NREL is a national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy 

Efficiency & Renewable Energy, operated by the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC.

Contract No. DE-AC36-08GO28308

Using Net-Zero Energy Projects 

to Enable Sustainable Economic 

Redevelopment at the Former 

Brunswick Air Naval Base 

S. Huffman

Produced under direction of the Environmental Protection Agency by the 

National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) under Interagency 

Agreement IAG-09-1752 and Task No WFD5.1001

Technical Report

NREL/TP-6A20-50710

October 2011
NREL is a national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy 

Efficiency & Renewable Energy, operated by the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC.

National Renewable Energy Laboratory

1617 Cole Boulevard

Golden, Colorado 80401

303-275-3000 • www.nrel.gov

Contract No. DE-AC36-08GO28308

Using Net-Zero Energy Projects 

to Enable Sustainable Economic 

Redevelopment at the former 

Brunswick Air Naval Base 

S. Huffman

Prepared under Task No. WFD5.1001

Technical Report

NREL/TP-6A20-50710

October 2011
NOTICE

This manuscript has been authored by employees of the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC (“Alliance”) under 

Contract No. DE-AC36-08GO28308 with the U.S. Department of Energy (“DOE”).

This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States government. 

Neither the United States government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, 

express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of 

any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately 

owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, 

trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, 

or favoring by the United States government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors 

expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States government or any agency thereof.

Cover Photos: (left to right) PIX 16416, PIX 17423, PIX 16560, PIX 17613, PIX 17436, PIX 17721

Printed on paper containing at least 50% wastepaper, including 10% post consumer waste. 
iii

Acknowledgments

The author wishes to acknowledge the assistance of the following people: Caleb Rockenbaugh of 

NREL built and ran the energy models for the building-type energy consumption templates that 

were used to estimate the potential future energy consumption of the empty buildings on the 

base; Special thanks to Ricardo Bracho, as well as Michael Mendelsohn, Travis Simpkins, Doug 

Dahle, Michael Penev, Claire Kreycik, Jenny Sumner, and Paul Schwabe of NREL provided 

consultation on financial modeling as well as some of the more obscure financial incentives; 

Alicen Kandt and Jeff Bedard of NREL provided consultation on the Kalaeloa project and 

comparison of the various green building code and rating systems; Nancy Carlisle, Sheila 

Hayter, Mary Lukkonen, Scott Gossett, Warren Duff, and Gail Mosey of NREL served as peer 

reviewers and editors; and Mitchell Tannenbaum of the Maine Public Utility Commission

provided consultation on the State of Maine pilot project; Li Kangmin, and Gabriel Grant 

provided assistance related to the descriptions of the Industrial Symbiosis systems in Lubei 

China and Kalundborg, Denmark; Mary Donnel provided assistance in greenhouse economics; 

and Coleen McCulla, Troy Wuelfing, and Li Kangmin illustrated the diagrams. The author 

would like to acknowledge Gunter Pauli and George Chan of Zero Emissions Research and 

Initiatives (ZERI) for many of the principles illustrated in the Systemic Opportunities section of 

the report as well as the many hundreds of innovators working all over the world who provided 

inspiration for some of the systemic processes proposed in this report. 

In addition, numerous equipment suppliers provided hours of their time helping estimate system 

costs. 
iv

Executive Summary

The Brunswick Naval Air Station is a naval air facility and Environmental Protection Agency 

(EPA) Super Fund site that is being cleaned up, and closed down. The State of Maine has 

established a new entity, the Midcoast Regional Redevelopment Authority (MRRA), to 

repurpose the property and over 100 buildings on the site. As part of this repurposing, MRRA 

has renamed the property Brunswick Landing, and under a contract through EPA asked the U.S. 

Department of Energy’s (DOE) National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) to do a 

comprehensive analysis of the property to look for renewable energy as well as sustainable 

economic redevelopment opportunities that could be used to redevelop the site. NREL analyzed 

eight different renewable energy technologies: solar photovoltaics (PV), solar domestic hot water 

heating (SDHW), solar ventilation preheating, wind, fuel cells, micro gas turbines, biomass 

combined heat and power (CHP), and geothermal heat pumps as well as opportunities for energy 

efficiency upgrades in the buildings and infrastructure. 

The objective of this report is not only to look at the economics of individual renewable energy 

technologies, but also to look at the systemic benefits that can be gained when cost-effective 

renewable energy technologies are integrated with other systems and businesses in a community; 

thus multiplying the total monetary, employment, and quality-of-life benefits they can provide to 

a community. This also included looking for opportunities for industrial symbiosis which can be 

defined as the concept of using the waste from one process as a feedstock for another process; 

lowering “disposal” costs, and up-cycling the former “waste” into a value-added commodity. 

The technology that offers the strongest combined economic opportunity is a CHP system; due to 

the abundant wood resources in the area, the system’s quick payback, and the system’s ability to 

be combined systemically with other micro-enterprises. 

By utilizing the State of Maine’s Community Based Renewable Energy Production Incentive 

Pilot Program,

1

 the Midcoast Regional Redevelopment Authority (MRRA) can enter into a longterm agreement with the Maine public utility commission (PUC) and the local utility that ensures 

MRRA would be paid for their cost to generate the wood-powered electricity, plus a reasonable 

profit. This rate can go up to a maximum of $0.10/kilowatt hour (kWh) and contracts can be 

signed for up to 20 years. In addition, by leasing the power plant from a third party, MRRA 

could indirectly take advantage of significant federal tax incentives that would reduce the 

installed cost of the system. Calculations show that under a worst-case scenario, if MRRA 

installed a 2 megawatt (MW) wood-powered boiler and steam turbine to generate electrical 

power and installed a distribution pipeline system to distribute waste heat from the turbine to 

heat buildings (with no incentives for the pipeline), and if there were no building tenants to 

purchase the waste heat, the payback of the system would be 10 years. There are a number of 

ways in which the project could be structured. One of these scenarios would involve MRRA 

leasing the biomass CHP system for 10 years during which time MRRA would have $133,000/yr 

in positive cash flow (not counting any heat sales). This money could be put into escrow and at 

the end of the 10-year lease, the system could be bought by MRRA for fair market value of $2 

million, which would be the amount that would have accumulated in escrow from the positive 

 

1 DSIRE. http://www.dsireusa.org/incentives/incentive.cfm?Incentive_Code=ME13F&re=1&ee=1. Accessed March 

28, 2011. 
v 

cash flow over those 10 years. These paybacks are based on taking advantage of the Federal 

Production Tax Credit and the Modified Accelerated Cost Recovery System (MACRS)

(Depreciation) with a bonus 50% the first year. 

In addition, waste heat from the power plant can be leveraged in a number of ways to spur 

economic growth or to create new businesses. A fairly typical way to do this is to give away free 

heat to entice new tenants to sign leases. However, the heat could also be leveraged to pay for 

part of a tenant’s building energy improvements when combined with tax incentives, thus 

increasing the impact of the long-term PUC/utility contract and the resulting waste-heat resource 

on the physical infrastructure of the property. 

By combining a CHP system with other optional systems, the waste hot water and carbon 

dioxide coming from the wood power plant could be used to jumpstart a greenhouse industry 

growing local foods and providing jobs all winter long. Carbon dioxide from power plants is 

commonly used in Europe to accelerate the growth of greenhouse crops by at least 30%. The 

moist, heated air resulting from the wood chip drying process could be used for locally grown 

produce that could be cultivated year-round in greenhouse facilities. 

This strategy ties in nicely with the large tourism and retiree industry in the Midcoast region and 

the burgeoning local and quality food movement. In addition, Bowdoin College also represents a 

huge potential bulk market and has committed themselves to supporting the purchase of local 

food. None of these large markets have local organic buying options during the winter season, 

which stretches for over 8 months of the year.2

Many additional optional business opportunities can be added around the main starting biomass 

CHP cluster, which generates electricity and heat for the buildings. These are proposed later in 

this report. An analysis of the full potential for the manufacturing sector is outside the scope of 

this report. However, many other symbiotic business opportunities will become available as 

additional businesses relocate in Brunswick Landing and as more information emerges about 

possible manufacturing processes, wastes, and feedstocks. It is recommended that this be 

investigated further in the future. 

By taking advantage of a newly-created corporate structure named low-profit limited liability 

company (L3C), which allows a nonprofit to control a for-profit corporation as long as it has a 

social mission, this biomass CHP business, or the new businesses in Brunswick Landing’s 

business incubator, could access new sources of capital that have not been traditionally 

accessible to start-up companies. In addition, Brunswick can take advantage of NREL’s 

prescreening of DOE’s holdings of clean-tech intellectual property to act as technology 

matchmaker with potential local entrepreneurs for future start-ups. 

In addition, initial discussions with consultants who specialize in other tax incentives not related 

to renewable energy, such as New Market tax incentives, indicate that there is a high possibility 

that Brunswick Landing would qualify for these tax incentives for the projects proposed. These 

 

2 Preliminary cash flows based on standard greenhouse industry figures show that a high-density greenhouse 

growing lettuce has a simple payback of 2.4 years. Combining a greenhouse business with the installation of a CHP 

system gives Brunswick a customer for waste heat and revenue to offset the cost of the CHP system. The 

greenhouse could provide a revenue stream even if other buildings at Brunswick fill up slowly.
vi 

tax incentives would be in addition to the tax incentives already included in the financial 

calculations presented in this report. 

Every site has different renewable resources. In addition to the biomass, we evaluated seven 

renewable technologies, of these, only solar ventilation preheating was found to be economically 

viable for large-scale deployment. Solar ventilation preheating was found to have a payback of 

approximately 7.4 years if done as a standalone project, and a payback of approximately two

years if done during the upgrading of the facade of a building. State tax incentives and rebates 

would buy down the cost enough to allow a very small solar PV and a very small wind system to 

become economically viable for demonstration purposes, but not on a large scale at this time. 

Natural gas micro turbines were found to have a payback of 6.2 years, but this would require that 

1 MW of capacity be installed at one time and that all of its waste heat be sold. This would be a 

challenge with the current low occupancy rate and uncertainty at Brunswick Landing. Selling 

only 50% of the heat would make the payback increase to 17 years. 

The conclusion of this study finds that by combining an aggressive building energy efficiency 

retrofit program with a biomass CHP system, it appears that Brunswick Landing could become 

one of the first net-zero energy developments in the country. 

We recommend MRRA proceed to a more detailed implementation analysis to determine the 

optimal mix of technologies, partner companies, and financing mechanisms that MRRA might

utilize to implement a project. 
vii 

Table of Contents

Acknowledgments ........................................................................................................................ iii

Executive Summary ..................................................................................................................... iv

Table of Contents ........................................................................................................................ vii

List of Figures ............................................................................................................................... xi

List of Tables ................................................................................................................................ xi

1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................1

1.1 Scope of Work .................................................................................................................. 1

1.2 Study Location ................................................................................................................. 1

2 Estimate of the Energy Consumption of the Existing Facilities .........................................3

2.1 Analysis of Potential Energy Consumption on the Site ................................................... 3

2.1.1 Energy Consumption Analysis Methodology and Assumptions and Limitations .... 3

2.1.2 Limitations of these Estimates .................................................................................. 3

3 Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Screenings........................................................4

3.1 Biomass CHP (Cogeneration) .......................................................................................... 4

3.1.1 Biomass CHP Technology Overview ....................................................................... 4

3.1.2 Steam Turbines ......................................................................................................... 4

3.1.3 Internal Combustion.................................................................................................. 5

3.1.4 Pros and Cons of Each Technology .......................................................................... 5

3.1.5 Additional Systems ................................................................................................... 6

3.1.6 Biomass Fuel ............................................................................................................. 6

3.1.7 Biomass CHP Technology Screening Methodology ................................................ 8

3.1.8 Biomass CHP Screening Results .............................................................................. 8

3.1.9 Additional Potential Savings and Income ................................................................. 8

3.2 Heat Distribution Pipeline to Buildings ........................................................................... 9

3.3 Storage Tanks (Old Fuel Tanks) ...................................................................................... 9

3.4 Cooling ........................................................................................................................... 10

3.5 Dehumidification and Drying......................................................................................... 10

3.6 Energy Efficiency ........................................................................................................... 10

3.7 NREL Assistance with Deep Building Retrofits and New Building Design ................. 11

3.8 Energy Standards ............................................................................................................ 11

3.8.1 Examples of Progressive Building Codes and Resolutions for Future Codes ........ 12

3.9 Incentives ....................................................................................................................... 15

3.9.1 Federal Incentives for Biomass ............................................................................... 15

3.9.2 State of Maine Incentives for Biomass ................................................................... 16

3.9.3 Federal Incentives for Pipeline ............................................................................... 17

3.9.4 Federal Incentives for Energy Efficiency ............................................................... 18

3.9.5 State of Maine Incentives for Energy Efficiency .................................................... 18

4 Solar Photovoltaics ...............................................................................................................20

4.1 Roof-Mounted Systems .................................................................................................. 20

4.1.1 PV System Components ......................................................................................... 20

4.1.2 PV Array ................................................................................................................. 21
viii

4.1.3 Inverters .................................................................................................................. 21

4.1.4 Operation and Maintenance .................................................................................... 22

4.1.5 Photovoltaics Screening Methodology ................................................................... 22

4.1.6 Photovoltaics Screening Results ............................................................................. 24

4.2 Incentives ....................................................................................................................... 24

4.2.1 Federal Incentives for Photovoltaics ....................................................................... 24

4.2.2 Regional Incentives for Photovoltaics .................................................................... 25

4.2.3 State of Maine Incentives for Photovoltaics ........................................................... 25

5 Solar Domestic Water Heating ............................................................................................27

5.1 Solar Domestic Hot Water Technology Overview ........................................................ 27

5.2 Solar Domestic Hot Water Screening Methodology ...................................................... 27

5.3 Solar Domestic Hot Water Screening Results ................................................................ 27

5.4 Incentives ....................................................................................................................... 28

5.4.1 Federal Incentives for Solar Domestic Hot Water .................................................. 28

5.4.2 Regional Incentives for Solar Domestic Hot Water ............................................... 29

5.4.3 State of Maine Incentives for Solar Domestic Hot Water ...................................... 29

6 Solar Preheating of Ventilation Air ....................................................................................30

