HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.council.worksession.20090922MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Jeff Rice, John Hines, Kim Peterson, Lee Cassin, Lee Ledesma
THRU: Phil Overeynder, Utilities Director
DATE OF MEMO: 9/18/09
MEETING DATE: 9/22/09
RE: Clean Energy Collective Renewable Installations
REQUEST OF COUNCIL: Staff requests council to consider the proposal from Clean Energy
Collective for a co-op owned solaz PV array installation within the City of Aspen Electric Utility
service boundary (roof tops of Yellow and Red Brick buildings). The purpose of which is to
provide a single source site of solaz PV for co op members rather than individual private installs.
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: No previous action concerning this proposed project.
BACKGROUND: COA electric utility and staff strive to obtain a 100% renewable electric grid
serving our ratepayers. This is done through renewable power purchases, renewable power
generation, and reduced ratepayer consumption via DSM programming. Solaz PV array
installations on personal property for personal consumption aze one such avenue of obtaining the
goal. However not all homes and buildings are site located or oriented to benefit from solaz PV
installations. The solution is to look for applicable sites best oriented to the solaz window of the
sun. The question is how to serve ratepayers with a solar PV array not directly associated with
their property.
DISCUSSION: The Clean Energy Collective (here after referred to as the Collective or co-op)
offers a way to serve COA electric ratepayers who wish to offset their current electrical
consumption with solaz PV but whose property is not ideally situated for solaz window exposure.
A single site sourced install with good to excellent solaz window exposure within the COA
electric service area tied to the electric grid is the ideal. The proposed install would be roof
mount solaz PV on first the Yellow Brick Building and then a second array proposed on the Red
Brick Building (as ratepayer demand increases). The members of the Collective co-op are the
owners of the solaz PV arrays. The members aze COA electric ratepayers who purchase for
install solaz PV panels to be installed at the Collective site rather than on their personal property.
The proposed array sizes aze approximately 100 kW (average personal system size between 3 and
6 kW) potentially serving more than twenty households. Options to address ownership in the co-
Page 1 of 3
op aze Collective ownership remains with the real property or Collective ownership is bought out
by the collective or Utility at reasonable mazket value. A project install such as this can be
implemented immediately rather than micro hydro for example that requires a two yeaz FERC
process prior to implementation.
This proposed single site sourced install, maintained by the Clean Energy Collective, owned by
the co-op members, will provide solaz PV generated electricity to offset the members' personal
electric consumption via virtual net metering (this is currently being discussed with regazds to
COA utility billing softwaze. If lack of technology based softwaze interface and program
administration results in added manual calculations and rebilling efforts the collective will cost
associate to reduce or eliminate impacts to current staff). Currently it is an ideal arrangement as
it relieves the COA and the electric utility of liability, installation costs, and maintenance costs
while still providing an affordable solar PV model.
The privately owned arrays installed on city owned buildings will be maintained by the
Collective, and all inherent and perceived costs aze proposed to be carried by the Collective. The
COA being a government agency cannot take advantage of the investment tax credit (ITC) while
the private co-op members can. Along with economies of scale and addifional local incentives
the cost of such a solaz PV install per member can be reduced by as much as $3.50 /watt. The
current average cost of solaz PV installation for a private system on personal property is about
$7.50 /watt.
Outside of maintaining additional insurance on the buildings where arrays have been installed the
COA will not incur any costs of installation or maintenance of proposed installs. The Collective
is willing to absorb this incremental expense. Revenue contracts to date with owners of
buildings where installs occur have not been done. If city revenue is pursued roof top lease
agreements and or percentages of production (after 25 yeaz estimated amortization of investment)
aze options. The COA would need to execute a Utility agreement to address metering economics
and production information assimilation.
In regazd to implementing a lease agreement for proposed solaz PV installation on City buildings
(such as the Yellow Brick or Red Brick) a public review process will be desired by Council. The
existing code would allow a building permit to be issued without the requirement for a public
hearing. Council may wish to specify that prior to approving a lease document for either of the
above buildings, what type of process is desired to ensure that there is an opportunity for public
comment on the proposal.
