— from Governor Inslee’s Office —
The rumble of the engine room is a familiar sound aboard a Washington state ferry, but that sound — and the carbon emissions that go with it — may soon become a thing of the past.
A member of the state’s Jumbo Mark II ferry fleet — the Tacoma, the Wenatchee or the Puyallup — will soon likely have two of its four diesel engines replaced with batteries. Once the conversion is complete, that hybrid-electric ferry would run on electric power most of the time, using the remaining diesel engines only in rare circumstances.
The money saved from converting that ferry to hybrid-electric power could cover conversion costs for the remaining two, Washington State Department of Transportation officials say.
The likelihood that the state will have at least one electrified ferry in the next several years is drawing international attention, in particular from Norway, which has one of the world’s first all-electric car ferries. State transportation leaders on Thursday took Kåre Aas, Norwegian ambassador to the United States, on a tour of the Tacoma’s engine room to talk more about the project — as well as how Norway and Washington might collaborate on electric ferry innovation.
Read the rest of the story on the governor’s Medium page.
**If you are reading theOrcasonian for free, thank your fellow islanders. If you would like to support theOrcasonian CLICK HERE to set your modestly-priced, voluntary subscription. Otherwise, no worries; we’re happy to share with you.**
Shouldn’t we answer the question, “where will that electricity come from to power these ferries”?
Will it come from clean hydro? Well, unfortunately, there is no hydro left. People want to remove damns, not build more. This super clean hydro resource is GONE.
Will it be solar? It could be if we could store the energy. But if we install solar without using it to drive our ferries, that solar will go to reduce generation from the most expensive resources on the grid. That would REDUCE CO2 emissions.
How about wind. This resource suffers from the same limitation as solar.
So, to power those ferries, the grid must supply energy from the power plants that have available generating capacity. Those are the most expensive plants on the gird, which run less due to their high cost.
The most expensive plants are rail hauled coal fired plants. They are high CO2 generation sources. So the hybrid ferries will really be running on COAL.
There is no free lunch here and the governor’s staff should know it. They need to clue the governor in. This conversion of ferry “fuel” will increase, not decrease CO2 emissions.
This column shows that you can “prove” anything you want to, and is based on the following equally specious logic:
There are 365 days this year.
There are 52 weeks per year in which you already have 2 days off per week, leaving 261 days available for work.
Since you spend 16 hours each day away from work, you have used up 170 days, leaving only 91 days available.
You spend 30 minutes each day on coffee break. That accounts for 23 days each year, leaving only 68 days available.
With a one hour lunch period each day, you have used up another 46 days, leaving only 22 days available for work.
You normally spend 2 days per year on sick leave. This leaves you only 20 days available for work.
We are off for 5 holidays per year, so your available working time is down to 15 days.
We generously give you 14 days vacation per year which leaves only one day available for work!
No, hydro (which is adjustable) is NOT gone, and coal plants are dropping like flies for the very reason Tom Owens says: they’re to expensive. The issue is not raving environmentalists, it’s cold hard economics. State regulators guarantee privately owned coal plants a return on their capital investment (in coal plants) which have run longer than economical because stockholders benefit. Because of the high resulting rates they impose because of high operating costs, large industrial customers are investing directly in solar and wind, stranding the coal plants. The Avista coal plant in Chehalis does not run at full output because Avista is unable to sell power at a competitive price even though for some purposes under an agreement entered into with the state its power is counted as “renewable” in return for closing that plant before its investment is fully amortized. Coal is a diminishing part of the power mix in Northwest daytime power consumption because of $$$, not philosophy.
And yes there are batteries. They’re on the ferries, of course. Night time charging is most efficient. They don’t turn off the rivers at night, and the wind at night is stronger, so renewable power availability abounds. No, they won’t be firing up coal plants (which can take a day to fire up) to run the ferries.
Bill, the logic is simple. You are just trying to complicate things. There is no philosophy in my comments. Just a real knowledge of how the power system operates and a basic understanding of economics.
The hydro resource is totally in use every day. This is logical because it is near zero incremental cost. Environmental issues have reduced the available energy from the hydro system for years now. Fish must have water to migrate and spawn. Floods must be controlled. If the Snake River damns are removed, there will be even less hydro. How will that loss be made up Bill? You worked in the legal end of the energy industry so you surely know this.
Getting rid of coal plants is great. This can be done only if the unreliability of renewable energy is solved. However, every bit of almost zero cost sun or solar energy we produce will reduce coal output with its high incremental cost. That is an economically logical out come.
So more loads like electric buses and ferries will only go to sustain the fossil fuel plants longer. During the night, the sun does not shine and the wind sometimes does not blow. What then Bill?
Leif,
Your questions are good. Let me share with you what I know.
Calculating emissions, when the source is not where we are, is the same as if the source was in our own back yard. Except that if it is a coal plant somewhere else, we don’t have to breath the emissions. Unfortunate for those folks that live near coal or natural gas plants, but good for us who live somewhere else. For CO2, it does not matter as that is a global issue. For unburned hydrocarbons, it is a local issue. So a ferry that runs on electricity here will not pollute here. The coal plant supplying the electric energy will pollute for others to breath. Is this really fair? We get the ferry service and they get the pollution.