6.1 Solar Vent Preheat Technology Overview ..................................................................... 30

6.2 Solar Vent Preheat Screening Methodology .................................................................. 30

6.3 Solar Vent Preheat Screening Results ............................................................................ 30

6.4 Incentives ....................................................................................................................... 30

6.4.1 Federal Incentives for Solar Ventilation Air Preheating Systems .......................... 30

6.4.2 State of Maine Incentives for Solar Ventilation Air Preheating Systems ............... 31

7 Wind Turbines ......................................................................................................................32

7.1 Wind Technology Overview .......................................................................................... 32

7.2 Wind Screening Methodology ....................................................................................... 34

7.3 Wind Screening Results ................................................................................................. 34

7.4 Incentives ....................................................................................................................... 34

7.4.1 Federal Incentives for Wind Energy Systems ......................................................... 34

7.4.2 State of Maine Incentives for Wind Energy Systems ............................................. 35

8 Geothermal Heat Pumps ......................................................................................................37

8.1 Geothermal Heat Pump Technology Overview ............................................................. 37

8.2 Geothermal Heat Pump Screening Methodology ........................................................... 37

8.3 Geothermal Heat Pump Screening Results .................................................................... 38

8.4 Incentives ....................................................................................................................... 38

8.4.1 Federal Incentives for Geothermal Heat Pump Systems ........................................ 38

8.4.2 State of Maine Incentives for Geothermal Heat Pumps .......................................... 38

9 Fuel Cells ...............................................................................................................................38

9.1 Fuel Cell Technology Overview .................................................................................... 38

9.2 Fuel Cell Screening Results ........................................................................................... 39

9.3 Incentives ....................................................................................................................... 39

9.3.1 Federal Incentives for Fuel Cells ............................................................................ 39

9.3.2 State of Maine Incentives for Fuel Cells................................................................. 40
ix

10 Micro Gas Turbines ..........................................................................................................42

10.1 Micro Gas Turbine Overview ........................................................................................ 42

10.2 Micro Turbine Analysis Methodology ........................................................................... 42

10.3 Micro Gas Turbine Screening Results ........................................................................... 42

10.4 Incentives ....................................................................................................................... 42

10.4.1 Federal Incentives for Micro Gas Turbines ............................................................ 42

11 Anaerobic Bio Digesters ...................................................................................................43

11.1 Potential Tenant .............................................................................................................. 43

11.2 Potential Synergies ......................................................................................................... 43

11.3 Potential Issues to be Aware of and Questions to Ask the Digester Operator ............... 43

12 Smart Grid Strategies and Technologies ........................................................................45

12.1 Smart Grid Overview ..................................................................................................... 45

12.2 Smart Grid Recommended Strategy ............................................................................... 45

12.2.1 Hardware ................................................................................................................. 45

12.2.2 Metering .................................................................................................................. 45

12.2.3 Test-Bed Opportunity ............................................................................................. 46

13 Introduction to Systemic Economics and Opportunities ..............................................47

13.1 Industrial Symbiosis ....................................................................................................... 47

13.1.1 Danish Industrial Symbiosis ................................................................................... 47

13.1.2 Chinese Industrial Symbiosis .................................................................................. 49

13.1.3 Interrelationship but not Dependency ..................................................................... 50

13.1.4 Systemic Renewable Energy ................................................................................... 51

14 A Vision of Possible Systemic Opportunities at Brunswick Landing ..........................52

14.1 Where Your Money Comes From (Sources of Income) ................................................ 52

14.2 Where your Money Goes (Expenditures) ....................................................................... 53

14.2.1 Food ........................................................................................................................ 53

14.2.2 Utilities .................................................................................................................... 53

14.3 Renewable Energy Systems ........................................................................................... 53

14.4 Leveraging Win-Win Systemic Incentives .................................................................... 55

14.5 Option of Creating a Greenhouse Industry .................................................................... 56

14.6 Aquaponics ..................................................................................................................... 56

14.7 Fish and Aquaculture Option ......................................................................................... 58

14.8 Freshwater Crab ............................................................................................................. 59

14.8.1 Insects and Worms as Fish Food ............................................................................ 59

14.8.2 Nursery “Starter Pots”............................................................................................. 59

14.8.3 Worm Enzyme Business ......................................................................................... 60

14.9 Mushrooms ..................................................................................................................... 60

14.10 Greenhouses on Roofs ................................................................................................ 61

14.11 The Local Food Movement ........................................................................................ 61

14.12 On-Site Restaurants and High Value-Added Food Processing .................................. 62

14.13 Additional Businesses................................................................................................. 62

14.14 Transportation ............................................................................................................. 63

14.15 Food Miles .................................................................................................................. 63

14.16 Eco-Tourism ............................................................................................................... 64

14.17 Unemployed and Veterans.......................................................................................... 64
x 

14.18 Incentives .................................................................................................................... 66

14.18.1 Federal Programs These Systems May Qualify For............................................ 66

14.19 Alternate Remediation Project .................................................................................... 66

15 Additional Financing and Incentive Options .................................................................69

15.1 L3C Corporate Structure ................................................................................................ 69

15.2 Other Mechanisms.......................................................................................................... 69

15.3 State of Maine Incentives for Alternative Fuels ............................................................. 70

16 Conclusion .........................................................................................................................70

Appendix A. Information on Renewable Energy Certificates, Carbon Credits, and Green 

Claims............................................................................................................................................71

Renewable Energy Certificates ................................................................................................. 71

Retail Products ....................................................................................................................... 71

Greenhouse Gas Offsets ............................................................................................................ 74

Retail Greenhouse Gas Offset Products ................................................................................ 74

Appendix B. Financial Spreadsheet ...........................................................................................78
xi 

List of Figures

Figure 1. Biomass combined heat and power schematic....................................................................... 5

Figure 2. City of Boulder, Colorado, building requirements ...............................................................12

Figure 3. Major components of a grid-connected PV system ..............................................................21

Figure 4. Graph of solar radiation and clearness index........................................................................23

Figure 5. Flat plate (boxed) solar domestic hot water heating system for showers and laundry at 

Chickasaw National Recreation Area in Oklahoma..................................................................28

Figure 6. Brunswick Naval Air Station wind resources map................................................................33

Figure 7. Diagram of industrial symbiosis in Kalundborg, Denmark ..................................................49

Figure 8. Diagram of industrial symbiosis in Lubei, China ..................................................................50

Credit: Li Kangmin sustainability consultant Wuxi China....................................................................50

Figure 9. Biomass combined heat and power system..........................................................................54

Figure 10. Hydroponic lettuce growing in a greenhouse.....................................................................56

Figure 11. Map of the 3,026 miles that lettuce must travel from California to Brunswick, Maine ....58

Figure 12. Greenhouse and aquaculture fish and crab module interactions .....................................59

Figure 13. Optional mushroom module interactions ............................................................................61

Figure 14. Biomass CHP with all optional module interactions...........................................................63

Figure 15. Preliminary diagram of some transportation options......................................................... 65

Figure 16. Optional phyto-remediation module .....................................................................................68

List of Tables

Table 1. Comparison of Various Building Energy Designations and Green Sound-Bites ................13

Table 2. Solar Radiation and Clearness Index Data for Brunswick Maine..........................................23

Table 3. Cost Effectiveness and Impact of Maine Incentive on PV......................................................24

Table A-1. National Retail REC Products................................................................................................72

Table A-2. Greenhouse Gas Offset Products.........................................................................................74
1 

1 Introduction

1.1 Scope of Work

The U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE) National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) was 

asked by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to analyze the Former Brunswick Naval 

Air Station (BNAS) in terms of the business opportunities available to revitalize the property 

utilizing renewable and sustainable technologies. 

This analysis was performed as part of the RE-Powering America’s Land initiative3, a 

partnership between EPA and NREL to site renewable energy (RE) on potentially contaminated 

land or mine sites.

Eight different renewable energy technologies were analyzed in terms of their cost effectiveness: 

solar photovoltaics (PV), solar domestic hot water heating (SDHW), solar ventilation air 

preheating, wind, fuel cells, biomass combined heat and power (CHP), micro gas turbines, and 

geothermal (ground source heat pumps). In addition, NREL looked at strategies for incentivizing 

and implementing projects that would increase the energy efficiency of the buildings on the site 

as well as projects to utilize currently wasted local resources, such as waste heat and materials to 

create new opportunities for economic growth on the property and in the Brunswick area. 

1.2 Study Location

BNAS is located at 43° 53’ north latitude and 69° 55’ west longitude. It experiences an average 

of 7,194 heating degree days per year and an average of 375 cooling degree days per year. 

BNAS is one of Midcoast Maine’s major employers, and is in the process of being closed and 

repurposed for private and public uses. This repurposing has the potential to create an economic 

hardship for the area. In addition, it was determined before closing the base that solvents present 

while the property was under the control of the Navy are now seeping into the ground aquifer. 

The EPA has instituted a remediation program, which pumps up water from the aquifer to the 

surface and treats it using mechanical air-stripping technology. The Navy will continue this

remediation until traces of the solvent have been remediated. 

The BNAS property is now under the management of the Midcoast Regional Redevelopment 

Authority (MRRA), a new non-profit entity created by the State of Maine. This redevelopment

entity has also been dually chartered as a non-profit utility. Some of the property has been 

converted to various colleges, military services, and municipalities. The remaining property has 

been renamed Brunswick Landing and will be used for commercial development. The 

redevelopment authority is currently planning to reposition Brunswick Landing as a green 

development park, and the developers want to use renewable energy as the centerpiece theme 

around which the redevelopment of the property takes place. Currently, most of the buildings are 

empty. This also means that at this time there are very few long-term contracts with tenants or 

the accompanying long-term cash flow that goes with them. Based on these conditions, it would 

be preferable to propose a project that is not dependent on stable internal cash flow from longterm tenants, rent, or electrical or heating utility purchases. Given the limited cash flow, it would 

 

3 http://www.epa.gov/oswercpa/ Accessed Sept 18, 2011
2 

also be preferable to propose a project that has a good chance of attracting an outside source of 

financing and a long-term revenue stream to help secure that financing. Most of the buildings on 

the base are old and not energy efficient and, therefore, will be relatively expensive to heat or 

cool over the long term. 
3 

2 Estimate of the Energy Consumption of the Existing Facilities

2.1 Analysis of Potential Energy Consumption on the Site

2.1.1 Energy Consumption Analysis Methodology and Assumptions and 

Limitations 

Due to the sheer size and number of buildings on the base, and the limited budget of this study, 

there was no way to do an in-depth detailed energy study of each building. Even if there were the 

time and budget to do these studies as a part of this report, because the tenants, uses, and 

processes that go into these buildings are currently unknown, it is doubtful that it would be a 

wise expenditure at this time. 

Therefore, we decided that a valuable strategy would be to build four different “template” 

building models based on the four general building type categories found on the base. These four 

different building types were modeled using e-Quest energy modeling software and were based 

on the most typical building skin configurations for each of the four different building types. The 

internal energy consumption used to model these building types was based on surveys of average 

energy consumption by buildings of similar types in the region. Ventilation rates were based on 

code requirements for each of the building types. These building templates were then used to 

estimate the energy demand and consumption of approximately 110 buildings on the site. 

2.1.2 Limitations of these Estimates 

It is important to note that these estimates were performed to get an idea of base load 

infrastructure needs, and are based on the typical consumption in buildings of these types. They 

should not be used to estimate the energy demand or consumption for any specific building. 

These estimates are general in nature and may not be accurate for particular buildings. Because 

almost all of the buildings on the base are currently empty, there is no way to estimate the types 

of processes they may have occurring in them. These estimates do not account for the energy 

consumption of any industrial machinery. 

These estimates were used for macro-level (high-level) modeling of a hypothetical district 

heating pipeline and the potential loading that might occur on it during peak consumption 

periods. These models were also used to estimate the potential energy savings from performing 

energy efficiency retrofits on generic building types. 

Energy savings retrofits and new equipment retrofit projects should perform their own detailed 

energy analysis of each building and should not rely on the estimates used for this high-level 

analysis.

This analysis found that if all the buildings on the property were occupied, they might have a 

peak heating demand somewhere in the range of 50-million Btu/hour and a peak electric demand 

of approximately 3.5 MW, not accounting for any specialized manufacturing equipment loads. 
4 

3 Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Screenings

All of the analyses were done with the assumption that these systems were being installed as 

retrofits to existing systems or services and that there was no avoided cost that could be claimed 

by the fact that existing equipment needed to be replaced anyway. In such cases, the total cost of 

the renewable energy systems would remain the same, but the payback might be calculated based 

only on the added incremental cost of the renewable energy system minus the cost of a new 

conventional system. This was calculated for the solar ventilation air preheating system.

In addition, there are numerous grant programs, both federal and state (Efficiency Maine 

specifically), that are indeterminate as to whether they might be awarded to the projects being 

analyzed. Therefore, while there is a great likelihood that a project done at Brunswick Landing 

might receive additional grants, these indeterminate incentives and their possible effects on 

paybacks were not calculated into any of these financial analyses.

3.1 Biomass CHP (Cogeneration)

3.1.1 Biomass CHP Technology Overview

When considering the generation of electricity using wood as a fuel, there are two basic 

technologies that can be used: steam turbines (shown in Figure 1) or internal combustion (IC). 

3.1.2 Steam Turbines

Steam turbine technology has been around for many years and is very mature. It relies on highpressure steam generated by a wood-fired boiler. It is this steam pressure moving from an area of 

higher pressure to an area of lower pressure that turns a turbine on a shaft connected to a 

generator. The steam forces its way past a series of turbine blades, and as it loses energy, the 

water condenses and is re-injected into the boiler. The condensation of the steam at the exit of 

the turbine system not only allows the steam to be liquefied so it can reenter the boiler, but it also 

creates a vacuum on the exit side of the turbines that exerts even more force on the blades. 

3.1.2.1 Boilers

Before the steam can be created, the energy must be taken out of the wood fuel as efficiently as 

possible. Modern day wood steam boilers do not use cord wood like that used in a home 

fireplace. First, the wood is reduced in size so the heat can be better controlled. Moisture may 

also be removed so that it does not retain excess heat as it exits through the exhaust. 