FINANCIALBUDGET IMPACTS: The Electric Utility Efficiency division currently offers a
solaz PV install incentive of $3 per installed watt with an allocated budget of $25,000. to
incorporate a project such as the Clean Energy Collective would decimate current budget
allocation and mandate a future budget in excess of $300,000 to serve projected solaz PV install
alone. Our current program would need to be amended either reducing the per watt incentive,
creating a flat incentive per member 'or maximum incentive per Collective array. The third
option is the increasing of the PV incentive budget to continue with a higher incentive offering.
While this is initially attractive it is the most expensive option in providing renewable energy to
Page 2 of 3
our rate payers. It may come at the expense of faz more effective measures such as energy
performance auditing, efficiency measures, and programs tazgeting products and appliances that
reduce energy consumption.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: The implementation of solaz PV electric generation via the
Clean Energy Collective will provide renewably generated electricity to our grid (each 100 kW
install will be approximately 1/1000°i of 1% of our current grid consumption). It will allow COA
electric ratepayers who other wise could not install solar PV on their personal property for a
number of reasons, a resource to benefit from, ultimately reducing there personal home or
building cazbon emissions.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff requests council to act on the proposal from Clean Energy
Collective for a co-op owned solaz PV array installation within the City of Aspen Electric Utility
service boundary (roof tops of Yellow and Red Brick buildings). The purpose of which is to
provide a single source site of solar PV for co op members rather than individual private installs.
ALTERNATIVES: Currently alternatives with similaz financial implications for the ratepayer
and extremely reduced liability for the city and installation site owners do not exist to the best of
our knowledge.
PROPOSED MOTION:
CITY MANAGER COMMENTS:
ATTACHMENTS:
A -Clean Energy Collective Overview
B - CEC Council Considerations
Page 3 °f 3
Clean
Energy
CQllective~
Clean Energy Collective, based in Carbondale, Colorado, was created to propel a
momentous leap in the future of clean energy use in our local area, state and nation. Our
goals are to:
~ Foster the accelerated adoption of clean energy by the masses at a
community level to directly reduce carbon emissions (easier, cheaper, safer)
Provide utilities with lower risk and more beneficial clean energy
generation (smart growth)
~ Creating a manageable and mutually beneficial power production
partnership between utilities and consumers
The Clean Energy Collective (CEC) is a powerful option for aligning customer and utility
oriented goals for controlled, affordable clean energy generation. The CEC fosters greater
affordability to the utility's customers by leveraging the aggregated purchasing power in
larger sized systems, all while embracing a managed, long term solution that is more
advantageous to utilities than distributed home generation. The CEC partners with utilities
and assists in leveraging private customer investment in renewable energy generation
projects to meet carbon reduction goals, as well as diversifying the cost-effective renewable
energy projects in the utility's portfolio.
The CEC project development team is responsible for seeking cost reductions, such as
wholesale and bulk contracts for PV modules and other generation sources, as well as grant
writing and other fundraising activities. The CEC not only makes reducing the cost of clean
energy a priority, but more importantly provides a structure that enables more consumers
to partake, further increasing the overall clean energy impact. For example, if 500 utility
customers participated in the Clean Energy Collective over a several year period, the CEC
could deploy $6M - $lOM of clean energy atfar-reduced costs per kilowatt hour, and
without any utility, corporate, municipality or governmental investment. The CEC also
makes a wider variety of clean energies available for public ownership, such as micro-hydro,
wind and biomass, further lowering ownership costs and improving our energy stability.
The adoption of clean energy is being heavily subsidized by
the government as well as utility providers, a practice that
is currently important for market penetration. Subsidies in
their current form (rebates, production payments, tax
credits) are not along-term, sustainable solution. The
Clean Energy Collective seeks to create lasting investments
insensible renewable energy projects through the
development of managed and financially stable clean
energy generation sources.
