Placeholder Image

字幕表 動画を再生する

  • MICHAEL HESS: Hello. And welcome to the latest edition of Energy Matters. I’m Michael Hess,

  • a new media specialist here at the Energy Department. And joining me today is Dr. Kathleen

  • Hogan, assistant deputy secretary for energy efficiency. Today well be discussing how

  • the cost savings associated with industrial energy efficiency affects American companies

  • and their global competitiveness. But before we start with the questions, Dr. Hogan, is

  • there anything you’d like to say?

  • KATHLEEN HOGAN: Sure. I’d like to talk a little bit about what were doing here at

  • the Department of Energy. You know, were working to develop energy efficiency initiatives

  • that improve our economic competitiveness, create jobs, improve our energy security,

  • lower costs and reduce pollution. And today well be specifically focusing on two of

  • our major initiatives: one, the Better Buildings and Better Plants Program, and the other,

  • the Advanced Manufacturing Initiative.

  • The first one, Better Buildings, Better Plants, is focused on boosting the competitiveness

  • of companies, really, in the here and now. In this program were providing assistance

  • to companies that commit to achieving a 25 percent improvement in their energy intensity

  • over the next 10 years, if not earlier. In the other, the Advanced Manufacturing Initiative,

  • well be working with organizations to address early-stage technical challenges, with some

  • innovative manufacturing processes as materials, that have huge potential for the United States.

  • And while were still in the early stages of this program, it clearly has stuck a chord

  • with American businesses. In response to $120 million solicitation we have open, weve

  • received over 1,400 letters of interest representing over $4 billion in work. So we arewere

  • looking forward to reviewing these proposals once they all come in, and really working

  • on some outstanding investments to grow American leadership in manufacturing technologies,

  • and in turn growing our GNP and jobs.

  • So I’m looking forward to hearing your ideas and suggestions during today’s Live Chat.

  • So let’s get started.

  • MR. HESS: All right. Well, weve gottenweve gotten a number of emails, Facebook

  • statusor rather comments, and Tweets as well. There’s been a common theme here,

  • actually. To paraphrase several questions: How important is this energy-efficient manufacturing

  • and industrial technology to strengthening our economy?

  • MS. HOGAN: Well, certainly that’s a great place to get started today. You know, our

  • manufacturing sector in the United States truly is a big part of what we do. It represents

  • 12 million jobs, and it represents about 60 percent of our exportsso also then, a

  • big part of our GNP. So manufacturing is really critical to our economy. And what we want

  • to be doing is continuing to boost its competitiveness, boost its leadership around the world so we

  • can continue to strengthen our economic position. So really, manufacturingadvanced manufacturing

  • and U.S. competitiveness really go hand in hand.

  • MR. HESS: Great. And, you know, thatthere are the processes that were dealing with,

  • but then there’s also, well, the buildings, right? And that’s where were coming into

  • our second questionan actual two-part question from Mark (sp) on Facebook, who asks

  • why there aren’t tighter regulations right now for energy efficiency and commercial buildings.

  • So first, what are the barriers to making commercial buildings more energy-efficient?

  • And second, what would make buildings more energywould makingsorrybuildings

  • more energy-efficient make our economy stronger?

  • MS. HOGAN: Right. So the buildings area, you know, does have a lot of opportunity for energy

  • efficiency improvements, and the questioner has really asked, first, about building codes.

  • So building codes are something that we are doing across the country. And really, the

  • Department of Energy’s role there is to do determinations around the energy savings

  • that result from sort of new-model energy codes that come to us through consensus stakeholder

  • processes.

  • So can those codes that the stakeholders are developingcould they be more stringent?

  • They can, and they do get more stringent over time. I think right now were in the process

  • of doing a code determination on a code that improves the commercial building energy efficiency

  • for new construction by something in the neighborhood of 20 to 30 percent. So we will be seeing

  • tighter codes for commercial buildings soon.

  • Now, at the same time, why are we doing those codes? It is because we have sort of a disconnect

  • in the marketplace, where the people that sort of build the buildings typically aren’t

  • the people that are in the buildings, occupy them and pay the energy bills. And that’s,

  • you know, a market failure, a market barrier. And the codes are there to help us build to

  • the level that’s cost-effective so when the building gets handed over to the owner,

  • or the tenants lease the building, they won’t be paying a higher energy bill than they otherwise

  • have to.