Next, the wood goes through one of two processes—either the wood size is further reduced into 

a powder and is burned in a normal steam-boiler heat exchanger, using a wood-powder burner 

instead of a liquid-fuel burner, or the wood is heated in a special sealed chamber known as a 

gasifier. Gasifiers are sealed, heated chambers where a process similar to pyrolysis takes place. 

During the gasification process, the structure of the wood breaks down and hydrogen and carbon 

monoxide gas, as well as some other gasses, are produced. From there, these gasses are moved to 

another chamber where oxygen is introduced in a controlled manner and the gasses combust. The 

heated products of combustion next move to the same type of heat exchanger used in other steam 

boilers, and the heat is transferred into water where it turns into steam.
5 

3.1.3 Internal Combustion

The other main technology used for the creation of electricity around the world is the IC engine. 

One of the largest manufacturers of IC engines for this purpose is Jenbacher, an Austrian 

division of GE that uses natural gas as a fuel.4 In recent years, their engines have rivaled fuel 

cells in efficiency, reaching up to 48% efficiency. Over a number of years in Europe, they have 

used the gas from coal gasifiers to fire IC engines to produce electricity. In the last few years, 

they have also started using the gas from wood gasifiers to do the same.

Running IC engines on wood gas is nothing new. Germans invented the process during World 

War II because of fears they would be cut off from Middle Eastern oil. Indian companies have 

been operating IC engine generators for years. Traditionally, one of the problems with using 

wood gas has been the forming of gaseous tars in the gasification process. There are two ways of 

dealing with these tars. In India, they run water through a counter-flow water spray column that 

condenses and washes the tars out of the gasses. Tests show long-term operation of such systems 

with no problems while meeting European Union (EU) air quality standards. This is an 

inexpensive way of dealing with these tars in India because there are no water pollution 

standards and the polluted water can be dumped. The second method typically used in the United 

States is the catalyst method, where a catalyst is used to “crack” the tar gasses down into more 

manageable gasses, which are burned in the engine cylinders. The gasification company 

currently partnering with Jenbacher (Nexterra) is now using both processes: the water method 

when there is an existing waste water treatment plant on site, and the catalyst method when there 

is not. In any case, both methods deal with the tars effectively. 

There may be a number of other methods that could be explored that may be even more costeffective than waste water treatment for dealing with the tar residues of the water method.

Figure 1. Biomass combined heat and power schematic. Illustration by Colleen McCulla

3.1.4 Pros and Cons of Each Technology

Steam turbine technology has been around for years and is the most mature of the technologies 

listed. However, its electrical efficiency is only in the range of 30%. This is the percentage of 

the total heat-energy contained in the original fuel, which is converted into electricity. 

 

4 http://www.gepower.com/prod_serv/products/recip_engines/en/index.htm Accessed March 24, 2011.
6 

IC engine technology is also very mature, having been around almost as long as steam turbines. 

IC engines are a technology that maintenance people typically feel comfortable with due to 

familiarity with automobile engines or diesel generators. However, these same maintenance 

people may not feel as comfortable with the wood gasifiers these IC engines would be tied to. 

IC engines can have an electrical efficiency of up to 48%, which is 60% higher than a steam 

turbine’s 30% electrical efficiency. Potential issues seem to center around dealing with tars when 

they are not washed out with a water spray. While they can be dealt with using catalysts, these 

are expensive to replace when they wear out. This gasifier/IC engine system is currently only 

offered by one manufacturer alliance, Nexterra and Jenbacher, in the United States.5

 

Gasifiers are one of the most efficient ways of utilizing wood, and the only method of converting 

wood into gas for use in IC engines. Issues involve starting and stopping the gasifier quickly. 

From a cold start, the process often initially requires the use of a supplemental gas-fired burner 

to heat the gasification chamber. After the process is started, the fuel provides its own process 

heat. To modulate a gasifier, the unit is essentially sealed up so that no oxygen can enter the 

conversion chamber, and the conversion process slows until it stops. The project we are 

proposing would be operating continuously at a steady state, so stopping and starting should not 

be an issue. 

Wood powder burner boilers are a technology first developed in Sweden by one of the largest 

manufacturers of marine boiler burners in the world. They are currently partnering in the United 

States with Babcock Wilcox,6 who is guaranteeing their burners on projects where they are 

providing the boilers. While the technology is proven in Sweden, the drawback is that American 

buyers are not as familiar with this technology, so they tend to be less comfortable with it from a 

familiarity standpoint. The first projects are just now being installed in the United States 

(Jackson Labs located in Bar Harbor Maine7).

3.1.5 Additional Systems

All biomass systems have the potential to release particulate matter in the form of un-combusted 

carbon particles. These can be removed from the exhaust air stream in variety of ways, bag 

filters, electrostatic precipitators (approximately 90% efficient8), or reverse flow water spray 

scrubbers (virtually 100% effective). The last of these is the most effective in removing 

particulate matter from exhausts; however, there is an exhaust fan pressure drop penalty with any 

of these technologies as you go higher in efficiency. 

3.1.6 Biomass Fuel

Any biomass project requires assurance that sufficient quantity of fuel will be available. 

Fortunately, Maine is a state with abundant forest resources. However, no resource is 

inexhaustible, especially if it is not properly managed and cared for by balancing use with 

propagation. 

 

5 http://www.nexterra.ca/ Site accessed July 25, 2011 6 Phone Conversation with Leo Dwyer U.S. Rep for PetroKraft 7 http://www.jax.org/news/archives/2010/biomass_plant.html. Accessed March 24, 2011. 8 http://www.isesp.org/ICESP%20X%20PAPERS/PDFS/Paper%206A4.pdf. 
7 

There is currently discussion linking the sustainability and carbon claims for biomass projects to 

how long it takes to re-grow the trees used as fuel9 in these projects. Of course, this goes back to 

the conditions under which the trees are re-grown. Active and aggressive soil management is 

strongly recommended. In addition, minimizing the soil compacting impact of heavy timber 

harvesting equipment by only harvesting during hard ground freeze conditions or possibly 

substituting alternative harvesting methods such as cable or helicopter harvesting during warm 

months should be aggressively investigated. 

For this analysis, we used a cost of fuel of $40/ton (conservative) for wet-chipped wood at 50% 

moisture chipped directly into containers to ensure clean chips without dirt or stones. The 

cleanliness of the fuels used for biomass projects invariably has a huge effect on the long-term 

viability of projects due to the problems it can cause with the equipment. Cheap, dirty fuel is no 

bargain if your burning chamber and equipment must be cleaned every few days or if its lifetime 

is cut in half. 

An effective way of dealing with this issue is to develop a relationship with a property owner 

willing to partner with you by establishing a long-term purchasing contract and by utilizing 

advanced sustainable tree re-growth acceleration techniques for both partners’ benefits. This 

ensures a long-term, stable-priced fuel supply with a sustainability pedigree that can easily be 

defended as requirements become increasingly stringent in the biomass world. It also ensures the 

forest-owner fixed, long-term yields and cash flow, which they can bring to a bank and use to 

obtain financing to purchase harvesting equipment. 

One way of accomplishing this is may be to negotiate a long-term, fixed contract with the State

of Maine Bureau of Purchasing. Initial discussions with the Maine Public Reserve Land Unit 

indicate that this may be a possibility. 

Active, aggressive soil management in forests should be strongly investigated. This includes 

leaving limbs and branches in the forest and possibly inoculating them with native microbes to 

enhance the soil microbiological levels optimal for speedy tree re-growth. This might also 

include establishing defined log transport paths and handheld chainsaw cutting combined with 

cable system transport of logs to avoid soil-damaging compaction by heavy harvesting 

equipment, which limits the depth to which oxygen and root activity can penetrate. 

One of the biggest potential problems in any biomass energy project is the cleanliness of the fuel 

used in the project. Wood chipped in the forest onto the ground and then loaded into trucks with 

backhoes can have dirt and stones scraped up with the chips in the process. Trees drug through 

the dirt and then chipped at another location without the removal of its bark can lead to the same 

issues. “Urban wood” reclaimed from construction or demolition projects have these issues of 

contaminants as well. Some gasification systems can accept biomass in a fairly “dirty” state and 

thus may give the operator the flexibility of using cheaper, more diverse fuel sources. With most 

gasification systems, when these non-organic, “dirty” substances enter a biomass system along 

with the wood, they can’t be gasified, and will need to be removed from the system in one way 

or another. Depending on the type and temperature of the system, that may mean that workers 

 

9

Walker, Cardellichio, Colnes, Gunn, Kittler, Perschel, Recchia, Saah “Biomass Sustainability and Carbon Policy.” 

June 2010 Brunswick, ME: Manomet Center for Conservation Sciences Natural Capital Initiative. 
8 

need to shut down the system and get into the gasifier and chip slag out of the system once a 

week. In other, less fortunate situations, it may mean that the gasifier breaks down and stops 

operating. This emphasizes the importance of making sure biomass purchasers know the 

condition of the fuel they’re purchasing and have acceptance tests in place to verify the 

cleanliness, moisture content, and ash content of the chips they are buying. In addition, it’s 

important to have a back-up supply of wood. Without this, a plant operator may want to refuse a 

shipment of dirty fuel, but without a readily available clean substitute, the electrical generation 

system would be forced to be shut down to avoid damaging the system with a load of dirty fuel 

(possibly incurring stiff penalties on utility contracts).

3.1.7 Biomass CHP Technology Screening Methodology

For the purposes of this analysis project, cost estimates were made for each of the two 

technologies. Actual prices were obtained from some of the top manufacturers in the field. These 

prices were costed together with operations and maintenance (O&M) and fuel prices based on 

the efficiency and moisture content of the fuel proposed. These costs were loaded into a cash 

flow spreadsheet customized for this project with the specific financing mechanisms proposed, 

as well as the specific federal and local incentives applicable for these configurations. For this 

analysis, it is assumed that the heat would be sold to tenants at a 20% discount compared to the 

cost of heating with natural gas as an incentive for them to buy heat from MRRA and not use 

natural gas. 

For the purposes of this costing estimate, a size of 2 MW wood-powered boiler and steam 

turbine, electrical-generating plant was initially selected. 

3.1.8 Biomass CHP Screening Results

Calculations show that under a worst case scenario, a 2 MW wood-powered boiler and steam 

turbine, electrical-generating plant including a waste-heat distribution pipeline system with no 

incentives for the pipeline and no tenants to sell the heat to would have a system payback of 10 

years. Economies of scale for larger sized plants in the 10 MW range indicate that installed cost 

savings in the 50% range per megawatt may be possible compared to costs of a 2 MW system. 

Projections show approximately the same payback for a biomass internal combustion system. 

MRRA has the capacity to install a 15 MW system on the site based on the size of the incoming 

utility line. If an additional utility connection were possible, the MRRA could install up to 

30 MW of power on site and still take advantage of the State of Maine Community-Based 

Renewable Energy Production Incentive Pilot Program.10 According to the rough modeling 

done, the existing buildings on the campus could only use as much heat as a 6 MW steam power 

plant would produce. However, additional new ventures described later in this document might 

be able to consume much more heat. 

3.1.9 Additional Potential Savings and Income

3.1.9.1 Buildings

Given the fact that one of the biggest assets in MRRA’s possession at this time is a huge quantity 

of empty buildings, the calculations have not included any costs for constructing buildings to 

 

10 http://www.state.me.us/mpuc/electricity/community_pilot.shtml. Accessed March 24, 2011.
9 

house the biomass power systems described above. This also holds true for the existing storage 

tanks. This may present an additional opportunity for this project depending on the tax and 

business structure selected for the project, as the buildings, including all of the areas used to 

house and store fuel for a project, are eligible for all of the same tax incentives (52.5% cost 

reduction) as the equipment itself. This might also hold true for the tanks if refurbished, 

insulated, and used as buffering tanks for the hot water distribution portion of the CHP system. 

3.1.9.2 Renewable Energy Certificates

Additional opportunities for increased income from the project may come from selling renewable 

energy certificates (RECs) accrued by the project to Massachusetts, which has a higher level of 

stringency for biomass RECs but also pays higher prices. At this point, the project has been 

calculated using an actual quote based on Maine RECs obtained from one of the leading traders 

of RECs in the country. 

3.2 Heat Distribution Pipeline to Buildings

An analysis of the payback for installing a pipeline to distribute heat to the buildings on the base 

was performed. For this analysis, it was assumed that all the buildings in one section of the base 

were occupied. This analysis utilized the heat-consumption estimates that were described 

previously in this section. 

Using the buildings’ winter heat-consumption estimates, a pipeline was mapped out and sized 

assuming the worst case scenario in terms of the heat-utilization ability of the equipment 

installed in the buildings. A hypothetical 10-inch (in) diameter pipeline, 2,555 feet (ft) long, was 

laid out along Orion Street. The pipeline is large enough to supply all of the buildings on the 

coldest day of the year. Installation of new pipe was estimated at $534/ft utilizing a European 

low-energy loss, twin-tube system with a stacked supply and a return line integral to each 

installed unit. Based on the estimated heat consumption of these buildings in an average year, it 

was found that installing a 10-in pipe would have approximately a 10-year payback with no 

incentives if all the buildings were purchasing heat. 

The pipeline size is based on a worst case scenario that assumes heating for the coldest day of the 

year, and equipment with the lowest ability to utilize low-temperature heat installed in the 

buildings. There are other options that could be considered; the majority of the days of the year 

the ambient temperatures are within a certain range, which means the heat distribution system is 

sized to accommodate only a very few hours per year. An alternate strategy might be utilizing

some of the boilers that already exist on the base to supply the heat in a few buildings on the 

coldest days of the year. This would allow optimizing the financial performance of the pipeline 

installed as well as unused, existing assets. 

3.3 Storage Tanks (Old Fuel Tanks) 

Another possible strategy might be to insulate the fuel tanks already on the base to serve as 

storage for hot water. Given the fact that they are already located next to one of the largest 

buildings on the base might allow the storage of hot water during off-peak times and utilize it 

during peak-heating times to reduce the size of the pipeline. The two tanks together could store 

enough water to heat one of the large hangers for 2-9 days depending on the type of equipment 

installed in the building. 
10 

Given the uncertainty of which building tenants will choose to locate in, it is the intent of this 

analysis to simply show an estimate of what a possible payback would be if a distribution 

network were installed in a fully occupied area of the base. It is outside the scope and granularity 

of this study to analyze all of the different potential layout configurations that might be possible 

to optimize the cost of a distribution network on the base. 

