Comprehensive Energy Projects (CEP)

and Innovative Financing

June 21, 2011

1
Sonoma County – CPAP history

2001 Joined ICLEI – Cities for Climate Protection

• First Climate Pledge
2002 County GHG Assessment - Orrett
• Goals, targets, opportunities, cogeneration possible
2006 Climate Protection Action Plan – CPAP
1. Set Policy - BOS Resolution to exceed AB32
2. Recommended Energy & Sustainability Manager/ Division
3. Recommend hire Energy Services Company (ESCO)
4. Recommended EEM’s/ Comprehensive Energy Project (CEP)
5. Set GHG target reduction of GHG by 8,454 tons:
• Buildings - 6,348 tons, Fleet - 436 tons, Commute – 1,670 tons
2
Sonoma County – Policies

2006 BOS Resolution GHG Targets exceed AB32

• 20% below 2000 GHG by 2010
• 25% below 1990 GHG by 2015
Permitting and Resource Management (PRMD)
– 2008: LEED certified for commercial and BIG for residential
– 2011: Currently adopted CALGreen Tier 1
– Next: International Green Construction Code (IGCC)
2010 – GS Green Building Policy County Facilities
– LEED certified <10,000 s.f.
– LEED Silver minimum goal >10,000 s.f.
– LEED Gold minimum goal >50,000 s.f.
– Maximize green, sustainable and energy efficiency
3
Sonoma County – Background

Various 20th Century Efficiency Projects

First decade 21st Century Projects:
– 5-6 MW Landfill Gas
– Local Government Electric Vehicle Partnership
• County plus 9 Jx = 240 hybrids, plug-ins and EV’s
– 820 MW Solar 2 projects, more planned
– CEP w/ 1.4 MW Fuel Cell CHP Power Plant
– 1MW biogas (compost) in development
– 5MW to date – Sonoma County Energy
Independence Program (SCEIP)
– Bloom box technology in consideration
– Off bill, ARRA, and QCEB funded projects
– 5 MW savings – Sonoma County Energy Watch
(SCEW)
4
Sonoma County – Other Agencies

Sonoma County Water Agency (SCWA)

– Goal of carbon free water delivery by 2015
– 22.4MW in development including CCA feasibility
– 2.2 MW Solar 3 projects – $15.5M, projects received
$4.49M in PG&E rebates
– 2.64 MW Hydro
– 32 hybrids and plug-in hybrids
– Wave power feasibility study – 2 to 5 MW at each of 3
locations, potential expansion 40 MW.
– Geothermal project in development
Sonoma County Fair and Exposition
– 1.36 MW Photovoltaic, State grant funding
5
Sonoma County – Other Agencies

Sonoma County Water Agency (SCWA)

– 5.6 MW Biomass – 1.4 MW Fuel Cell project in development

6
Sonoma County – CEP history

2006-2008 – Develop CEP (Phase I)

– RFP to select Energy Services Company (1 year)
– Complete Inventory Grade Energy Audit (1 year)

2008-2010 – Execute CEP (Phase II)

– CEP Objectives:
1. GHG reduction
2. Positive Financial Impact
3. Infrastructure Renewal
7
Comprehensive Energy Project

CEP Process
– Phase I – Inventory County
Facilities (1 year)
• Prepared Investment Grade Audit
• 180 Energy Efficiency Measures
(EEM) assessed
• 101 EEM’s recommended

Fuel Cell Module

– Phase II – CEP
• Phase IIA – 38 EEM measures, 24
buildings plus Fuel Cell
• Phase IIB – To be determined from
remainder on list of 101 EEMs
8
Comprehensive Energy Project

38 EEMs at 24 buildings
Lighting retrofits, 20 buildings, 1.3 MWh savings
HVAC replace or rebuild in 4 buildings
HVAC Motors & Controls MADF
Central Mechanical Plant (CMP) upgrade
Water retrofits, including detention, 20 M gallons/yr.
Ozonator for Detention Laundry Water
1.4MW Fuel Cell Cogeneration Power Plant

9
1.4 MW Fuel Cell Power Plant

Fuel Cell Energy DFC 1500

– Generates 10,693,216 kWh/year
– Produces 45 billion BTUs year
– Produces virtually no NOx or SOx
pollutants
– Reduce GHG emissions by 69%
versus grid power
– Designated “Ultra-Clean” by CARB
– Categorically exempt from CEQA

10
1.4 MW Fuel Cell Power Plant

Fuel Cell Energy Production

8
1.4 MW Fuel Cell Power Plant

Fuel Cell Installations in California:

– City of Santa Barbara, 500KW
– Sierra Nevada Brewing Co., Chico, CA 1MW
– Sheraton Hotel, San Diego 1MW
– Westin Hotel, San Francisco Airport, 600KW
– California State Univ. at Northridge, 1MW
– City of Riverside 1MW
– County of Alameda, 1MW
– Turlock Irrigation District, 1.2 MW
– City of Tulare, 900KW
– Dublin San Ramon Service District, 600KW
– Cache Creek Casino, 750 KW
– Santa Clara 1996 – 4@500MW
11
1.4 MW Fuel Cell Power Plant

Sonoma County Fuel Cell Power Plant

•Largest fuel cell in California - First article 1.4MW
•1.4 MW Distributed Generation (DG) creates more
reliable power for County Center in brown out situation.
•Adjacent to CMP for Combined Heat and Power (CHP)
• Certified Combined Heat and Power (CHP) per
CPUC §2840 Guidelines, Section III
• 47% electrical efficiency , plus 20% due to CHP
(compare fossil fuel plants 33% efficient)
• No transmission loss to deliver to 12kV loop
•Natural gas provided by utility non-core.
• Shopping for renewable gas supply
•SGIP incentive of $3,000,000 from PGE toward the
$9,763,271 cost
13
1.4 MW Fuel Cell Power Plant

County Utility Costs –

• Prior County electric bill $1.5M annually
• New County power costs $1.5M annually
• Gas bill for fuel cell is $350k
• Amortize equipment costs (debt repayment)
• Pay FCE maintenance costs
• Prepay (amortize) stack replacement @ 5th year
County Load Characteristics –
• Demand at night – 8-900 kW due to detention 24/7
• Demand summer peak – 2,500kW or more
• Supply constant 1.4MW (Part Peak Load match)
• AB1613 Feed in Tariff (FIT) desired.
• Looking at additional load shifting opportunities
Fuel Cell Payback is Seven Years! 14
1.4 MW Fuel Cell Power Plant

SPECIAL ISSUES:
• Interconnection to utility was difficult
• Fuel cell module on-site August 2010
• Turned “on” in December 2010
• Digital Metering desired per building–
• First meter $25k with software
• Subsequent meters $15k
• Metering Load –
• Net generation output meter at the fuel cell
• No meter at the connection of12kV loop to PGE
• Maintenance –
• No problems yet with seamless electric supply
• Demand charges are severe when FC drops out
15
Financing

Directive: Make CEP Expense Neutral Day 1 Î

– California Government Code §4217.10 finance based on savings
– Obtained Private Loan Financing – Bank of America
– Based on equipment lease model
– Collateralized on improvements
– Bond package option as backup
16
Financing

Financing Plan
Project Cost $22,272,029
Incentives, Grants, and Rebates ($3,941,226)
Financed Amount $18,730,803
Estimated Interest Rate* 4.98%
Repayment Term 16 years
Assumed Closing/Funding Date 1/1/09
Assumed Annual Energy Cost Escalation* 5%
First year of positive cash flow Year 12
Total payments $31,794,615
Total cumulative positive cash flow after 25 years
$38,404,231
(estimate life of equipment)

* Rates are estimates and are subject to change. 5.4 was max rate 17
Rebates

Rebates played a big part in our total financial package. 18

Cost Savings

Comprehensive
Projected Cost Savings
Energy Project - Phase 2 Projected Projected
EnergyEnergy
& Water Cost
and Water Cost
Energy and Water Savings Projection Total Financing
Total Financing and Maintenance Costs
& Maintenance Costs
$6,000,000

$5,000,000

$4,000,000
Dollars
Dollars

$3,000,000

$2,000,000

$1,000,000

$-
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
Year
Year 19
CEP Results

CEP Objectives Met ?

1. GHG reduction 6,135 tons*
– Electricity reduction 13,365,226 kWh
– Water savings = 19,138,260 gallons
– Utility savings = $1,689,316
2. Saving $$$, No General fund impact
3. Replaced old worn out equipment
* Now in 1 year Measurement and Verification
+ Created jobs, collaboration, other benefits
20
 Additional Projects

• LED Parking lot retrofit with

On Bill Financing
• Sustainable Energy
Practices Guidebook

www.sonoma-county.org/gs/energy/index.htm
21
State of California Trending

Governor Jerry Brown Goals

Distributed Generation Renewable

1.3 Million MW feasible CA

Increase RPS 20% to 33%
20,000 MW Distributed
Generation – Renewable
– 8,000 MW utility scale
– 12,000 MW small projects
• 2,500 MW state facilities
By 2020 (9 years)
22
 Thank you

Julia Donoho, AIA, Esq. – Major Project Architect

Project Manager of Comprehensive Energy Project
[email protected]
707- 565-1366

Sam Ruark– Energy & Sustainability Coordinator

[email protected]
707- 565-2125 23