1. March 4, 2013
NGA Policy Academy
Cheryl Roberto, Former Commissioner
Public Utilities Commission of Ohio
Ohio CHP Pilot: A PUCO and
US DOE Partnership

2. Snapshot of Ohio CHP Potential
Current Potential
CHP Implementation in Ohio 530 MW 9,800 MW
CHP % of Total Ohio Electric Generation 2% 29.4%
Nationally, CHP % of Total Generation 8.0% -
Market Sector
Gen. Potential*
(MW)
Paper 2,329
Chemicals 2,838
Primary Metals 430
Food 310
Other Industrial 767
Commercial/Institutional 3,082
Total 9,800
CHP Technical Potential
* Includes CHP export potential
2

3. Why CHP matters to the PUCO
PUCO’s statutory responsibilities:
• Energy assurance and reliability
• Addressing market deficiencies
• Encouraging diversity of electricity supply
• Ensuring emergency preparedness
3

4. Why now?
Clean Air Act’s Industrial Boiler MACT*
• U.S. EPA finalized rules Dec. 20, 2012
• Establishes three-year compliance window**
• Facility owners’ choices:
– Add environmental controls/ retrofits to existing boilers
– Replace oil/coal boilers with natural gas boilers
– Consider installing new CHP as a natural gas option
– Shut down/move
Coal-Fired Plant Retirements
• Localized grid constraints
• Reduced capacity
4

5. How CHP could help Ohio
• Create distributed generation in pockets of
electricity constraint
• Provide “Island of Power” during outages:
-- for sensitive/critical organizations including
hospitals, data centers, others
-- black start capabilities for everyone else
• Eliminate or defer investment in “t” and “d”
• Assist industries in developing cost-effective
emission compliance strategies (Boiler MACT)
• Expand customer choices to remain economically
competitive (i.e. retaining businesses and jobs in
Ohio)
5

6. Boiler MACT Affected Boilers in Ohio
Fuel Type Number of
Units
Capacity
(MMBtu/hr)
Coal 48 10,015
Heavy Liquid 6 743
Light Liquid 16 5,112
Biomass 7 1,448
Process Gas 6 2,003
Total 83 19,321
industrial, commercial and institutional boilers only
Source: EPA Information Collection Request
6

7. Potential Coal-fired Plant Replacement?
ACEEE 12-state study (Fall 2012):
• CHP can help replace generation lost to retired coal
power plants.
• The CHP technical potential in those 12 states alone
is more than enough to offset all coal retirements
nationwide.*
* Study did not overlay specific locations of CHP technical
potential with specific locations of retiring coal utility power.
7

8. CHP can be cost-effective choice
Costs for new 20 MW plants
(ACEEE , September 2012)
$-
$0.02
$0.04
$0.06
$0.08
$0.10
Natural-Gas
powered CHP
Natural-gas
powered combined
cycle
Nuclear power
plant
Levelized cost per KWh
8

9. Genesis of PUCO/US DOE Partnership
• September 2011: Ohio Gov. John Kasich hosts energy
summit and expresses interest in promoting CHP for
its economic and environmental benefits.
• Winter 2011: U.S. DOE, through the Midwest Clean
Energy Application Center, offers to pilot technical
assistance to boiler operators in Ohio.
• February 2012: PUCO adopts resolution in support of
the DOE pilot and becomes the first state to
participate.
9

10. PUCO’s Role and Commitment
From PUCO resolution, February 2012:
– Identify boilers in areas of potential constraint as
priorities for U.S. DOE educational efforts
– Work with PJM Interconnection to understand how
new CHP could be incorporated into markets
– Help boiler owners connect with U.S. DOE and
utilities
– Facilitate information sharing with other state
agencies (OEPA, ODOD, ODNR)
– Seek opportunities to remove educational and
regulatory barriers to voluntary adoption of cost-
effective CHP
10

11. US DOE’s Role and Commitment
Provide site-specific technical and cost
information to facilities that are burning coal or
oil in their boilers and are affected by EPA Boiler
MACT Rules.
• 40+ major source facilities (~ 90 to 100
boilers) in Ohio
• Share information on financial incentives
available at the local, state, utility and federal
levels as well as private financing
11

12. Removing Educational Barriers
CHP 101 Workshop (3/9/12):
• Target Audience – MACT boiler owners
• DOE Technical Assistance Program
• Ohio EPA on MACT rule
• Examples of successful CHP in Ohio
• PJM market overview
• DR opportunities in PJM
12

13. Removing Educational Barriers
CHP Case Studies Workshop (6/20/12):
• Target Audience – MACT boiler owners
• CHP 101
• Two Medical Centers
• Wastewater Treatment Plant
• Landfill
• Coke Plant
• Chemical Plant
13