3.4 Cooling

Depending on the type of wood power plant installed, it may be possible to distribute hot water 

at a temperature of around 200° Fahrenheit (F). If radiant heating systems were retrofitted in the 

buildings, it this would allow the pipeline to be reduced in size to approximately 6 in, due to the 

fact that you can keep on extracting heat from the water all the way down to 100° F, thus 

requiring less water to be distributed. 200° F water is also hot enough to operate small absorption 

chillers, the chillers could be used to cool buildings in the summer, providing additional ways to 

consume waste hot water during the summer months as well as in the winter. 

3.5 Dehumidification and Drying

If 200° F water were distributed to the buildings, the water could be used to provide 

dehumidification, or process drying, with liquid desiccant systems. One of the big advantages of 

salt-based liquid desiccants is that they do not thermally degrade over time, such as when ice 

melts or hot water becomes lukewarm. This means they can be stored in simple plastic containers 

or plastic-lined steel containers (i.e., old fuel tanks) without any insulation. Storing liquid 

desiccant could be a cheap way of allowing a processor to store heat from one period of the day 

for use during another period of the day, when they have their peak production. This is basically 

another form of peak shaving—only using another form of energy to accomplish the same goal. 

3.6 Energy Efficiency

Energy efficiency and good O&M is essential for any development claiming to deal with energy 

responsibly. There is a direct relationship between providing good O&M of equipment and the 

amount of energy saved over time. This is true of existing equipment as well as new equipment. 

Often, purchasers only look at the first cost and see the cost of maintaining equipment as a 

burden while forgetting the cost of the energy wasted in operation. Dollars invested in jobs to 

maintain equipment are almost always more than paid for by the energy savings they bring. In a 

very real sense, there is an opportunity to reclaim wasted energy dollars and turn them into goodpaying maintenance jobs in the area. 

All of the energy rating systems, which have been created in the last 10 years, acknowledge these 

realities and have different ways of dealing with them. There are a number of different ways in 

which MRRA can be responsible in dealing with this piece of their energy strategy, including: 

1) Perform detailed energy audits and deep-energy retrofits on all buildings bundled as part of 

the lease.

2) Create programs that incentivize building owners to take advantage of tax credits and low- or 

no-interest loans to retrofit buildings before or after occupancy; this could be accomplished 

by using rebates and waste heat from the power plant to pay resident companies “in-swap” 

for heat to cover their building retrofit loan payments each month. 
11 

3) Create a volume-buying coalition for the area to lower the cost of purchasing high-cost items 

like high-tech energy saving windows. 

4) Use these retrofit projects to jump start an energy retrofitting business willing to be located in 

Brunswick Landing. 

5) Create a bundled maintenance service buying group for the companies in Brunswick 

Landing, which includes regularly scheduled maintenance of tenants’ equipment. 

6) Provide industry-specific customized energy efficiency design services for IT companies 

providing data warehousing. 

3.7 NREL Assistance with Deep Building Retrofits and New Building Design

NREL can provide free assistance to MRRA and any of its tenants or property purchasers 

through the Department of Energy (DOE) Commercial Buildings Partnership. The program will 

provide state-of-the-art energy engineering and modeling services, and design assistance for all 

the buildings on military-type campuses, provided there is a commitment on the part of the 

controlling entity to deep retrofits (creating at least 30% energy savings) and high levels of 

energy efficiency in new buildings (50% savings compared to standard buildings).11 

3.8 Energy Standards

Part of establishing any community is setting up boundaries that protect the citizens and their 

investments in the community. Whether building codes that establish safety standards and 

standards of best practice, zoning laws, or appearance standards that protect property values, 

standards are put into place to protect solid, long-term economics in a community. 

Communities around the country are putting in place energy standards that protect the long-term 

economies in their communities and invest in their children’s futures.

We recommend that Brunswick Landing establish an energy standard for the property that will 

address new construction as well as existing buildings. This will add-to and protect the green 

image that is built for the property, and prevent charges of green-washing from outside groups. 

Any kind of standard or rule becomes much easier for tenants or builders to accept and follow if 

they feel like they are getting something for their trouble. In the past, utilities would provide 

rebates for customers to install energy saving equipment. In this case, rebates or waste heat 

produced by the wood-powered heating plant could be used to incentivize builders or new 

tenants to build or retrofit their properties up to high energy standards. 

Each of these concepts on its own is not as effective as when operating together in a system. 

NREL is currently helping to develop a new, comprehensive energy standard for a new 

community being established on the redeveloped Barber’s Point Air Naval Station, now renamed 

the community of Kalaeloa.12 While the standard is not completed yet, and Brunswick Landing 

would need their standard to be customized for their climate, Brunswick’s standard could be 

developed based on the work that has previously been done to develop Kalaeloa’s standard. 

 

11 http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/commercial_initiative/building_partnerships.html Accessed March 24, 

2011.

12 http://www.hcdaweb.org/kalaeloa. Accessed March 24, 2011.
12 

3.8.1 Examples of Progressive Building Codes and Resolutions for Future Codes

3.8.1.1 Colorado

The City of Boulder, Colorado, now requires all new homes to be 30% – 75% better than the 

2006 International Energy Conservation Code (IECC). Boulder County went a step further by 

requiring homes over 5,000 ft2

 to achieve a home energy rating index of less than 10, which 

represents near zero-energy performance. 

Figure 2. City of Boulder, Colorado,13 building requirements

3.8.1.2 California

The California PUC and the California Energy Commission have adopted a Long Term Energy 

Efficiency Strategic Plan14 that requires all new homes to be zero energy by 2020 and all new 

commercial buildings to be zero energy by 2030. 

3.8.1.3 Texas

3.8.1.3.1 City of Austin

“In February 15, 2007, the city council passed Resolution No. 20070215-23, the Austin Climate 

Protection Plan, calling for the drafting of new building codes consistent with reducing energy 

use in single-family homes by 65% and all other public and private buildings by 75% by 2015. 

The November 2006 version of the Austin Energy Code will serve as a reference.”15 

 

13 http://www.bouldercolorado.gov/files/LEAD/Green%20Building/final_green_points_ordinance_7565.pdf. 

Accessed March 24, 2011.

14 http://www.californiaenergyefficiency.com/index.shtml. Accessed March 24, 2011

http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/PUC/energy/Energy+Efficiency/EE+General+Info/eesp.htm. Accessed March 24, 2011. 15http://www.dsireusa.org/library/includes/incentive2.cfm?Incentive_Code=TX19R&CurrentPageID=1&RE=1&EE

=1. Accessed March 24, 2011.
13 

3.8.1.3.2 City of Frisco

“The residential green building program began in 2001 under Ordinance No. 01-05-39, which 

required that all single-family residential structures platted after May 31, 2001 receive the EPA 

Energy Star designation for energy efficiency. The original ordinance was amended in 2006 with 

additional requirements for structures with building permits filed after June 30, 2007. These new 

structures are required to meet Energy Star specifications with a score of 83 or lower on the 

Home Energy Rating System (HERS) index. An Energy Star designation requires a HERS score 

of 85 or lower.”16

Table 1. Comparison of Various Building Energy Designations and Green Sound-Bites

Metric Benefits Drawbacks More Information

Net Zero

Rating 

Systems: 

LEED, Green 

Globes, 

Energy Star 

Can be defined for a 

building- or communityscale

Many definitions lead to

confusion and no 

consensus regarding what 

is net zero

See document providing a 

variety of definitions for net 

zero; 

http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy0

6osti/39833.pdf

Many definitions increase 

the chance that there will 

be a good definition for a 

particular application

The role of RECs or green 

power purchases is often 

ambiguous and could 

counteract the good 

intentions associated with 

net-zero planning; it is 

important to define the role 

that RECs and green 

power purchasing should 

play in a net-zero 

application

Can be defined such that 

it includes indices beyond 

building energy use (such 

as transportation, water 

use, and embodied 

energy)Includes indices 

beyond building energy 

use (such as 

transportation and water 

use)

Well developed and used 

for building-scale, but 

relatively new for 

communities

LEED: 

http://www.usgbc.org/Display

Page.aspx?CategoryID=19; 

Green Globes: 

http://www.greenglobes.com/

; Energy Star: 

http://www.energystar.gov/in

dex.cfm?c=business.bus_ind

ex

 

16http://www.ci.frisco.tx.us/departments/planningDevelopment/greenbuilding/Pages/ResidentialGreenBuilding.aspx. 

Accessed March 24, 2011.
14 

Rating system 

requirements (such as

LEED-Silver) are 

becoming broadly 

adopted by industry, the 

government, and cities as 

a building standard

 

Some rating system 

certification levels are not 

very stringent, allowing 

entities to gain certification 

by implementing no or 

minimal energy reducing 

strategies

 

Greenhouse 

Gas (GHG) 

Reduction 

Requirements

Can include indices 

beyond building energy 

use (such as 

transportation, water use, 

etc)

GHG accounting can be 

very time consuming

There is currently no 

broadly accepted GHG 

accounting methodology

Building Code 

Requirements

Very recognizable 

standard that all builders 

are familiar with

Building codes are only 

applicable to buildings and 

do not impact other indices 

(such as transportation

and water use)

See examples above of 

progressive building codes 

throughout the United States

Embodied 

Energy/Life

Cycle 

Assessment

Can include indices 

beyond building energy 

use (such as the energy 

use associated with the 

materials used in the 

construct of a building)

Calculating embodied 

energy can be very 

complex and time

consuming

Embodied Energy: 

http://www.yourhome.gov.au/

technical/fs52.html; Life 

Cycle Assessment: 

http://www.epa.gov/nrmrl/lca

ccess/

International 

Energy 

Conservation 

Code

Encourages energy 

efficiency in building 

design

It could be hard to set 

reduction goals tied to 

embodied energy

Relatively new standard http://www.iccsafe.org/e/prod

show.html?prodid=3800S06
15 

Other Factors

Building codes are only 

applicable to buildings and 

do not impact other indices 

(such as transportation

and water use)

3.9 Incentives

3.9.1 Federal Incentives for Biomass

1) The Federal Business Energy Investment Tax Credit17 provides a tax credit for biomass 

energy systems based on the capital cost of the system in an amount equal to 30% of the 

purchase price. The federal business energy tax credit cannot be utilized if the renewable 

energy production tax credit (PTC) is utilized. 

2) The Renewable Energy PTC18 offers for-profit businesses a tax credit based on the amount of 

energy produced by a system over a number of years. It allows open-loop biomass generation 

systems (using non-managed forest wood) to take a tax credit of $0.011/kWh of electricity 

generated each year for 5 years. It allows closed-loop biomass systems (using biomass 

energy crops or managed forest wood) to claim $0.022/kWh for 10 years. Both types of 

systems must be put into service before 2013. The PTC cannot be utilized if the federal 

business energy tax credit is utilized. The U.S. Treasury Department Renewable Energy 

Grants,

19 otherwise known as the Treasury 1603 program, offers for-profit businesses an upfront payment equal to 30% of the capital cost of the system if significant portions of the 

funding have been committed before the end of 2011. It may be taken in lieu of either the 

renewable energy tax credit or the renewable energy PTC, but only through the end of 2011. 

3) Modified Accelerated Cost Recovery System (MACRS)

20 allows businesses to recover

investments in renewable energy equipment through depreciation deductions. Biomass 

energy systems can be depreciated over 5 years. If installed before the end of 2011, then 

100% can be depreciated in the first year. Assuming a third-party for-profit owner of the 

system had an appetite for tax credits and assuming a 30% corporate tax rate, this would 

amount to a reduction in cost of approximately 22.5%. In 2012, only 50% can be depreciated 

in the first year. 

 

17 http://www.dsireusa.org/incentives/incentive.cfm?Incentive_Code=US02F&re=1&ee=1. Accessed March 24, 

2011.

18 http://www.dsireusa.org/incentives/incentive.cfm?Incentive_Code=US13F&re=1&ee=1. Accessed March 24, 

2011.

19 http://www.dsireusa.org/incentives/incentive.cfm?Incentive_Code=US53F&re=1&ee=1 Accessed March 24, 

2011.

20 http://www.dsireusa.org/incentives/incentive.cfm?Incentive_Code=US06F&re=1&ee=1 Accessed March 24, 

2011.
16 

4) The Renewable Energy Production Incentive (REPI)21 is for non-profit electric generators 

and provides an incentive payment of up to $.022/kWh of electricity generated depending on 

the federal appropriation each year for up to 10 years. 

5) The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Rural Energy for America Program (REAP) 

Grants and Loan Guarantees22 can provide grants of up to 25% of the capital cost of a system 

and loan guarantees of up to $25 million. Biomass energy systems are eligible to apply for 

either grants or loans.

6) The New Era Rural Technology Competitive Grants Program (RTP)23 (USDA-NIFA-RTP003380) will make grants of up to $300,000 available to community colleges or advanced 

technological centers, located in a rural area, for technology development, applied research, 

and training necessary to produce graduates capable of strengthening the nation's technical, 

scientific, and professional workforce in the fields of bioenergy, pulp and paper 

manufacturing, and agriculture-based renewable energy resources. 

7) In the past, the Biomass Crop Assistance Program (BCAP)

24 has provided federal funding 

directly to biomass producers. While it is not certain that funding will be forthcoming in 

2011, there is a chance that the federal government’s BCAP will be extended or modified. If 

this is the case, then this incentive, which is paid directly to biomass fuel producers, might 

exert downward pressure on the price of biomass fuel supplies and thus provide additional 

savings to a biomass project. This incentive has not been added into any of the calculations in 

this report. 