:; 2'li ~ ~.o~-yr r It C~ =',5 f-nsr ,v '. ~la.~iive, LAC i ,. ;~qr, i:;l
Some utilities are concerned with the influx of small distributed systems that could
introduce unneeded instability to the electrical grid. Utilities also bare the responsibility of
maintaining a complicated grid to support the growing amount of distributed generation. A
smart growth solution is needed that works for utilities ;and consumers to rapidly and safely
propel us towards a clean energy future -the Clean Energy Collective is part of the solution.
The CEC establishes local clean energy sources in full partnership with utilities, such as
medium scale solar, hydro, wind, geothermal and biomass on behalf of its members. Local
Collectives are created, administered and managed by the CEC, an organization whose sole
focus is to provide optimal clean energy solutions and supporting technology that serves our
communities, businesses and utilities in creating a sensible and affordable clean energy
nation.
The Clean Energy Collective removes the traditional barriers experienced by consumers:
Consumers
Rather than placing panels on each
owner's home (in the case of solar),
members' panels are placed within a
managed community array, while
reaping the same benefits as putting
a clean energy source on their own
property orbusiness -and more.
These include available rebates, tax
credits and net metering against
their power bill, all while saving
money on a "bulk" or large-scale
4 2ui~~~pav +I--.:~irri,,C .vim@ce.l l(. i.it-cia
Common Challenges for ~les~n E~rcrcJY otlectiyc:
installation and having access to technologies that otherwise would not be available to
the masses (hydro, wind, geothermal, biomass). Other consumer Collective advantages
include access to special financing, leasing and tax incentive partner options, resale
opportunities and the ability to move within a utility network and have their clean
energy source instantly move with them. Two of the CEC's primary objectives are to
provide perpetual energy solutions while keeping consumer costs as low as possible to
make clean energy obtainable by the masses and to drastically increase clean energy
use. The CEC will stage system build-outs in reasonably sized phases as members
purchase ownership in the community owned system.
A primary benefit of the Clean Energy Collective is that energy facilities, no matter the
system complexity, are perpetually maintained to ensure continual peak performance
and return on each owner's investment into the future. Consumers are able to monitor
their ongoing clean energy production within the Collective through an online account
management website that presents up-to-date energy production and consumption
information as well as historical data.
The Clean Energy Collective provides a variety of cleon energy sources
that produce power around the clock, not just during peak solar hours.
It's as easy Checking the box on your utility bill,
Arranging payment or financing with the Clean Energy Collective
You're DONE! Your savings will start showing on your next utility bill.
Clean
Energy
Collective
Utilities
In addition to providing managed ownership solutions for consumers and businesses,
we also respond to the needs of utilities by providing reliable, well located and
exceptionally maintained clean energy generation facilities. The Clean Energy Collective
presents utilities with an avenue for simplified renewable energy growth through large
scale solutions without introducing undo risk to their networks or requiring any funds.
All technology and net metering information is seamlessly provided to the utility
partners by the CEC to enable the proper crediting of consumer accounts as well as
reconciliation tools. In working to serve both utilities and consumers, we realize that as
clean energy penetration raises, a pole and wire impact will need to be addressed either
through the CEC or on a state level for all net metering customers. Following are a few
of the utility provider benefits:
:: 2A iCupgt ~L.m Fn r ~p!!estnrt~.Ur.
(%20~~~~~P~,'rr Qa~n€rr ti.oi{0ctivr. LLi: t i~i-~.tl ~I
Home/business-based solutions Cl~c~n Energy Gallee~~ve
Clean Energy Collective
Considerations for Council and City Manager
Lease Aereement
Complete engineering analysis / calcs for roof load, sheer, etc. as prerequisite to
building permit
Site impacts and maintenance agreements (roof penetrating /non roof penetrating
mounting), roof weaz and teaz assessment or additional walking structures to
~ accommodate collective maintenance staff.