14. Removing Educational Barriers
Financial Tools Workshop (8/2/12):
• Target Audience – MACT boiler owners
• Federal and State tax policies
• State Financing Program
• Fuel Procurement Hedging
• Debt, Developer, Equity Financing
• EPA Spark Spread Tool
• Project Cost Screening Tool
14

15. Removing Educational Barriers
Training Natural Gas Utility Key Account Reps
(12/7/12):
• Target Audience – Gas Utility Key Account Reps
• Understanding Fundamentals of CHP
• Why CHP Can Bring Value to Your Customers
• Recognizing CHP opportunities in Your
Customers’ Facilities
• Finding Assistance For Your Customer Once CHP
Potential is Identified
15

16. Removing Regulatory Barriers
Stand-by Rates Workshop (9/13/12):
• Target Audience – MACT boiler owners,
developers, utilities, all stakeholders
• Introduction to Stand-by Rates
• Existing Stand-by Rates in Ohio (RAP)
• Best Regulatory Practices (NRRI)
16

17. Removing Regulatory Barriers
PUCO Rulemakings and Comment
Opportunities:
• Target Audience – MACT boiler owners,
developers, utilities, all stakeholders
• Interconnection, Case No. 12-2051-EL-ORD
• Net Metering, Standard Market-Based Rate for
Energy and Capacity for Co-Gen, Case No. 12-
2050-EL-ORD
17

18. Results: Outreach & Education
385 people attended 5 CHP workshops at PUCO
405 people joined the PUCO listserv on CHP
3,500 unique page views of our CHP web page for:
-- Archived workshop webcasts
-- Existing and potential CHP facilities in Ohio
-- CHP rulemakings and tariffs
-- Technical assistance and reports
18

19. • Over 50 companies contacted
• 12 feel they are already in compliance
• 6 no longer in business
• Analyses for 15 in various stages
• All companies are now aware of how CHP can
assist in a compliance strategy
• U.S. DOE will continue to track results of
technical assistance
Results: Boiler MACT Technical Assistance
20

20. Ohio’s Legislative Support of CHP
Senate Bill 315, Gov.
Kasich signed June 2012:
• CHP and waste energy
recovery can be counted
toward the state’s Energy
Efficiency requirements.
• Waste energy recovery
facilities qualify as renewable energy sources under
Ohio’s Alternative Energy Portfolio standard.
20

21. What did we learn?
Successful
CHP
applications
operate in
Ohio
University of Cincinnati Central Utility Plant
21

22. What did we learn?
Pay-back horizons are best suited to institutional or
governmental boiler operators. Joint ventures work
for private industry.
Ashtabula, Ohio joint
venture: Millenium
Inorganic Chemicals and
Duke Energy
Generation Services
22

23. What did we learn?
• Financing is project
specific and owners
often use consultants
to pursue best
options
• Standby tariffs must be
updated to reflect current
conditions
23

24. What’s ahead for CHP in Ohio
• Market-specific newsletters
created by Midwest CEAC
and PUCO
• Rules updates
• Midwest CEAC implementation assistance when an
owner chooses a CHP solution
• Additional training opportunities as topics and
interests develop
• Open invitation from U.S. DOE for additional ways
they can assist PUCO
24

25. For More Information
Public Utilities Commission of Ohio:
Matt Butler, Administrative Officer
matthew.butler@puc.state.oh.us
614-644-7670
CHP@puc.state.oh.us
http://www.puco.ohio.gov/puco/index.cfm/industry-information/industry-
topics/combined-heat-and-power-in-ohio/
Midwest Clean Energy Application Center:
John Cuttica, Director, Energy Resource Center
cuttica@uic.edu
312-996-4382
http://www.midwestcleanenergycenter.org/
25

26. For More Information
U.S. Department of Energy
Katrina Pielli, Senior Policy Advisor, Acting CHP Deployment Lead
katrina.pielli@ee.doe.gov
202-287-5850
Boiler MACT Technical Assistance Program
http://www1.eere.energy.gov/manufacturing/distributedenergy/boilermact.html
26

27. References
• “Coal Retirements an the CHP Investment Opportunity,” Anna Chittum and Terry Sullivan,
American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy, September 2012
http://www.aceee.org/research-report/ie123
• “FACT SHEET: Adjustments for Major and Area Source Boilers and Certain Incinerators,” U.S.
EPA, December 2012
http://www.epa.gov/airquality/combustion/docs/20121221_sum_overview_boiler_ciswi_fs.pdf
• “President Obama Signs Executive Order Promoting Industrial Energy Efficiency,” The White
House, August 2012 http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/08/30/executive-order-
accelerating-investment-industrial-energy-efficiency
• “Natural Gas Key Account Reps Training for Combined Heat and Power,” John Cuttica and Cliff
Haefke, Midwest Clean Energy Application Center, December 2012
• “Annual Energy Outlook 2013 Early Release Overview,” U.S. Energy Information
Administration, December 2012 http://www.eia.gov/forecasts/aeo/er/pdf/0383er(2013).pdf
27