3.9.2 State of Maine Incentives for Biomass

1) The Community-Based Renewable Energy Production Incentive (pilot program)25 provides a 

generator two choices. The first option is to enter into a long-term contract with a local utility 

for the purchase of energy, capacity resources (peaking), or RECs at a price not to exceed 

$0.10/kWh for up to 20 years. This includes renewable electricity generation systems

(including biomass) up to 30 MW in size. The program is very similar to pre-deregulation 

utility funding programs previously administered by the Maine PUC. The PUC requires the 

local utility to enter into a purchasing agreement with the generator at a price approved by 

the PUC as determined by a transparent look at the finances of the generator allowing for a 

“reasonable rate of return” on investment. The electric generator is permitted to sell the 

associated RECs and carbon credits separately from the electricity if the local utility has 

already met their state mandated renewable energy portfolio percentage requirement. The 

PUC is the entity that certifies RECs awarded to the project. As an alternative to a long-term 

contract, the generator may instead choose to have the RECs associated with their project 

multiplied by 150%. 

 

21 http://www.dsireusa.org/incentives/incentive.cfm?Incentive_Code=US33F&re=1&ee=1 Accessed March 24, 

2011.

22 http://www.dsireusa.org/incentives/incentive.cfm?Incentive_Code=US05F&re=1&ee=1 Accessed March 24, 

2011.

23 http://www.grants.gov/search/search.do?mode=VIEW&oppId=58802 Accessed March 24, 2011. 24 http://www.fsa.usda.gov/FSA/webapp?area=home&subject=ener&topic=bcap Accessed March 24, 2011. 25

http://www.dsireusa.org/incentives/incentive.cfm?Incentive_Code=ME13F&re=1&ee=1http://www.dsireusa.org/inc

entives/incentive.cfm?Incentive_Code=ME13F&re=1&ee=1 Accessed March 24, 2011.
17 

2) Maine's Voluntary Renewable Resources Grants,

26 supported by the state's Voluntary 

Renewable Resources Fund and administered by the Maine PUC, provide funding for smallscale demonstration projects designed to educate communities on the value and cost 

effectiveness of renewable energy. Maine's Voluntary Renewable Resources Fund, a public 

benefits fund, was established in 2000 and is supported by contributions made by consumers 

on their electric bills. Applications for Voluntary Renewable Resources Grants are available 

only during specified application periods; funding is made available when a certain amount 

has been collected as a result of voluntary contributions. In addition, Efficiency Maine will 

make funds available from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) to 

supplement this grant program.27 

3) Grants up to $50,000 are generally available to Maine-based non-profit organizations 

(including community-based non-profits), electric cooperatives, quasi-municipal corporations 

and districts, schools, and community action programs. To qualify for grant funding, 

renewable energy resources generally (1) must qualify as a small, power-production facility 

under Federal Energy Regulatory Commission rules or (2) must not exceed 100 MW in 

capacity and use one or more of the following resources to generate electricity: fuel cells, 

tidal power, solar energy, wind energy, geothermal energy, hydropower, biomass energy, and 

municipal solid waste used in a generator in conjunction with recycling. There is a 20% costshare requirement for grant funding. 

4) Initial discussions with the Maine Public Reserve Land Unit indicate that since this is a stateinitiated redevelopment project, it may be possible to negotiate a long term purchasing 

contract from the State Bureau of Purchasing. This will fully secure the fuel price for the life 

of the project and reduce the perceived risk for any potential financiers. 

3.9.3 Federal Incentives for Pipeline

It is uncertain if these tax incentives can be utilized for leasing pipelines due to the fixed nature 

of pipelines. This should be further investigated with a tax specialist.

1) The Federal Business Energy Investment Tax Credit28 provides a tax credit for CHP energy 

systems based on the capital cost of the system in an amount equal to 30% of the purchase 

price. The federal business energy tax credit cannot be utilized if the renewable energy PTC 

is utilized.

2) MACRS29 allows businesses to recover investments in renewable energy equipment through 

depreciation deductions. Biomass energy systems can be depreciated over 5 years. If installed 

before the end of 2011, 100% can be depreciated in the first year. In 2012, only 50% can be 

depreciated in the first year. 

 

26

http://www.dsireusa.org/incentives/incentive.cfm?Incentive_Code=ME03F&re=1&ee=1http://www.dsireusa.org/inc

entives/incentive.cfm?Incentive_Code=ME03F&re=1&ee=1 Accessed March 24, 2011. 27 http://www.maine.gov/mpuc/recovery/ Accessed March 24, 2011. 28 http://www.dsireusa.org/incentives/incentive.cfm?Incentive_Code=US02F&re=1&ee=1 29 http://www.dsireusa.org/incentives/incentive.cfm?Incentive_Code=US06F&re=1&ee=1
18 

3.9.4 Federal Incentives for Energy Efficiency

The Federal Energy-Efficient Commercial Buildings Tax Deduction30 of $1.80/ft2 is available to 

owners of new or existing buildings who install (1) interior lighting, (2) building envelope, or (3) 

heating, cooling, ventilation, or hot water systems that reduce the building’s total energy and 

power cost by 50% or more in comparison to a building meeting minimum requirements set by 

American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) 

Standard 90.1-2001. Energy savings must be calculated using qualified computer software 

approved by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). 

These deductions are available primarily to building owners, although tenants may be eligible if 

they make construction expenditures. Tenants could be given a grant and free heat for a 

predetermined length of time if they participate. [Possible scenario: Tenants might be given a 

low-interest loan from MRRA (or from Efficiency Maine), which is then used to install radiant 

floor heating systems (approximate cost $3/ft2). These systems would conserve heat in large 

hangar buildings when the doors are opened. The tenant can pay off half the cost of the loan with 

their tax credit and the other half with their “free heat” provided by MRRA. This allows two 

incentives to work together. Half of the incentive comes from MRRA through a formerly wasted 

resource, which now drives efficiency, and the other comes from the tenant who uses their 

business tax credit.] 

The USDA Rural Energy for America Program (REAP)31 offers competitive grants to eligible 

entities to provide assistance to agricultural producers and rural small businesses to become more 

energy efficient and to use renewable energy technologies and resources. These grants are 

generally available to state government entities, local governments, tribal governments, landgrant colleges and universities, rural electric cooperatives and public power entities, and other 

entities, as determined by the USDA. These grants may be used for conducting and promoting 

energy audits and for providing recommendations and information related to energy efficiency 

and renewable energy. Of the total REAP funding available, approximately 9% is dedicated to 

competitive grants for energy technical assistance.

3.9.5 State of Maine Incentives for Energy Efficiency

For retrofit projects, the amount of the Efficiency Maine custom incentive may be up to 35% of 

the total cost of the efficiency project, including labor. For new construction and major 

renovations, as well as replacement of failed equipment, the incentive may be up to 75% of the 

incremental cost of high-efficiency equipment over standard equipment. The incentive cap 

applies in all cases. Efficiency Maine reserves the right to monitor and inspect subsidized 

installations and energy use of the products for which incentives are paid: refrigerators, lighting, 

chillers, heat pumps, central air conditioners, energy management systems/building controls, 

motors, and custom or other products pending approval. There is a maximum of $300,000/year 

in incentives. 

 

30http://www.dsireusa.org/incentives/incentive.cfm?Incentive_Code=US40F&re=1&ee=1http://www.dsireusa.org/in

centives/incentive.cfm?Incentive_Code=US40F&re=1&ee=1. Accessed March 24, 2011. 31

http://www.dsireusa.org/incentives/incentive.cfm?Incentive_Code=US05F&re=1&ee=1http://www.dsireusa.org/inc

entives/incentive.cfm?Incentive_Code=US05F&re=1&ee=1. Accessed March 24, 2011.
19 

Efficiency Maine's small business low-interest loan program32 provides loans of up to $35,000 at 

1% interest to small businesses to support approved energy efficiency measures. Efficiency 

Maine, a program of the Maine PUC, administers this program with the assistance of the Finance 

Authority of Maine (FAME), who completes underwriting and credit rating. Businesses with less 

than $5 million in annual sales or less than 50 full-time employees are generally eligible.

 

32 http://www.dsireusa.org/incentives/incentive.cfm?Incentive_Code=ME04F&re=1&ee=1. Accessed March 24, 

2011.
20 

4 Solar Photovoltaics

Solar photovoltaics (PV) are semiconductor devices that convert sunlight directly into electricity. 

They do so without any moving parts and without generating any noise or pollution. They must 

be mounted in an un-shaded location; rooftops, carports, and ground-mounted arrays are 

common mounting locations. The amount of energy produced by a panel depends on the several 

factors. These factors include the type of collector, tilt and azimuth of the collector, temperature, 

level of sunlight, and weather conditions. An inverter is required to convert the direct current 

(DC) to alternating current (AC) of the desired voltage compatible with building and utility 

power systems. The balance of the system consists of conductors/conduit, switches, disconnects, 

and fuses. Grid-connected PV systems feed power into the facility’s electrical system and do not 

include batteries.

PV panels are made up of many individual cells that all produce a small amount of current and 

voltage. These individual cells are connected in series to produce a larger current.

4.1 Roof-Mounted Systems

In many cases, a roof is the best location for a PV system. Roof-mounted PV systems are usually 

more expensive than ground-mounted systems, but a roof is a convenient location because it is 

out of the way and is usually un-shaded. Large areas with minimal rooftop equipment are 

preferred, but equipment can sometimes be worked around if necessary. If a building has a 

sloped roof, a typical flush-mounted crystalline silicon panel can achieve power densities on the 

order of 11 DC-Watt/ft2

. For buildings with flat roofs, rack-mounted systems can achieve power 

densities on the order of 8 DC-Watt/ft2 with a crystalline silicon panel. Typically, PV systems 

are installed on roofs that either are less than 5 years old or have over 30 years of life left. 

Because no roof area is available on the sites studied, no roof-mounted analysis was conducted. 

4.1.1 PV System Components 

The PV system considered here has these components: 

1) PV arrays, which convert light energy to DC electricity 

2) Inverters, which convert DC to AC, and provide important safety, monitoring, and control 

functions 

3) Various wiring, mounting hardware, and combiner boxes 

4) Monitoring equipment. 
21 

Figure 3. Major components of a grid-connected PV system. Credit: NREL

4.1.2 PV Array

The primary component of a PV system, the PV array, converts sunlight to electrical energy; all 

other components simply condition or control energy use. Most PV arrays consist of 

interconnected PV modules that range in size from 50 peak DC-Watts to 300 peak DC-Watts. 

Peak watts are the rated output of PV modules at standard operating conditions of 25°C (77°F) 

and insolation of 1,000 Watts/m2. Because these standard operating conditions are nearly ideal, 

the actual output would be less under typical environmental conditions. PV modules are the most 

reliable components in any PV system. They have been engineered to withstand extreme 

temperatures, severe winds, and impacts. ASTM E1038-0533 subjects modules to impacts from 

one-inch hail balls at terminal velocity (55 mph) at various parts of the module. PV modules 

have a life expectancy of 20-30 years, and manufacturers warranty them against power 

degradation for 25 years. 

4.1.3 Inverters 

PV arrays provide DC power at a voltage that depends on the configuration of the array. This 

power is converted to AC at the required voltage and number of phases by the inverter. Inverters 

enable the operation of commonly used equipment such as appliances, computers, office 

equipment, and motors. Current inverter technology provides true sine wave power at a quality 

often better than that of the serving utility. The locations of both the inverter and the balance-ofsystem equipment are important. Inverters are available that include most or all of the control 

systems required for operation, including some metering and data-logging capability. Inverters 

must provide several operational and safety functions for interconnection with the utility system. 

The Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers, Inc (IEEE) maintains standard “P929 

Recommended Practice for Utility Interface of Photovoltaic (PV) Systems,” which allows 

manufacturers to write “Utility-Interactive” on the listing label if an inverter meets the 

 

33 ASTM Standard E1038, 2005, "Standard Test Method for Determining Resistance of Photovoltaic Modules to 

Hail by Impact with Propelled Ice Balls ," ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2005, DOI: 

10.1520/E1038-05. http://www.astm.org/Standards/E1038.htm . Accessed March 24, 2011.
22 

requirements of frequency and voltage limits, power quality, and non-islanding inverter testing. 

Underwriters Laboratory maintains “UL Standard 1741, Standard for Static Inverters and 

Charge Controllers for Use in Photovoltaic Power Systems,” which incorporates the testing 

required by IEEE 929 and includes design (type) testing and production testing. A large choice 

of inverter manufacturers is available.34

4.1.4 Operation and Maintenance 

The PV panels come with a 25-year performance warranty. The inverters, which come standard 

with a 5-year or 10-year warranty (extended warranties available), would be expected to last 10-

15 years. System performance should be verified on a vendor-provided website. Wire and rack 

connections should be checked. For this economic analysis, an annual O&M cost of 0.17% of 

total installed cost is used based on the O&M cost of other fixed-tilt, grid-tied PV systems. For 

the case of single-axis tracking, an annual O&M cost of 0.35% of total installed cost is used 

based on existing single-axis tracking system O&M.

4.1.5 Photovoltaics Screening Methodology

For this analysis, a PV system cost of $4.50/W was established from costing data based on some 

of the most recent projects installed in the Northeast United States. Next, the solar radiation data 

for the installation site was used to calculate the electricity production during an average year at 

the site based on years of solar radiation data measurements taken. These calculations were made

using the Hybrid Optimization Model for Electric Renewables (HOMER) calculation software 

(originally developed at NREL) and confirmed using NREL’s Renewable Energy Optimization 

modeling software. These softwares base their calculations on comparing the solar radiation that 

would hit a panel tilted at an optimal 43° from horizontal in the specified geographic location 

over a 1-year period to the amount of solar radiation that would strike the same panel during a 

standardized rating test over an equivalent 1-year period. Based on this comparison of the 

radiation differences over a year, the program calculates the electrical output of the panel in 

kilowatt-hours based on the peak watt rating of the panel. The efficiency and the size of the 

panels are irrelevant in this calculation because the information is already inherently contained 

within the measurement of the panel by peak watt. The efficiency of the panel for these purposes 

only affects the size of the panel. Therefore, a peak watt of PV will be different in size depending 

on the efficiency of the panel. Either way, the quantity of energy produced per peak watt will be 

equally affected by the amount of sun available in the local site no matter the efficiency of the 

panel. The software assumes some system losses associated with wiring and inverters and 

assigns the system an overall efficiency of 80%. 