Additional building insurance /insurance on PV array
Virtual net metering, PV offset data per collective member in relation to COA
billing. Softwaze compatibility /manual data entry, etc.
Revende pursued: city roof space lease option w/ percentage of production after
25 yr estimated amortization of investment.
Utility
- REC's (renewable energy credits)
- Current solar PV incentive program budget is $25,000. propose to double
allocating $25,000 for collective incentives for total PV budget of $50,000.
options; allocate budget per watt demand at 151 phase build out of 400kW equates
to incentive of $0.125 per installed watt.
- Proposed 15` phase solaz PV azrays of 200 kW on Yellow Brick 200 kW on Red
Brick. 2"d phase install of up to 800kW on Obermeyer and additional 200kW of
possible micro hydro. Total current proposed build out of 1.4 MW =roughly 3.5
MWH or 4.8% of the COA electric grid consumption. Castle Creek Hydro will
produce roughly 6.5 MWH per yeaz or 9% of the COA electric grid
- Why COA electric? Inverted block rate structure and investment benefit/payback.
MEMORANDUM
TO: Aspen Municipal Boazd of Health
FROM: Lee Cassia, Public Health Agency Director
MEETING DATE: September 22; 2009
RE; Quarterly Boazd of Health Update
PURPOSE OF MEETING: State law requires the Aspen Board of Health to meet
quarterly. The purpose of these meetings is for staff to provide updates and give the Board of
Health a chance to provide d]rection to staff. No decisions are requested from Council.
DISCUSSION: This packet includes two items: 1) an update from Environmental Health
on recent projects, 2) two articles on H1N1 /swine flu from Aspen's Medical Officer Dr.
Morris Cohen. An update from Liz Stark, Community Health Services Duector will be
provided separately.
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH UPDATES:
SYSTEM FOR COUNCIL TO WEIGH ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENTS: Staff in Environmental Health, Global Warming, and
Engineering developed quantitative standards that can be used to assess the impacts of
developments on air quality, greenhousegas emissions, and stormwater pollution. We
discussed these procedures with local planning consultants and developers and the system
has been implemented via administrative policy by the Community Development D]rector.
After the P&Z adopts the AACP, this will be one of dozens of items included in possible
changes to the land use code.
RESTAURANTS- Despite the down economy, the Environmental Health Department has
performed more restaurant plan reviews in 2009 than any other time in the past 5 yeazs. We
are currently looking at having 4-5 more new restaurants opening prior to the end of the year
and have completed 12 plan reviews so faz in 2009. These numbers are a significant increase
over the past several years and represent an encouraging sign about the vibrant restaurant
scene in Aspen.
SWINE FLU- City Environmental Health is participating in an IlvIT with local law
enforcement, Pitkin County Public Health, and the Aspen School District to prepare for and
respond to Swine Flu. The group is working with local government and businesses to help
them prepare for Swine Flu and also to ensure timely and accurate distribution of
appropriate information to key partners. One of the focal points of the group is maintaining
continuity of operations during an outbreak and we are working with those who provide
essential services to help ensure this will happen. The group is currently meeting weekly as
Page 1 oft
Swine Flu numbers are beginning to rise quickly in the US, and is operating in the ICS
format.
RECYCLING GOAL: The City of Aspen exceeded our recycling outreach goal for 2009.
The top ten businesses that were not previously recycling have now all started recycling.
Those top ten businesses are all located in the commercial core, with lots of visibility, and
their actions have helped spread the word about recycling to their customers. In addition,
Ashley Cantrell (recycling outreach coordinator) helped over 35 businesses start recycling
more commodities. That means that businesses that were previously only recycling
cardboard have now started recycling office paper, comingled containers and
newspaper/magazines as well. This is all good news for Aspen's recycling rate and also for
those business that aze now saving money by recycling more and throwing away less.