The “zero emissions” slogan is pure political SPIN. I personally have had enough of it.
Our hydro system runs on the water that comes as rain and snow in the Canadian Rocky Mountains each year. Therefore, there is a fixed amount of electric energy that can be produced each year. The use of this resource is heavily regulated to protect fish, manage floods and provide recreation. Since it is very-very low cost energy, what is available will be fully used up supplying existing loads. In fact, there is not enough to supply all our needs. Hence, nuclear, natural gas, coal, solar, geothermal and wind plant make up the difference. Nuclear, solar, geothermal and wind have a very low incremental cost so all that gets used up quickly. Natural gas is used next as it is fair cheap. Finally, coal comes into play. So there is no “extra” hydro to “fuel” the ferries or buses or EV. That energy must come from available generation capacity and that will usually be coal. And that is a huge CO2 source.
Centralia has a special deal from the State of Washington. Their electricity is “labeled” renewable, giving them a higher price. Washington got a shut down date for each plant and the owners got this special deal to earn back their investment by selling “renewable” power at a higher price into the market.
Centralia’s owners have installed at least 500 MW’s of natural gas fired plants at the site. When they look at the market, they sell at the renewable price. They then decide to use the cheapest source of generation. This would seem to be natural gas. Hence, we see less Centralia generation from coal. A good thing, but not for the reasons that Bill sighted. It is all about economics, not philosophy
Coal plants, owned by private utilities (like PSE,PGE and Avista) will be shut down if their regulators (Public Utility Commissions) will agree to let the utilities recover their investments and return on investment through the rates they charge their customers. So their main concern is their stockholders, not their customers. The customers always pay in the long run.
Public utilities, like Snohomish PUD, Seattle City Light, Tacoma City Light, etc are not regulated. For them to shut down a plant (coal or otherwise) they must raise their rates. This is not something they like to do because customers usually have means to pitch the board out at the next election. A mistake by the utility immediately hits the customers.
I hope this helps.
Much like a Venn diagram, Tom and I are in agreement on many things but given additional facts, our logic diverges.
Avista’s plant in Centralia is running far below capacity, having been able to sell on contract only a limited amount of its capacity. But that plant doesn’t increase its output when you turn on your electric toothbrush or when a ferry charges. Centralia is a bulk generator, and does not participate in the spot market because, as Tom and I agree, it can’t compete.
The fallacy of Tom’s argument is that Tom assumes that if a coal plant is running at all, then hydro and gas (and wind and solar) must have been exhausted. This is not how the market works.
Electronically controlled and with no rotor inertia to build up, solar facilities can fill needs with gap speeds of milliseconds, and wind within minutes, not hours, when shortages occur. These assets are almost as often underutilized as drained, resulting in two interesting developments: First, BPA is moving to a 5 minute power allocation from a 15 minute allocation, where previously (in the coal days) only the day-ahead market prevailed (though there still is such a market). Second, the existence of excess power from inexpensive renewable sources is now the primary asset of the Electric Imbalance Market that many Western utilities have joined and BPA is looking at. Its limitation is power line capacity, a challenge nearly everywhere, but as coal dies, this is being worked on.
The issue is no longer coal, it is distribution of our very considerable inexpensive renewable energy resources in a manner to meet loads reliably and flexibly. It isn’t only that coal is too expensive, it’s that it really no longer meets the needs of the existing grid that requires far more flexibility than coal can provide.
Economics will prevail. Tom is right that for municipal utilities, rates can be a sensitive issue, but municipal utilities today do what they have to because they issue revenue bonds that require rates well in excess of operating expenses, and sometimes bond reserve funds. Also, there nonresidential classes of utility customers: commercial, municipal and industrial. Utilities of all kinds and generating non-utilities like Avista compete for these customers.
No, the “last resort” argument that Tom makes for coal is not the reason why we still have it in the Northwest. Coal exists in our region on life support. It is an anachronism whose elimination is giving rise to very serious social and local economic challenges that act as a brake on shutting them down.
Tom, Bill Appel and I have been discussing all this for several years. Bill is right, there is much we agree with Tom on, but not Tom’s opinion on electric transportation and coal.
As in much of the world, in San Juan County the growth of local renewables like solar and wind generation, as well as energy efficiency, are outpacing the growth of load. In fact, US electric load peaked in 2007, and has been flat to down in most of the US as renewables and efficiency rush in, putting a stake in the heart of coal.
Even though Electric Vehicles (EVs) in SJC grew at over 65% last year, the amount of local renewable generation and efficiency gains more than outpaced the EV load, by about 10 to 1. That’s because EVs are so efficient and use so little energy. And they cost about 5 times less to drive.
Electric ferries will provide similar efficiencies. Right now, 63% of WA fleet carbon emissions come from ferries. That is a stunning number, but anytime you see the black diesel smoke belching from the stacks, you can see why WA wants to learn from Norway. The transition will take time, but during that time, coal plants will continue to be decommissioned and go the way of the dinosaur. It all will get better and better.
For those looking to learn more about this topic, see the excellent report published by the Union of Concerned Scientists, here: https://tinyurl.com/ucs-EVs-cleaner-than-ever