The resulting quantity of electricity that HOMER calculated would be generated in Brunswick 

was next loaded into a life cycle analysis software program, which was customized to calculate 

the impact of all the specific federal and state financial incentives, which are available to provide 

financial assistance for this particular project. 

 

34 Go Solar California, a joint effort of the California Energy Commission and the California Public Utilities 

Commission, provides consumer information for solar energy systems. See http://www.gosolarcalifornia.org/ 

equipment/pvmodule.php. Accessed March 24, 2011.
23 

Figure 4. Graph of solar radiation and clearness index 

Table 2. Solar Radiation and Clearness Index Data for Brunswick Maine

Month Clearness Index Daily Radiation

(kWh/m2/day)

January 0.498 1.780

February 0.521 2.610

March 0.572 4.070

April 0.496 4.620

May 0.497 5.430

June 0.501 5.810

July 0.510 5.730

August 0.530 5.240

September 0.531 4.170

October 0.498 2.800

November 0.447 1.740

December 0.467 1.470
24 

4.1.6 Photovoltaics Screening Results

Due to the differences in solar radiation received in different parts of the world, the amount of 

electricity generated by PV panels varies significantly. The results of this screening show that 

even with significant state and federal incentives (in excess of over 52.5%), which “buy-down” 

the first cost of PV systems, the calculations on a large system of 100 kW results in a payback of 

approximately 16 years. 

Table 3. Cost Effectiveness and Impact of Maine Incentive on PV

Size (kW) Cost with

Incentives ($)

Electricity

Generated

(kWh/year)

Income from 

kWh

Generated ($)

Payback 

(years) 

100 $211,750 132,324 $13,232 16

1 $138 1,323 $132 1*

1.5 $1,206 1,985 $199 6.1*

2 $2,275 2,646 $264 8.6*

*Since the state incentive is aimed at incentivizing smaller systems, when installing a smaller project, the 

state incentive has a proportionally larger impact on the payback. To illustrate this, notice that the 100 kW 

system has a payback of 16 years, but the 1 kW system has a payback of 1.04 years. As the system gets 

larger, the payback gets longer, so a 1.5 kW system has a payback of 6.1 years, and a 2 kW system has 

a payback of 8.6 years. 

4.2 Incentives

4.2.1 Federal Incentives for Photovoltaics

1) The Federal Business Energy Investment Tax Credit35 provides a tax credit for PV energy 

systems based on the capital cost of the system in an amount equal to 30% of the purchase 

price. 

2) The U.S. Treasury Department Renewable Energy Grants,

36 otherwise known as the 

Treasury 1603 program, offers for-profit businesses an upfront payment equal to 30% of the 

capital cost of the system if significant portions of the funding have been committed before 

the end of 2011. It may be taken in lieu of either the renewable energy tax credit or the 

renewable energy PTC, but only through the end of 2011. 

3) MACRS37 allows businesses to recover investments in renewable energy equipment through 

depreciation deductions. PV energy systems can be depreciated over 5 years. If installed 

before the end of 2011, 100% can be depreciated in the first year. After this in 2012, only 

50% can be depreciation in the first year. 

4) REPI38 is for non-profit electric generators and provides an incentive payment of up to 

$0.022/kWh of electricity generated depending on the federal appropriation each year for up 

to 10 years. 

 

35 http://www.dsireusa.org/incentives/incentive.cfm?Incentive_Code=US02F&re=1&ee=1. Accessed March 24, 

2011.

36 http://www.dsireusa.org/incentives/incentive.cfm?Incentive_Code=US53F&re=1&ee=1. Accessed March 24, 

2011.

37 http://www.dsireusa.org/incentives/incentive.cfm?Incentive_Code=US06F&re=1&ee=1. Accessed March 24, 

2011.

38 http://www.dsireusa.org/incentives/incentive.cfm?Incentive_Code=US33F&re=1&ee=1 Accessed March 24, 

2011.
25 

5) REAP39 can provide grants of up to 25% of the capital cost of a system and loans of up to 

$25 million. PV energy systems are eligible to apply for either grants or loans.

4.2.2 Regional Incentives for Photovoltaics

1) The Boston-based non-profit organization New Generation Energy40 offers low-interest loans 

for the installation of solar electric and solar water heating systems via its Community 

Lending Program. The solar loans are available to companies (including sole-proprietorship) 

and non-profits in New England (Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, 

Rhode Island, and Vermont) with an emphasis on those located in low- and middle-income 

communities. Loans are available for up to $100,000, and the interest rate is currently 5.0%; 

although, certain projects may be awarded grants and receive a lower interest rate. Only 

projects applying for loans are eligible for grants.

4.2.3 State of Maine Incentives for Photovoltaics

1) The Community-Based Renewable Energy Production Incentive (Pilot Program)

41 provides a 

generator two choices. The first option is to enter into a long-term contract with a local utility 

for the purchase of either energy, capacity resources (peaking), or RECs at a price not to 

exceed $0.10/kWh for up to 20 years. This includes renewable electricity generation systems 

(including PV) up to 30 MW in size. The program is very similar to pre-deregulation utility 

funding programs previously administered by the Maine PUC. The PUC requires the local 

utility to enter into a purchasing agreement with the generator at a price approved by the 

PUC as determined by a transparent look at the finances of the generator allowing for a 

“reasonable rate of return” on investment. The electric generator is permitted to sell the 

associated RECs and carbon credits separately from the electricity if the local utility has 

already met their state mandated renewable energy portfolio percentage requirement. The 

PUC is the entity that certifies RECs awarded to the project. As an alternative to a long-term 

contract, the generator may instead choose to have the RECs associated with their project 

multiplied by 150%. 

2) The State of Maine Solar Rebate Program

42 provides a rebate of 25% of the cost of a solar 

PV system or $1,000, whichever is less. It isfunded by an assessment on the state's 

transmission and distribution utilities. A total of $500,000 in funding will be available for 

rebates annually. Of this sum, the PUC has allocated 60% to rebates for solar-thermal 

systems, 20% to rebates for PV systems, and 20% to rebates for wind-energy systems. 

During fiscal years 2009-2010 and 2010-2011, this rebate program is increased by 

$500,000/year with money allocated from ARRA. 

3) Maine's Voluntary Renewable Resources Grants,

43 supported by the state's Voluntary 

Renewable Resources Fund and administered by the Maine PUC, provide funding for small-

 

39 http://www.dsireusa.org/incentives/incentive.cfm?Incentive_Code=US05F&re=1&ee=1 Accessed March 24, 

2011.

40 http://www.dsireusa.org/incentives/incentive.cfm?Incentive_Code=ME14F&re=1&ee=1. Accessed March 24, 

2011.

41 http://www.dsireusa.org/incentives/incentive.cfm?Incentive_Code=ME13F&re=1&ee=1 Accessed March 24, 

2011.

42 http://www.dsireusa.org/incentives/incentive.cfm?Incentive_Code=ME08F&re=1&ee=1 Accessed March 24, 

2011.

43 http://www.dsireusa.org/incentives/incentive.cfm?Incentive_Code=ME03F&re=1&ee=1 Accessed March 24, 

2011.
26 

scale demonstration projects designed to educate communities on the value and cost

effectiveness of renewable energy. Maine's Voluntary Renewable Resources Fund, a public 

benefits fund, was established in 2000 and is supported by contributions made by consumers 

on their electric bills. Applications for Voluntary Renewable Resources Grants are available 

only during specified application periods; funding is made available when a certain amount 

has been collected as a result of voluntary contributions. In addition, Efficiency Maine will 

make funds available from ARRA to supplement this grant program.44 

Grants of up to $50,000 are generally available to Maine-based non-profit 

organizations (including community-based non-profits), electric cooperatives, quasimunicipal corporations and districts, schools, and community action programs. To 

qualify for grant funding, renewable energy resources generally must (1) qualify as a 

small power production facility under Federal Energy Regulatory Commission rules 

or (2) not exceed 100 MW in capacity and use one or more of the following resources 

to generate electricity: fuel cells, tidal power, solar energy, wind energy, geothermal 

energy, hydropower, biomass energy, and municipal solid waste used in a generator 

in conjunction with recycling. There is a 20% cost-share requirement for grant 

funding. 

 

44 http://www.maine.gov/mpuc/recovery/. Accessed March 24, 2011.
27 

5 Solar Domestic Water Heating 

5.1 Solar Domestic Hot Water Technology Overview

Solar domestic hot water (SDHW) heating systems transform the radiation coming from the sun 

into heat energy that then heats domestic hot water normally used for showers, hand washing, or 

cooking. These systems normally include an insulated storage tank that stores water for use 

during times when the sun is not shining. The most common types of systems are flat plates 

bonded to pipes (fin tubes) through which a liquid flows. These fin tubes are contained either 

within an insulated box with a glass front or within vacuum-encapsulated glass cylinders that

look somewhat like large diameter clear fluorescent light bulb tubes. The fin tubes typically have 

a black selective surface plated on them, which reduces the amount of heat that they lose by reradiation once they heat up. The fin tubes are connected together in groups by tubular headers 

connecting them at the top and the bottom so that water can enter the tubes at one end and leave 

at the other end. There are a number of strategies to prevent freezing in cold climates, but the two 

most successful and common are to either run antifreeze in the collector, or run water in the 

collector and drain it out when there is not sufficient heat produced to keep the collector from 

freezing. Both strategies use a heat exchanger to transfer the heat from the fluid flowing through 

the collector into the water in your domestic hot water system and storage tank. The use of a 

double-walled heat exchanger is often required by code to prevent the contamination of domestic 

water by either the antifreeze or non-potable water running through the collectors. Antifreeze has 

a 50% lower heat transfer capacity than water, which means that for the same size collector you 

may not be able to collect as much heat. Antifreeze systems are pressurized and therefore should 

include expansion tanks, pressure relief valves, flush and fill valves, and controls. Drain-back 

systems are not pressurized and so require some additional energy for pumping compared to a 

pressurized system and should also include flush and fill valves and controls. SDHW systems are 

typically sized to provide 40% - 70% of domestic water heating requirements. The conventional 

hot water heating system or an instantaneous hot water heater is often used as a back-up or boost 

to the solar system. 

5.2 Solar Domestic Hot Water Screening Methodology 

The analysis for this technology was performed using NREL’s Renewable Energy Optimization 

software program. The program calculated the energy savings that could be expected using the 

average yearly daily solar radiation data for this geographic location obtained from NREL’s GIS 

National Solar Resource Database. The system savings were calculated assuming system panels 

were installed at a fixed slope of 43° from horizontal, which is the optimal angle of installation at 

this latitude. The results of this analysis calculated the energy saved by the system as well as the 

projected first cost and yearly O&M costs. These were next loaded into a spreadsheet customized 

with the state and federal incentives that apply for this technology. 

5.3 Solar Domestic Hot Water Screening Results

The payback on this system was calculated to be 36.8 years. While it is not uncommon for a 

well-designed SDHW system to operate over a lifetime of 40 years, this high payback time is 

bound to make some question the wisdom of installing such a system. Something to keep in 

mind, however, is the fact that the current low costs of natural gas may not last forever.

Low natural gas prices are affecting electric generation prices as well; if this system were 

replacing an electric hot water heating system, the payback would be approximately 8.5 years. If 
28 

this system were replacing an electric hot water system with rates similar to those being 

incentivized by the Community-Based Renewable Energy Production Incentive ($0.10/kWh, 

which is more in line with previous northeastern rates), the payback would be approximately 6 

years. 

Figure 5. Flat plate (boxed) solar domestic hot water heating system for showers and laundry at 

Chickasaw National Recreation Area in Oklahoma. Credit: Andy Walker, NREL

5.4 Incentives

5.4.1 Federal Incentives for Solar Domestic Hot Water

1) The Federal Business Energy Investment Tax Credit45 provides a tax credit for SDHW

systems based on the capital cost of the system in an amount equal to 30% of the purchase 

price. 

2) The U.S. Treasury Department Renewable Energy Grants,

46 otherwise known as the 

Treasury 1603 program, offers for-profit businesses an upfront payment equal to 30% of the 

capital cost of the system if significant portions of the funding have been committed before 

the end of 2011. It may be taken in lieu of either the renewable energy tax credit or the 

renewable energy production tax credit but only through the end of 2011. 

3) MACRS47 allows businesses to recover investments in renewable energy equipment through 

depreciation deductions. SDHW systems can be depreciated over 5 years. If installed before 

the end of 2011, 100% can be depreciated in the first year. In 2012, only 50% can be 

depreciated in the first year. 

 

45 http://www.dsireusa.org/incentives/incentive.cfm?Incentive_Code=US02F&re=1&ee=1. Accessed March 24, 

2011.

46 http://www.dsireusa.org/incentives/incentive.cfm?Incentive_Code=US53F&re=1&ee=1. Accessed March 24, 

2011.

47 http://www.dsireusa.org/incentives/incentive.cfm?Incentive_Code=US06F&re=1&ee=1. Accessed March 24, 

2011.
29 

4) REAP48 can provide grants of up to 25% of the capital cost of a system and loans of up to 

$25 million. SDHW systems are eligible to apply for either grants or loans. 

5.4.2 Regional Incentives for Solar Domestic Hot Water

1) The Boston-based non-profit organization New Generation Energy49 offers low-interest loans 

for the installation of solar electric and solar water heating systems via its Community 

Lending Program. The solar loans are available to companies (including sole-proprietorship) 

and non-profits in New England (Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, 

Rhode Island, and Vermont), with an emphasis on those located in low- and middle-income 

communities. Loans are available for up to $100,000, and the interest rate is currently 5.0%; 

although, certain projects may be awarded grants and receive a lower interest rate. Only 

projects applying for loans are eligible for grants.

5.4.3 State of Maine Incentives for Solar Domestic Hot Water

1) The State of Maine Solar Rebate Program50 provides a rebate of 25% of the cost of a solarthermal system or $1,000, whichever is less. It isfunded by an assessment on the state's 

transmission and distribution utilities. A total of $500,000 in funding will be available for 

rebates annually. Of this sum, the PUC has allocated 60% to rebates for solar-thermal 

systems, 20% to rebates for PV systems, and 20% to rebates for wind-energy systems. 

During fiscal years 2009-2010 and 2010-2011, this rebate program is increased by 

$500,000/year with money allocated from ARRA.