ZGREEN EVENTS PROGRAM - had a very successful summer! Ashley and Lauren
McDonell worked with over 30 events to help them meet the new ZGreen requirements.
Although some events did better than others, all events made the effort to be greener and
visitors to those events noticed. The new requirements were met with support from most
event planners, and the public comment has been positive. Event attendees aze impressed
that Aspen is leading the way with green events, and locals are proud that Aspen is the first
city in the U.S. to require that public events meet green standards. ZGreen staff will
continue to work with the Aspen Skiing Company to ensure that all Ski Co. events follow
ZGreen standards. Green events are becoming increasing populaz, so look for more ZGreen
certified events next summer. Thank you to City Council for your continued support of this
program.
RADON: The Environmental Health Department was just awarded a 2009-2010 Indoor
Radon Grant for $1,975. The grant will fund a Radon outreach and testing program
targeted to owners of Affordable Housing in the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority's
inventory. The Radon Education Campaign will begin in November, 2009. Outreach will
include attending HOA meetings, one on one office visits with interested homeowners, and
a multi-media blitz. Coupons for free test kits will be delivered in December with
instructions on where to pick up their test kits and how to set out the test kits. Participants
will be encouraged to set kits out during January's Radon Action Month. Environmental
Health staff will be available to help interpret the results and inform owners about radon
remediation options if their results are greater than 4 pCi/l. Test results will be tabulated in
February, 2010.
OZONE: The Environmental Health Department is pursuing a contract for an ozone
monitoring system. This system will be funded by existing Air Quality Impact Fees paid by
new developments. Given that the highest ozone level ever recorded on the western slope
of Colorado was measured on Ajax Mountain in the summer of 2008 and that breathing
ozone can trigger a variety of health problems, staff believes that ozone is an important
environmental health concern for the Aspen community. By locating an ozone monitoring
system within the City of Aspen, staff will be able to determine whether our community is
exposed to high ozone levels and focus our efforts in the City's air quality program.
Page 2 of 2
August 26, 2009
NBC News
30 Rockefeller Plana
Suite 325W-I
NY, NY 10112
CDC Strrtemert on Vaccine Safety Thimefocat s___ dim
At the Centers for Disease Canes and Prevention ~~ dcrstand that autism and autism
specuvm disorders place a hen burden on many
De;Fpi[c compelling scientific evidence against a link bctwcKm vaccines and autism, some par~mts
wander if vaccintnt weld hate caused that cnildrat to develop. mtism The suggestion that
MMR (Nlnslex. Mumps and Rubella) veceua: cadd tie related to autism was initially raised in a
1998 snick by Audtew Wakefield sod oolleagucs. Several subsequent smdieF by independent
regeatchers, however; have not found sa ae;sociation A study that included the saiire laboratory
that was involved in Wakefield's origiml ~udies was not abk oo replicate the original findings.
Ctmce<as nave seen raised sent[[ possiNc b;as~s in the study by Wakefield, and !0 of the no-
autha[s of the 1998 article have pubU:~ed a formal reotStxiun of the article's conclusions. A
review by dtc htstittre of Medicare in 2004 concladcd that the evidence indicates that MMR
vaccine does not catisc autism.
in early 2000. ooricerns were raised that thitnetosal, a tncn:ury-basr'd p[ea:rvativc [hat had been
until in stxnnchildhaod vaceinr~. could cause autism Nutncmus smdiet have found na
ascociatioo betweetrthintctnsal trcpoauu and autism.., Siooc dtiutearMal was retttovcd ftrmt all
U.S. diildhood vaoanes by 2002 (with the exception of the fin vaccine), we have not scen a_
decline in children being identified with autism. iodu;ating that thimen>sal is unlikely to be
[elated to autism. "
The CDC supports research to better tmderstendtnc causes of autism and to develop [Wore
effective tr:atments. Early intcrvcntioa is critical a~ re4carch is our list hope to unde[staading
dte causes of autism Through ooUaborations with pouters in govcmroert, tr.'tit'arclt centeis, and
dte public. CDC is focusing on three altos 1) midetstnnding the frequency and arertds of autism
specaum disorders: 2) advancing tsacarch is the search far causes and 3) improving Orly
dctoctinn and diagabsis.
