renewable Energy, Industrial Technologies Program. (2008). Super Boiler: A Super  Hero of Steam Generation . http://www1.eere.energy.gov/industry/bestpractices/ energymatters/archives/winter2008.html#a265. Energy Information Information Administration. (2009). State Energy Data System. Retrieved from: from: http://www.eia.doe.gov/ emeu/states/_seds.html.

15. Bureau Labor Statistics. (2010)22, Civilian labor forceMarch and unemployment by state and sselected elected area, seasonally adjustedof(Last modified: January 2010, Accessed: 9, 2010). http://www.bls.gov/news.release/laus. t03.htm 16. 2007 GSP in 2007$: Bureau of Economic Analysis. (2008). GDP by State. Retrieved from: from: http://www.bea.gov/ newsreleases/regional/gdp_state/gsp_newsrelease.htm. newsreleases/regional/gdp_state/gsp_newsrelease.htm.  



Sponsor Documents

Or use your account on DocShare.tips

Hide

Forgot your password?

Or register your new account on DocShare.tips

Hide

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link to create a new password.

Back to log-in

Close