 

48 http://www.dsireusa.org/incentives/incentive.cfm?Incentive_Code=US05F&re=1&ee=1. Accessed March 24, 

2011.

49 http://www.dsireusa.org/incentives/incentive.cfm?Incentive_Code=ME14F&re=1&ee=1. Accessed March 24, 

2011.

50 http://www.dsireusa.org/incentives/incentive.cfm?Incentive_Code=ME08F&re=1&ee=1. Accessed March 24, 

2011.
30 

6 Solar Preheating of Ventilation Air 

6.1 Solar Vent Preheat Technology Overview

All commercial buildings are required by code to bring in a certain amount of outside ventilation 

air into the building when occupied to provide oxygen and to exhaust indoor air pollution. 

During the winter, this air can be preheated by drawing the air through vertical perforated metal 

south-facing exterior wall panels that are heated by the sun. These unobtrusive wall panels look 

very much like metal siding and can be retrofitted on to the south-facing walls of a building and 

actually improve the exterior appearance of the building. At the same time, any heat lost through 

that south facing wall is sucked back into the building along with the preheated ventilation air as 

it passes across the surface, thus eliminating any heat loss from that south wall during the 

daytime hours. 

6.2 Solar Vent Preheat Screening Methodology 

The analysis for this technology was performed using NREL’s Renewable Energy Optimization 

software program. Average yearly daily solar radiation data for the location was obtained from 

NREL’s GIS National Solar Resource Database. The results of this analysis provided the energy 

saved by the system as well as the projected first cost and yearly O&M costs. These were next 

loaded into a spreadsheet customized with the state and federal incentives that apply specifically 

for this technology. 

6.3 Solar Vent Preheat Screening Results

Screening results find a payback of approximately 7.4 years when doing standalone projects and 

approximately two years when done as part of a remodeling of the building façade. Under this 

remodeling scenario, the panels would be installed as part of a project to re-skin the south side of 

the building and the solar air heating system would be used instead of an alternate siding 

material. A conservative allowance of $5/ft2 of wall area was subtracted from the cost of the solar 

system due to the fact that an alternate siding product would not need to be added to that portion 

of the building to improve its appearance. 

6.4 Incentives

6.4.1 Federal Incentives for Solar Ventilation Air Preheating Systems

1) The Federal Business Energy Investment Tax Credit51 provides a tax credit for solar 

ventilation air preheating systems based on the capital cost of the system in an amount equal 

to 30% of the purchase price. 

2) The U.S. Treasury Department Renewable Energy Grants,

52 otherwise known as the 

Treasury 1603 program, offers for-profit businesses an upfront payment equal to 30% of the 

capital cost of the system if significant portions of the funding have been committed before 

the end of 2011. It may be taken in lieu of either the renewable energy tax credit or the 

renewable energy PTC but only through the end of 2011. 

 

51 http://www.dsireusa.org/incentives/incentive.cfm?Incentive_Code=US02F&re=1&ee=1. Accessed March 24, 

2011.

52 http://www.dsireusa.org/incentives/incentive.cfm?Incentive_Code=US53F&re=1&ee=1. Accessed March 24, 

2011.
31 

3) MACRS53 allows businesses to recover investments in renewable energy equipment through 

depreciation deductions. Solar ventilation air pre-heating systems can depreciate over 5 

years. If installed before the end of 2011, 100% can be depreciated in the first year. In 2012, 

only 50% can be depreciated in the first year. 

4) REAP54 can provide grants of up to 25% of the capital cost of a system and loans of up to 

$25 million. Solar ventilation air pre-heating systems are eligible to apply for either grants or 

loans. 

6.4.2 State of Maine Incentives for Solar Ventilation Air Preheating Systems

1) The State of Maine Solar Rebate Program55 provides a rebate of 25% of the cost of a solarthermal system or $1,000, whichever is less. It isfunded by an assessment on the state's 

transmission and distribution utilities. A total of $500,000 in funding will be available for 

rebates annually. Of this sum, the PUC has allocated 60% to rebates for solar-thermal 

systems, 20% to rebates for PV systems, and 20% to rebates for wind-energy systems. 

During fiscal years 2009-2010 and 2010-2011, this rebate program is increased by 

$500,000/year with money allocated from ARRA. 

 

53 http://www.dsireusa.org/incentives/incentive.cfm?Incentive_Code=US06F&re=1&ee=1. Accessed March 24, 

2011.

54 http://www.dsireusa.org/incentives/incentive.cfm?Incentive_Code=US05F&re=1&ee=1. Accessed March 24, 

2011.

55 http://www.dsireusa.org/incentives/incentive.cfm?Incentive_Code=ME08F&re=1&ee=1. Accessed March 24, 

2011.
32 

7 Wind Turbines

7.1 Wind Technology Overview

Wind turbines transform the kinetic energy in the wind into electrical energy by turning turbine 

blades connected to the shaft of a generator, which produces electricity when rotated. These 

machines are generally classified into two different categories: horizontal axis and vertical axis 

machines. No matter what the category, the critical factors determining how cost effective an 

installation will be are the wind resources available in an area (wind speed and variability), and 

access to a transmission line to transport the power to a location where it can be used. The power 

produced by a wind turbine goes up exponentially as wind speed increases. If the wind speeds 

are too low, it will hurt the project’s electricity generation. 
33 

Figure 6. Brunswick Naval Air Station wind resources map
34 

7.2 Wind Screening Methodology

Wind data for the BNAS was obtained from the NREL National Wind Database and loaded into 

the NREL Renewable Energy Optimization software program, which used this data to calculate 

the energy that could be produced at the site along with the projected cost of the wind energy 

system that could be installed at the site. This data was next loaded into a spreadsheet program 

customized with the specific local and federal incentives that are applicable to this location. 

7.3 Wind Screening Results

As shown in Figure 6, the wind resources on the Brunswick Landing property are rated as 

“marginal,” which might not be surprising since they are located at an airport. You can see from 

the inset map of the state that wind resources just off-shore from Brunswick are extremely good 

and probably a much better site for investment of resources in capturing wind energy than 

Brunswick Landing. Based on our calculations for this site, the paybacks for wind energy 

systems from 100 kW down to 10 kW, even with heavy subsidy, are in the range of 15 years. 

The payback on smaller systems of around 3 kW in size were skewed lower to about 8.8 years 

due to the State of Maine wind rebates, which provide a maximum of $1/W up to a maximum of 

4 kW. 

7.4 Incentives

7.4.1 Federal Incentives for Wind Energy Systems

1) The Federal Business Energy Investment Tax Credit56 provides a tax credit for wind energy 

systems based on the capital cost of the system in an amount equal to 30% of the purchase 

price. 

2) The renewable energy PTC57 offers for-profit businesses a tax credit based on the amount of 

energy produced by a system and it is taken over a number of years. It allows wind energy 

systems to take a tax credit of $0.022/kWh of electricity generated each year for 10 years. 

Systems must be put into service before 2013. 

3) The U.S. Treasury Department Renewable Energy Grants,

58 otherwise known as the 

Treasury 1603 program, offers for-profit businesses an upfront payment equal to 30% of the 

capital cost of the system if significant portions of the funding have been committed before 

the end of 2011. It may be taken in lieu of either the renewable energy tax credit or the 

renewable energy PTC but only through the end of 2011. 

4) MACRS59 allows businesses to recover investments in renewable energy equipment through 

depreciation deductions. Wind energy systems can be depreciated over 5 years. If installed 

before the end of 2011, 100% can be depreciated in the first year. In 2012, only 50% can be 

depreciated in the first year. 

 

56 http://www.dsireusa.org/incentives/incentive.cfm?Incentive_Code=US02F&re=1&ee=1. Accessed March 24, 

2011.

57 http://www.dsireusa.org/incentives/incentive.cfm?Incentive_Code=US13F&re=1&ee=1. Accessed March 24, 

2011.

58 http://www.dsireusa.org/incentives/incentive.cfm?Incentive_Code=US53F&re=1&ee=1. Accessed March 24, 

2011.

59 http://www.dsireusa.org/incentives/incentive.cfm?Incentive_Code=US06F&re=1&ee=1. Accessed March 24, 

2011.
35 

5) REPI60 is for non-profit electric generators and provides an incentive payment of up to 

$0.022/kWh of electricity generated depending on the federal appropriation each year for up 

to 10 years. 

6) REAP61 grants and loan guarantees can provide grants of up to 25% of the capital cost of a 

system and loans of up to $25 million. Wind energy systems are eligible to apply for either 

grants or loans. 

7.4.2 State of Maine Incentives for Wind Energy Systems

1) The Community-Based Renewable Energy Production Incentive (Pilot Program)62 provides a 

generator two choices. The first option is to enter into a long-term contract with a local utility 

for the purchase of either energy, capacity resources (peaking), or RECs at a price not to 

exceed $0.10/kWh for up to 20 years. This includes renewable electricity generation systems

(including wind) up to 30 MW in size. The program is very similar to pre-deregulation utility 

funding programs previously administered by the Maine PUC. The PUC requires the local 

utility to enter into a purchasing agreement with the generator at a price approved by the 

PUC as determined by a transparent look at the finances of the generator allowing for a 

reasonable rate of return on investment. The electric generator is permitted to sell the 

associated RECs and carbon credits separately from the electricity if the local utility has 

already met their state mandated renewable energy portfolio percentage requirement. The 

PUC is the entity that certifies RECs awarded to the project. As an alternative to a long-term 

contract, the generator may instead choose to have the RECs associated with their project 

multiplied by 150%. 

2) The State of Maine Wind Rebate Program63 provides a rebate of 25% of the cost of a wind 

energy system or $1,000, whichever is less. It isfunded by an assessment on the state's 

transmission and distribution utilities. A total of $500,000 in funding will be available for 

rebates annually. Of this sum, the PUC has allocated 60% to rebates for solar-thermal 

systems, 20% to rebates for PV systems, and 20% to rebates for wind-energy systems. 

During fiscal years 2009-2010 and 2010-2011, this rebate program is increased by 

$500,000/year with money allocated from ARRA. 

3) Maine's Voluntary Renewable Resources Grants,

64 supported by the state's Voluntary 

Renewable Resources Fund and administered by the Maine PUC, provides funding for smallscale demonstration projects designed to educate communities on the value and cost 

effectiveness of renewable energy. Maine's Voluntary Renewable Resources Fund, a public 

benefits fund, was established in 2000 and is supported by contributions made by consumers 

on their electric bills. Applications for Voluntary Renewable Resources Grants are available 

only during specified application periods; funding is made available when a certain amount 

 

60 http://www.dsireusa.org/incentives/incentive.cfm?Incentive_Code=US33F&re=1&ee=1. Accessed March 24, 

2011.

61 http://www.dsireusa.org/incentives/incentive.cfm?Incentive_Code=US05F&re=1&ee=1. Accessed March 24, 

2011.

62 http://www.dsireusa.org/incentives/incentive.cfm?Incentive_Code=ME13F&re=1&ee=1. Accessed March 24, 

2011.

63 http://www.dsireusa.org/incentives/incentive.cfm?Incentive_Code=ME08F&re=1&ee=1. Accessed March 24, 

2011.

64 http://www.dsireusa.org/incentives/incentive.cfm?Incentive_Code=ME03F&re=1&ee=1. Accessed March 24, 

2011.
36 

has been collected as a result of voluntary contributions. In addition, Efficiency Maine will 

make funds available from ARRA to supplement this grant program.65 

Grants of up to $50,000 are generally available to Maine-based non-profit organizations 

(including community-based non-profits), electric cooperatives, quasi-municipal corporations 

and districts, schools, and community action programs. To qualify for grant funding, 

renewable energy resources generally must (1) qualify as a small power production facility 

under Federal Energy Regulatory Commission rules or (2) must not exceed 100 MW in 

capacity and use one or more of the following resources to generate electricity: fuel cells, 

tidal power, solar energy, wind energy, geothermal energy, hydropower, biomass energy, and 

municipal solid waste used in a generator in conjunction with recycling. There is a 20% costshare requirement for grant funding. 

4) The State of Maine Sales and Use Tax Refund provides incentives for Community Wind 

Generators generating under 10 MW of power. 

 

65 http://www.maine.gov/mpuc/recovery/. Accessed March 24, 2011.
37 

8 Geothermal Heat Pumps

8.1 Geothermal Heat Pump Technology Overview

Heat pumps are devices similar to air conditioners. They have a compressor and heat exchangers 

and they move heat from one area to another using a refrigerant gas contained in a piping loop 

connecting two heat exchangers with a compressor (pump) between the two. In a standard air 

conditioner, the hot air inside a building flows over one of the heat exchangers located inside the 

building, and the heat is transferred into the refrigerant gas in the tubes. The compressor then 

compresses this gas and pumps the heat over to the other heat exchanger located outside the 

building. Eventually enough heat is pumped out of the building and the compressor turns off. A 

heat pump works the same way except in the winter it reverses direction and pumps heat from 

the outside of the building to the inside. During temperatures below 30°F, these air-based heat 

pumps do not work very well because there is very little heat in the air to pump into the building, 

so electric heating coils are used to provide additional heating. 

A more efficient version of this is a heat pump that uses a heat exchanger buried in the ground 

instead of out in the air. The reasoning behind these systems is that the ground is a constant 

temperature of 55°F and, therefore, there is always a supply of heat to pump into buildings in the 

winter.

These systems use one of two types of heat exchangers: either the exterior heat exchanger 

consists of a pipe with refrigerant in it running directly into the ground, or, more commonly, a 

separate pipe with water pumped through it runs into the ground, which then connects to another 

heat exchanger to transfer its heat into the refrigerant loop located inside the building. These 

exterior ground-heat exchange loops can be installed horizontally or vertically. Typically the 

horizontal units are only installed when systems are installed in new installations due to the fact 

that the surrounding ground often has already been excavated for construction and the marginal 

costs may be lower. Vertical wells are typically drilled by water well drilling companies and 

increasingly are designed by them as well. In either case, the size of the heat exchanger that 

needs to be installed and, therefore, the final installed cost of the heat exchanger, is highly 

dependent on the soil conditions in the area. Without doing a test drill in close proximity to the 

site, there is no way of knowing exactly what the soil type is and therefore what the heat 

conductivity of the soil is and how much rock might be encountered. The conductivity of the soil 

will determine how deep or long the holes for the heat exchanger will need to be. The less 

conductive, the longer or deeper the heat exchanger will need to be and the more hours the 

contractor will need to be on site to drill or excavate. 