  • But I did say in there thatyou know, that were building to a level that’s

  • cost effective. And that’s truly what we want to keep doing, is finding the right level

  • of the codes so that when you put the better technologies and the practices in the buildings,

  • it really is a good payback for the whole sort of life cycle and system. So as we are

  • looking forward to the upcoming increased stringency of the commercial codeagain,

  • itll get more stringent, but it will also be in a cost-effective way as well.

  • So we are looking forward to that happening and continuing to offer the type of assistance

  • the Department of Energy can to assist people in getting to those levels and, you know,

  • the training and enforcementall so we can reap all those benefits.

  • MR. HESS: Now, youso right now youre talking a lot about the investments that the

  • Department of EnergyEnergy Department has in programs and projects, which actually

  • comes from Chris (sp). He’s asking that as well in an email: Where we have so many

  • so many programs, what accounts for manufacturers not using those? And what is our department

  • doing to encourage those manufacturers to pursue energy efficiency more aggressively?

  • MS. HOGAN: Yeah, so we talk a lot about energy efficiency in this country. And we talk about

  • the low-hanging fruit. We talk about energy efficiency being sort of the lowest-cost path

  • to a clean-energy future. And all those things are true. And I guess the other thing we hear

  • is weve been talking about energy efficiency for a while, and a lot of that low-hanging

  • fruit is still there. So why is it still there? Wellyou know, because all those things

  • are true. Energy efficiency is low cost, it’s the low-hanging fruit, and indeed, much of

  • it is still there.

  • And it is because there are a variety of market barriers inyou know, inor just across

  • the economy, whether it’s in our industrial facilities, in our companies, in our buildings,

  • that we really have to get together to address. When you look at industrial companies, some

  • of the issues there are just that the efficiency is in enough different places across the facilities

  • that it’s a little bit hard to get organized in a way that youre routinely going out

  • there and finding the energy efficiency opportunities, making the small investments that need to

  • be made, and then reaping those benefits.

  • One of the things we have found in working with lots of companies across the country,

  • is that if we can work with the executive suite in those organizations so that the executives

  • truly understand the opportunities that are there and thesort of the path to implement

  • sort of energy management throughout their organization, and will set energy efficiency

  • goals for the organization, you can really engage the whole culture of the organization

  • in achieving those savings and delivering the benefits to the organization.

  • But it is still interesting, as you look across the country at this point in time, that there

  • are still many, many companies that haven’t really established an energy-savings target

  • for their organization. Many haveand leading organizations, and many of them were

  • working with through the Better Buildings, Better Plants program. But there are many

  • others who haven’t. And I think many of them still don’t quite understand the benefits

  • that are there to be had inthat, you know, include lower costs and increased competitiveness

  • as well as other benefits in terms of lower pollution and increased energy security.

  • So there’s a little bit of education we have to keep doing. There’s working with

  • the leaders to keep showing the pathway and the savings that can be achieved. And that’s

  • really one of the reasons were very excited about what were now doing with Better Buildings,

  • Better Plants, because I think those leaders will really help show the way for many of

  • the others that energy efficiency just offers great bang for the buck.

  • MR. HESS: So there’s thethese new programs, and we were just asked in an emailand

  • I think this might require a little bit of backgroundbut why can’t the private

  • sector produce on its own the kind of technological advances that your office is supporting through

  • your R&D efforts? And I believe he’s referring to the American Manufacturing Partnership’s

  • Innovative Manufacturing Initiative and the Grand Portfolio Challenge.

  • MS. HOGAN: Sure. Well, certainly the Department of Energy is involved in a whole variety of

  • efforts in energy efficiency, from research and development to engaging with industry

  • and others to improve the efficiency of their organizations and facilities in the here and

  • the now. This question is sort of going up into that R&D space. And we get this question

  • a lot. What is it you are really doing that changes the path that were on as a country

  • with energy efficiency?

  • And weve been doing this work now for quite a while. So let me just speak to some of that.

  • You know, as we work with companies, we do see that they have to wrestle with fairly

  • complex technical challenges as theyre bringing a new product or a new material to

  • the marketplace. And some of those technical challenges can be complex enough that it really

  • there is no totally clear technical answer at that point in time. And it’s a fair amount

  • of research to go and get the answers to those questions.

  • And if that research costs enough, the company is justwon’t take it on. So what we

  • have offeredyou know, over and overis cost sharing for those projects to help those

  • organizations get over that cost hurdle and get to the point where they can then see a

  • clear path to commercialization, at which point you need lesser resources from the federal

  • government.

  • So weve put together, I believe, a very thoughtful approach to engaging with industry

  • as they want to innovate in terms of the type of cost share we will provide based on sort

  • of the complexities and the stage of the research the project is in. And then we offer less

  • of that technicalthose resources as that product matures. So I think we are truly in

  • a good place there.