CDC place[ a hrgh prierrity on vaccire safay and dte integrity and cnxlibility of our vaccine
safety rescarch. CDC, along with other f~dcral agencies, is committed m assuring the safety of
vaccines through rigorous pre-Ucensure trssds and post-licensure monitoring. This comrnittncnt
not only stems from our scientific e~ medical d wFare canaaned about the hmlthf andw~
wok at l~C are also pacestts artd gcandp
safay of children.
Frank Destefano, M.D., M.P.H. Edwin Trevathan, MD.. M.P.H.
Direarrr ~~Of
lmmuniution Safety Office, CDC Natiotud Center on Birth Defccu
& Developrtxntal Disabilities, CDC
American Academy of Pediatrics
~;
nrnu:A~r•u iu.~in ni.tirn~u~,tit.r.nn.mec~ ;.,;~~
u~ Namrew Pam awe
9c Gmne Vage, R erar7-tOBB
PIIaK MTMX~OOG
F¢!gMl4r000
EyMR IoMOOOQaapoy
"~"~"'~P'O~ August 2009
EgeulM Caaimluw Statement from the American Academy of PCdiaVics to "Dateline"
FwlA~nt
CMUq T. T~/x,Jr,LD.FMP
-
~ The immunization schedule is considered the ideal schedule for healthy children.
.n~an s. Pau.r. Mo. FMP It is designed to stimulate chi Idren's immune systems so they wil I not suffer
,~~~ ilhKSS, disability and death from vaccine-preventable diseases. The recommended
ame.R.rmrs, ao, FMP immunization schedule i5 based on the latest scientific research. There is n0
~. o;,.o scientific evidence to support the safety or effec;iYeness of alternative schedules.
Eiwl R ~. wo. FMP Delaying vaccines leaves babies ltnproteMed when they ace mosi vulnerable to
vaxine-preventable disraces such as hepatitis B (a liver infection}, rotavinu
Boid of 0kae0oi° (severe diarrhea) disease), whooping cough and bacterial meningitis.
or~da ~
EAwad N. arlry, uo, FMP
sran. ~ Autism !S a devestatla r understood neurodeve
g, poo ty bpmenta] condition. It is
upsetting for families not to Imow what caused their child's autism. The American
°i°~""
Ne~yA 8clrlay MD, FMP Academ of Ped'~atrics AAP su additional research to investi to enetic
Y ( ) i ga g
a~ooePt ~++ and environmental factors drat Wray affect the developing brain. While it is likely
Drakes .that there are many environmental factors that influence the development of
senaa paean wdmc ao. FMP
~ autism, vaccines are nOt the CaUSe of autism. We know this because man careful
~• ~ and repeated studies s~ow'no link between vaccines and autism: Specifically,
orrkcn
FradsE RnHwe.-, W, FMP numerous studies have refuted Andrew Wakefield's
theory that MMR vaccine is
9..+an.9C linked t0 bowl disorders and autism. Every aspoct of Dr. Wakefield's tlwory has
a,~v been disproven.
MkrYn J. Bu rD, fMP ~ _- .
." The AAP wants [o have corn
parents pkte, science-6®sed information ~ they can
~~ ~
w FMr make the best decision for their child about immunization. The AAP urges parents
~
anYerq vN - who have questions about vaocincs to talk to their pediatrician. For more
ornaew information, visit
I(~dll E rlrtlw.+rs, W. FMP -
CalkpnSrrogTX -
[XstrlaeWl
Yrr P. &arn. MC. FMP
Bsn4 OR
C/kO1ae0(
Mfg B. Maa4 MD, FMP
~er7', CA
DruktX
Jmn & Capri. MD, FMP
TrIg4 R