Snapshot: Veolia Energy Grand Rapids LLC
Veolia Energy takes a long-term view of the district energy systems it owns and
operates, including the steam system in Grand Rapids, Mich., which the company
acquired from Kent County in late 2008. In Grand Rapids and at all its plants, Veolia
is committed to making continuous operational improvements that will drive economic growth, increase environmental benefits and increase energy efficiency. To
date, we have plans to implement the following major improvements to the Grand
Rapids system:
; Install a condensing heat exchanger – This will recover heat from the exhaust
stacks to preheat water being fed to the boilers, reducing the volume of fuel
consumed by approximately 5 percent. Reduced fossil fuel consumption means
a reduced carbon footprint and lower cost per pound of steam produced.
; Reinsulate piping in manholes – Reinsulating piping in manholes will reduce
heat loss to the atmosphere, thereby lowering the variable cost of steam to
customers.
; Reduce distribution system leaks – The Grand Rapids steam distribution network consists of nearly 4 miles of high-pressure (135 psi) and 1. 5 miles of low-pressure ( 8 psi) mains. The low-pressure system is old, results in more heat loss
and requires significant maintenance expenditure. Veolia will replace the low-pressure system with high-pressure
over the next three years, beginning
with more than three blocks on
Ionia Avenue this past summer.
Eliminating portions of the low-pressure
distribution steam system, without adversely
affecting customers, will also improve the
system efficiency and reduce the cost to
customers. Improving the distribution system
has a positive impact on maintenance, lowers the percentage of wasted steam and
reduces the company’s carbon footprint.
Courtesy Veolia Energy North America.
Veolia Energy’s Grand Rapids system provides
steam to more than 130 downtown customers,
including hospitals, college campuses, cultural
and exhibition centers, commercial offices and
retail stores.
are decades away from commercialization
– and few are as efficient overall.
On a global basis, our company collects statistics that demonstrate the
impact of our energy optimization efforts.
For instance, in 2008, customers that utilized our solutions reduced their carbon
dioxide emissions by 6. 2 million tons. This
material carbon footprint reduction was
enabled by a single company, globally.
Imagine what we could do as a nation if
we made a similar commitment to energy
efficiency.
An increased emphasis on the use of
renewable fuels to fire or co-fire CHP and
district energy systems can also help
address climate change in a meaningful
way. On an ongoing basis, we assess
opportunities for our customers and our
company to introduce renewable fuels to
the energy mix and further reduce fossil
fuel consumption.
ciency and greater reliability as well as
significant price volatility, industry has
long been a proponent of CHP. University
and large hospital campuses represent
other sectors that have embraced CHP, as
the campuses are essentially mini-cities
with thermal needs so they can effectively use their heat sink for maximum efficiency. Finally, as the economic climate
recovers and the new mixed-use real
estate developments are finally built,
these developments will also be prime
candidates for CHP.
Q. What role do you see district energy
and CHP playing in addressing climate
change? What impact do these technolo-
gies have in reducing the overall carbon
footprint of a building or district energy
system?
A. District energy and CHP will play a
necessary and crucial role in addressing
climate change. The objective is to reduce
our reliance on fossil fuels, and new technologies and renewable energy are all only
partial solutions. There is no single ‘silver
bullet’ for climate change, only ‘silver
buckshot’; district energy and CHP must
be encouraged and deployed in concert
with other solutions.
The less good news is that district
energy and CHP are sometimes overlooked
in favor of more ‘futuristic’ solutions; the
good news is district energy and CHP are
proven technologies that are available
today while some futuristic technologies
Q. Earlier this year IDEA tried to get
$1.6 billion appropriated for district
energy/CHP through the federal stimulus bill. Although that request was not
approved, the U.S. Department of Energy
set aside $156 million of stimulus
funding for CHP and district energy
and asked district energy/CHP systems
to apply for the funds. We understand
DOE was overwhelmed by the number
of applications received. We feel that
demonstrates the incredible potential
that the industry holds. What are your
thoughts on the need for federal funding?
A. The stimulus funding was an extraordinary event that involved stakeholders
across virtually every sector. With all of
the competing interests vying for funding,
it is not surprising that our industry did
not receive everything it requested. But I
must confess the final sum allocated made
little sense in light of the good that could
have been achieved with additional funding.
It is a positive sign that the DOE has
been flooded with applications, and we
agree that this demonstrates the industry’s potential. I also think it an oversight
not to allow the replacement of ancient
insulation with modern materials as a
candidate for stimulus funding.
We obviously agree that any federal
money directed toward district energy
and CHP is well-spent. Additional funding will come if we can demonstrate the