  • MR. HESS: All right. So in a similar vein, but actually almost on a personal level for

  • you as wellyouyouve had a lot of experience with combined heat and power

  • and corporate partnerships here and at the EPA, whichthat was 10 years, is that

  • accurate? I think

  • MS. HOGAN: Or more.

  • MR. HESS: – at EPA. Andso we got a through an email asking: Since you havesince

  • you have had EPA experience and now are at the Energy Department, could you address the

  • overlap in energy efficiency efforts between the EPA and the Department of Energy?

  • MS. HOGAN: Sure. So, yeah, I’ve now been at the Department of Energy for two years,

  • and been at the EPA for many years prior to that. And I would say that the work of the

  • EPA and DOE actually doesn’t overlap. I think it’s very complementary. And I think

  • it’s one of the things I’ve been focused on since I’ve being herebeen here,

  • is to see that the agency’s – agencies’ – (with emphasis) – work really does complement

  • each other.

  • We now sit down at least on an annual basis to develop a joint work plan across our energy

  • efficiency efforts. And that’s really just the start, as we coordinate much more actively

  • as theyou know, the year progresses. So I think were here to leverage what it

  • is that the EPA has developed, and then to play the role that the Department of Energy

  • can across the suite of programs and projects that are really our strength and our core

  • capabilities.

  • MR. HESS: All right. So our next email is associated with kind of a higher level of

  • economic expansion in association with energy efficiency. And it’s coming from Robert

  • (sp), who in hisin hisin his email he opines that strong economic expansion and

  • fuller employment are associated with energy and lower costs and lower consumption of energy.

  • And he asks you: Are there any examples ofor periods in U.S. history where a policy

  • of greater energy efficiency combined with the actual efforts at energy conservation

  • spurs economic expansion and strong job creation?

  • MS. HOGAN: Certainly an interesting question. I think if we just look back over the last,

  • I don’t know, 20, 30 years or so, and really tally up how much energy efficiency has occurred

  • in this country, well see that energy efficiency is probably the thing that weve potentially

  • used the most of, relative to other fuels. Energy efficiency is really playing a tremendous

  • role in terms of where we are now in energy per GDP, as an example. So I would say that

  • there is pretty good information that energy efficiency is part and parcel with having

  • sort of -- or of us being in a relatively good place, as you look at where we are over

  • the last 20 to 30 years.

  • But I think where we are now is really needing to look to the future and chart what we need

  • to do to deal with all of the challenges that we see before us. And as we look at those

  • challenges, it includes being economically competitive, building jobs, improved energy

  • security. And I think itwe don’t have to look too far to see that energy efficiency

  • isparticularly when you roll in that energy efficiency truly is low costthat

  • it is just a critical part of what we need to do going forward.

  • MR. HESS: And so thereweve beenweve been talking more at theat the higher

  • level, and you know, just seeing here that there have been a lot of specific questions

  • that are coming inspecifically from Jennifer (sp) via emailregardingabout combined

  • heat and power. And hers is: What can be done at the Energy Department and elsewhere in

  • the federal government to help jumpstart investments in combined heat and power so that we can

  • save facilities money, increase manufacturing competiveness, and reduce emissions? And could

  • you actually start off initially, before answering this question, explaining exactly what is

  • combined heat and power to a – to a more general audience here?

  • MS. HOGAN: OK. So combined heat and powerso let’s start with the fact that when

  • we generate electricity in this country in, you know, the big power plants where we do

  • so, and the electricity flows through the transmission distribution lines to our homes

  • when we generate that electricity, typically were pulling out about a third of the energy

  • content of the fuel. And we lose the other two-thirds of the content in the conversion,

  • really, through lost heat.

  • And what the concept is between combined heat and power is you capture a lot of that heat

  • and use it on site. So a lot of combined heat and power will take place at the facility.

  • Youll generate the electricity. Youll use electricity in the facility. But you will

  • capture the heat that is the conversion loss and put it to work for you, again, either

  • in terms of more electricity or taking the heat off and putting it into your process

  • needs.

  • And the really effective combined heat and power technologies are ones that are matched

  • to the process demands within a facility. And what’s interesting is were now seeing

  • a conversion efficiency sort of at the high endin the 80 percentages or so. So compare

  • that to 33 percent; those are huge efficiency gains to be had by the effective use of combined

  • heat and power.

