Page 6 - Zero Net Energy Case Study Buildings-Volume 3

ZERO NET ENERGY CASE STUDY BUILDINGS, VOL. 3 FOREWORD
Foreword
iv
Zero Net Energy Case Study Buildings: Volume 3
Much has changed in the market for ZNE since we published Volume 1 of this series four years ago. And the news is mainly good. The market for ZNE has exploded. Policy and legislative mandates to reduce GHG emissions on both the energy supply and energy demand sides continue to ramp up even as they begin to force changes in the dynamics of building-grid interaction. Importantly, the commercial real estate market is beginning to reflect the full value of high performance, low emissions and ZNE.
An Exploding Market. Although the total number of ZNE buildings is still small in absolute terms, the rate of increase of ZNE buildings in both residential and non-residential markets is soaring: to wit, the New Buildings Institute (NBI) reports a 700% increase in non-residential ZNE buildings since 2012; the Net Zero Energy Coalition (NZEC) reports 33% growth in 2016 in residential markets followed by 70% growth in 2017. In Volume 2 of this series, published in 2016, we documented Sharp Development’s 32,000 square foot project 435 Indio Way in Sunnyvale, CA—two years later, this small developer is now on ZNE retrofit project number six, demonstrating a model that can be replicated rapidly (more on this later).
On the other end of the “scale” spectrum, the State of California continues to accelerate ZNE plans in its own fleet of buildings: the State’s management memo implementing the Governor’s order B-18-12 states that “All new state buildings, major renovations, and build-to-suit lease beginning design after October 23, 2017 . . . shall be designed and built following cost-effective energy efficiency strategies for achieving ZNE.” On the residential side, we now have entire subdivisions, such as De Young Properties’ EnVision in Clovis CA, being built to ZNE. Although this series of Zero Net Energy Case Study Buildings is focused on California, much is happen- ing in other cities and states throughout North America: in the NZEC 2017 inventory of ZNE projects, six of the top twenty cities for ZNE are in California . . . but fourteen are in other states (and Canadian provinces). Momentum is clearly building, and not just in California.
Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Reduction: Still the Driver, with New Wrinkles. As we stated in our Foreword in 2014, in Volume 1 of Zero Net Energy Case Study Buildings,
“GHG issue(s) are driving and transforming . . . leaders within the building industry to target this new level of building performance.”
Likewise, the power grid serving our building stock continues to get “cleaner,” and at an ac- celerating rate. California passed AB 32 in 2006, mandating a 20% reduction in GHG emis- sions compared to 1990 levels by 2020; successor legislation SB 32, signed in October, 2016, mandates an extension of that law to require a 40% reduction by 2030. California is on target to reach these goals.
As of July, 2018, California has more than 830,000 solar projects totaling more than 6800 MW (www.californiadgstats.ca.gov). Although clean and renewable, this power is available a little less than 20% of all annual hours, calling out the need for flexible, responsive building loads, grid-level and behind-the-meter storage, and associated grid infrastructure improvements to enable these advances.
Not so long ago, policy makers were concerned about the air quality impacts of running rela- tively dirty “peaker” plants during summer afternoon heat storms: with the increased availability of solar photovoltaic systems (PVs), the emissions profile of the grid for spring and summer afternoon power in California is now at its lowest of any time of the year. In fact (and further turning conventional wisdom on its ear), some of the highest emissions on the California power grid now occur in the middle of the night in fall and winter, causing policy makers to rethink what we typically consider to be “off peak” charging and storage opportunities with available capac- ity—simply put, we want to store clean power, not dirty power! (In fairness, the off-peak hours are not “dirtier” than they used to be—it’s more that the other hours are far cleaner.)