  • So were very excited about what combined heat and power can do in this country. And

  • DOE’s been invested in combined heat and power with companies inacross the country

  • in even improving the technology even further, as well as then going out and doing outreach

  • with industrial facilities about how those technologies can help them improve their competitiveness

  • and reduce their costs.

  • And I thinkif you can spare me another momentwhat were doing in the technology

  • area is really quite exciting based on what were talking about here today. I mean,

  • weve been working with Capstone around microturbines, Caterpillar around larger reciprocating

  • engines. And in each case, due to some of the R&D work that weve helped fund, those

  • companies are leaders in the technologies that they were working on and have now been

  • selling a fair number of these advanced technologies – a lot of it going overseasreally

  • making the U.S. be a world leader in this space, and having a strong presence with U.S.

  • jobs.

  • So, really, just a great story there for combined heat and power, and I think thatll grow

  • to an even greater story as we look at where we are now with lower gas prices, which really

  • makes combined heat and power a very attractive option to our industrial facilities across

  • the country.

  • MR. HESS: Right. So I think were going to have time for maybe one or two more questions

  • waiting for a clarification from somebody on Twitter here. And then the next question

  • and this iswere going back to broad. In defining advanced manufacturing

  • and the role it plays towards a clean energy economy – I kind of paraphrased there, but

  • whatso what role does advanced manufacturing play in a clean energy economy?

  • MS. HOGAN: So advanced manufacturing is really critical to a clean energy economy. So what

  • do we think a clean energy economy is? I think it’s one where the U.S. is highly competitive.

  • We have improved energy security. We have strong jobs and we have low costs. So advanced

  • manufacturing is just critical to all of that. And if we just sort of think of ourof

  • the statistics again, of our manufacturing base, you know, we have 12 million jobs. It’s

  • contributing 12 – well, it’s 10 percent or so to our GNP, and it’s also a big part

  • of our national exports.

  • So if we want to meet all of what we think a clean, robust energy economy is, improving

  • our innovation and our leadership in the manufacturing space so that our manufacturing sector continues

  • to compete and lead, they really are part and parcelthe same thing.

  • MR. HESS: Great. So it’s just going to be one last question here. And this is regarding

  • this is from Acorus Factor (ph) on Twitter: Any efforts to make LED lighting cheaper,

  • since it’s the lowest power use compared to the other types of lightsand can we

  • put that, you know, based on this energysorry, industryindustrial energy efficiency

  • context, commercially and industriallyLED lights?

  • MS. HOGAN: Yeah, so we have a robust, solid-state lighting research program as well. And we

  • continue to work on improving the efficiency or efficacy, as we call it with lighting,

  • asand we continue to work on driving down the cost of solid-state lighting. I think

  • right now is a very exciting time for solid-state lighting. It’s demonstrating capabilities

  • that are new to people, particularly with its long life and its very nice quality of

  • lighting. So it’s going to be exciting to watch that innovation. And well be working

  • to, you know, integrate that into the partners that were working with industrially, commercially.

  • I guess one thing I would like to call out is a recent prize that we awarded for solid-state

  • lighting. We called it the L-Prize. And it’s a bulb, the replacement for the 60-watt bulb,

  • that Philips actually won in showcasing just a very high-performance solid-state lighting

  • alternative. And well be looking to watch the costs for that come down. And I think,

  • as the questioner was maybe leading me to, I think this is exciting for where technology

  • is going in this country: just brand-new, innovative approaches that do what it is we

  • needlightingfor fractions of the energy inputsolid-state lighting using

  • about a quarter of the traditional incandescent.

  • So it’s just a great indication of what we can do with technology to drive down the

  • energy we need to get the services we all want, which is the essence of efficiency,

  • and really increase our competitiveness, increase our energy security, and build jobs at the

  • same time.

  • MR. HESS: OK, wellOK, well that’s all the time we have for today. Thanks, everyone,

  • for watching, and also for all of your questions submitted before or live. Well have a video

  • of this broadcast available tomorrow on energy.gov. Please tune in again atto the next Energy

  • Matters.

  • MS. HOGAN: And thank you. I’d like to express my thanks as well. Thank you for joining us

  • today, and all of your good questions. I look forward to working with you in the future.

  • (END)

MICHAEL HESS: Hello. And welcome to the latest edition of Energy Matters. I’m Michael Hess,

字幕と単語

ワンタップで英和辞典検索 単語をクリックすると、意味が表示されます

A2 初級

エネルギー問題:産業効率 (ENERGY MATTERS: Industrial Efficiency)

  • 14 5
    songwen8778 に公開 2021 年 01 月 14 日
動画の中の単語