8.2 Geothermal Heat Pump Screening Methodology 

For this analysis, we used the 10,000 ft2 warehouse template energy model created during the 

energy modeling of the base. We compared the energy consumed heating the building using 

natural gas to the electrical energy used to heat the building using a ground source heat pump. It 

was determined that using a simplified bundled electrical cost of $0.07/kWh underestimated the 

true utility cost of the system by 40% due to the under-apportioning of the demand cost incurred 

solely by the heating systems, which peak in the winter. Costs for the compressor units were 

estimated using standard average costs. The cost of the ground heat exchange systems was 

determined by talking with well drilling firms in the region to determine costs. 
38 

8.3 Geothermal Heat Pump Screening Results

Energy modeling of a 10,000 ft2 template warehouse building determined that the savings in 

heating costs from utilizing a ground source heat pump versus a natural gas heat source would be 

$2,166/year. System cost estimates came to approximately $126,700. After subtracting federal 

incentives of approximately 35% and a state incentive of approximately $80/ton of capacity, the 

costs were reduced to $80,355, resulting in a payback of 37 years. 

At the building currently used for remediating ground water at Brunswick Landing, because 

there is already a well on site, pumping up groundwater, the cost of installing a system would be 

dramatically lower. If that tainted water were first run through a heat exchanger, the heat in that 

ground water could be utilized for heating the building. The cost after incentives would be 

$16,155 per 10,000 ft2

 of space resulting in a payback of 7.5 years compared to natural gas 

heating. 

8.4 Incentives

8.4.1 Federal Incentives for Geothermal Heat Pump Systems

1) The Federal Business Energy Investment Tax Credit66 provides a tax credit for geothermal 

heat pump systems based on the capital cost of the system in an amount equal to 10% of the 

purchase price. 

2) The U.S. Treasury Department Renewable Energy Grants,

67 otherwise known as the 

Treasury 1603 program, offers for-profit businesses an upfront payment equal to 10% of the 

capital cost of the system if significant portions of the funding have been committed before 

the end of 2011. It may be taken in lieu of the business energy investment tax credit but only 

through the end of 2011. 

3) MACRS68 allows businesses to recover investments in renewable energy equipment through 

depreciation deductions. Geothermal heat pump systems can be depreciated over 5 years. If 

installed before the end of 2011, 100% can be depreciated in the first year. This would 

amount to a savings of approximately 25% off the installed cost of the system. In 2012, only 

50% can be depreciated in the first year. 

8.4.2 State of Maine Incentives for Geothermal Heat Pumps

4) Efficiency Maine Business Incentive69 provides $80 for each ton of system capacity for 

ground source heat pumps. 

9 Fuel Cells

9.1 Fuel Cell Technology Overview

Fuel cells do not create new electricity; they simply release or transform energy from one form 

into another (similar to an IC engine changing the chemical energy in gasoline into mechanical 

 

66 http://www.dsireusa.org/incentives/incentive.cfm?Incentive_Code=US02F&re=1&ee=1. Accessed March 24, 

2011.

67 http://www.dsireusa.org/incentives/incentive.cfm?Incentive_Code=US53F&re=1&ee=1. Accessed March 24, 

2011.

68 http://www.dsireusa.org/incentives/incentive.cfm?Incentive_Code=US06F&re=1&ee=1. Accessed March 24, 

2011.

69 http://www.dsireusa.org/incentives/incentive.cfm?Incentive_Code=ME06F&re=1&ee=1. Accessed March 24, 

2011.
39 

energy or a battery transforming chemical energy into electrical energy). As such, they need an 

outside source of fuel to power them. The fuel used for many fuel cells is hydrogen, and this can 

come from a number of different sources. It can come from stripping hydrogen out of nonrenewable sources such as natural gas, using a device called a reformer (which is the most 

common method of obtaining hydrogen today), or it can come from renewable sources such as 

solar PV, which can be used to hydrolyze water into hydrogen and oxygen. 

In either case, the cost of fuel cells is still much higher than the cost of standard generating 

technologies, and their core components also have a shorter lifetime, needing to be changed out 

every 5-10 years depending on the technology. There are other operating advantages to fuel cells 

that make them attractive and are driving their growth in particular market segments today. 

One manufacturer, Bloom Energy, is promising cheaper costs in the future based on the 

technology using cheaper catalysts. Though they have not revealed the cost or operating data for 

the units, they are currently installing and owning their units and then selling the power to 

companies from their units at a rate of around $0.13/kWh.70 No further details are available. 

One of the markets currently adopting fuel cells rapidly is the forklift market. The big advantage 

that fuel cells bring to this segment is not energy savings as much as their ability to be refueled 

rapidly compared to batteries. Eliminating combustion fumes from diesel forklifts and losses in 

worker productivity from recharging electric forklifts allows these units, even though they are 

expensive, to pay for themselves. In addition, these fuel cell power packs can be retrofitted into 

existing electric lifts without the need to buy a whole new forklift truck. 

Typically expensive hydrogen refueling units are manufactured and leased by hydrogen 

distributors for use at warehousing locations. 

If a manufacturer or warehousing concern chooses to locate at Brunswick Landing in the future, 

there might be an opportunity to consider installing a hydrogen station to refuel their forklifts. 

This hydrogen refueling station may also qualify for federal incentives as an alternate vehicle 

refueling station and could be used to fuel other vehicles coming to or used on the site. 

9.2 Fuel Cell Screening Results

None of our cost analyses were able to get fuel cells used solely to generate electricity and heat 

to pay for them based solely on energy savings; in fact, a 20-year life cycle analysis showed that 

a 400 kW fuel cell power plant cost $7 million more to operate than electricity purchased at 

$0.10/kWh. 

9.3 Incentives

9.3.1 Federal Incentives for Fuel Cells

1) The Federal Business Energy Investment Tax Credit71 provides a tax credit for fuel cell 

energy systems based on the capital cost of the system in an amount equal to 30% of the 

purchase price. 

 

70 Fehrenbacher, K. (20 January 2011). “Bloom Energy Launches Electric Service Program.” Reuters News Service. 71 http://www.dsireusa.org/incentives/incentive.cfm?Incentive_Code=US02F&re=1&ee=1. Accessed March 24, 

2011.
40 

2) The U.S. Treasury Department Renewable Energy Grants,72 otherwise known as the 

Treasury 1603 program, offers for-profit businesses an upfront payment equal to 30% of the 

capital cost of the system if significant portions of the funding have been committed before 

the end of 2011. It may be taken in lieu of either the renewable energy tax credit or the 

renewable energy PTC but only through the end of 2011. 

3) MACRS73 allows businesses to recover investments in renewable energy equipment through 

depreciation deductions. Fuel cell energy systems can be depreciated over 5 years. If 

installed before the end of 2011, 100% can be depreciated in the first year. This would 

amount to a savings of approximately 22.5% of the installed cost of a unit. In 2012, only 50% 

can be depreciated in the first year. 

4) REAP74 grants and loan guarantees can provide grants of up to 25% of the capital cost of a 

system and loans of up to $25 million. Fuel cell systems that use renewable fuels are eligible 

to apply for either grants or loans. 

9.3.2 State of Maine Incentives for Fuel Cells

1) Community-Based Renewable Energy Production Incentive (pilot program)

75 provides a 

generator two choices. The first option is to enter into a long-term contract with a local utility 

for the purchase of either energy, capacity resources (peaking), or RECs at a price not to 

exceed $0.10/kWh for up to 20 years. This includes renewable electricity generation systems

(including fuel cells) up to 30 MW in size. The program is very similar to pre-deregulation 

utility funding programs previously administered by the Maine PUC. The PUC requires the 

local utility to enter into a purchasing agreement with the generator at a price approved by 

the PUC as determined by a transparent look at the finances of the generator allowing for a 

reasonable rate of return on investment. The electric generator is permitted to sell the 

associated RECs and carbon credits separately from the electricity if the local utility has 

already met their state-mandated renewable energy portfolio percentage requirement. The 

PUC is the entity that certifies RECs awarded to the project. As an alternative to a long-term 

contract, the generator may instead choose to have the RECs associated with their project 

multiplied by 150%. 

2) Maine's Voluntary Renewable Resources Grants, supported by the state's Voluntary 

Renewable Resources Fund and administered by the Maine PUC, provides funding for smallscale demonstration projects designed to educate communities on the value and cost 

effectiveness of renewable energy. Maine's Voluntary Renewable Resources Fund, a public 

benefits fund, was established in 2000 and is supported by contributions made by consumers 

on their electric bills. Applications for Voluntary Renewable Resources Grants are available 

only during specified application periods; funding is made available when a certain amount 

 

72 http://www.dsireusa.org/incentives/incentive.cfm?Incentive_Code=US53F&re=1&ee=1. Accessed March 24, 

2011.

73 http://www.dsireusa.org/incentives/incentive.cfm?Incentive_Code=US06F&re=1&ee=1. Accessed March 24, 

2011.

74http://www.dsireusa.org/incentives/incentive.cfm?Incentive_Code=US46F&re=1&ee=1. Accessed March 24, 

2011.

75 http://www.dsireusa.org/incentives/incentive.cfm?Incentive_Code=ME13F&re=1&ee=1. Accessed March 24, 

2011.
41 

has been collected as a result of voluntary contributions. In addition, Efficiency Maine will 

make funds available from ARRA to supplement this grant program.76 

Grants of up to $50,000 are generally available to Maine-based non-profit 

organizations (including community-based non-profits), electric cooperatives, quasimunicipal corporations and districts, schools, and community action programs. To 

qualify for grant funding, renewable energy resources generally must (1) qualify as a 

small power production facility under Federal Energy Regulatory Commission rules 

or (2) must not exceed 100 MW in capacity and use one or more of the following 

resources to generate electricity: fuel cells, tidal power, solar energy, wind energy, 

geothermal energy, hydropower, biomass energy, and municipal solid waste used in a 

generator in conjunction with recycling. There is a 20% cost-share requirement for 

grant funding. 

 

76 http://www.maine.gov/mpuc/recovery/. Accessed March 24, 2011. 
42 

10 Micro Gas Turbines 

10.1 Micro Gas Turbine Overview

Micro gas turbines are miniature turbines that combust natural gas through the turbine, thus 

creating rotational motion that turns a generator to produce electricity. These units have not been 

perfected for the combustion of wood gas yet. Therefore, when comparing them with other 

technologies used to generate electricity from natural gas, such as an IC engine at up to 48% 

efficiency, they have a relatively low electrical efficiency at 20%-30% efficiency. 

10.2 Micro Turbine Analysis Methodology

The installed cost of the equipment needed to generate 1 MW of power from natural gas was 

estimated and entered into a cash flow spreadsheet customized with the federal and state 

incentives applicable for this technology to estimate the payback period. 

10.3 Micro Gas Turbine Screening Results

Micro turbines convert an even lower percentage of the energy consumed into electricity, which 

means that the finances of the system are even more dependent on the sale of heat.

Calculations show that the system has a payback of approximately 6.3 years if all of the heat is 

sold, 17 years if only 50% of the heat is sold, and 25 years if no heat is sold. Given the current 

occupancy of the buildings at Brunswick Landing this may not be a wise risk. If smaller, 

individual 60 kW units were installed they would theoretically have a payback of 7.8 years. 

However, since these systems need a third party to finance and lease them in order to get the 

52.5% federal tax incentive buy-down, individual units would be impossible under that financing 

structure. The financing structure utilized by energy service companies generally requires a 

minimum project size of $1 million-$2 million in order to justify the financing costs required for 

such a project. 

10.4 Incentives

10.4.1 Federal Incentives for Micro Gas Turbines

1) The U.S. Treasury Department Renewable Energy Grants,

77 otherwise known as the 

Treasury 1603 program, offers for-profit businesses an upfront payment equal to 30% of the 

capital cost of the system if significant portions of the funding have been committed before 

the end of 2011. It may be taken in lieu of either the renewable energy tax credit or the 

renewable energy PTC but only through the end of 2011. 

2) MACRS78 allows businesses to recover investments in renewable energy equipment through 

depreciation deductions. Fuel cell energy systems can be depreciated over 5 years. If 

installed before the end of 2011, 100% can be depreciated in the first year. This would 

amount to a savings of approximately 22.5% of the installed cost of a unit. After this in 2012, 

only 50% can be depreciation in the first year. 

There are no state incentives available for this technology aside from the Maine state allowance 

to use net metering if used in a CHP system.

 

77 http://www.dsireusa.org/incentives/incentive.cfm?Incentive_Code=US53F&re=1&ee=1. Accessed March 24, 

2011.

78 http://www.dsireusa.org/incentives/incentive.cfm?Incentive_Code=US06F&re=1&ee=1. Accessed March 24, 

2011.
43 

11 Anaerobic Bio Digesters 

11.1 Potential Tenant 

MRRA is currently in talks with a tenant who is interested in creating a large, anaerobic biodigester on site. They plan on digesting mainly bio-solids settled out of the sewage from the 

Portland waste water treatment plant. 

11.2 Potential Synergies 

There are a number of potential synergies that might occur between the proposed wood-burning 

power plant and this type of anaerobic digester: 

1) The waste heat from the wood power plant could be used to pre-process the bio-solids. This 

pre-processing serves to liquefy the bio-solids and can cut the next step of digesting the 

materials in half. This means that either the size of the capital equipment required for the 

digester would be cut in half or the digester could accommodate twice the throughput of 

materials if more materials were available. 

2) If the digester gas were cleaned sufficiently, it might allow it to be burned in the MRRA 

wood boiler or IC engines without the removal of carbon monoxide, which might also reduce 

the cost for the digester operator as opposed to attempting to sell the gas back to the gas 

utility, which would require very extensive gas cleaning. 

3) The digesters might present an additional resource for the disposal of organic manufacturing 

or cooking waste materials such as waste vegetable oils. 

4) It is possible that after slow introduction, the digester could use the waste water from a wood 

gas shower column cleanser as feedstock to produce methane. 

5) Any digester processing bio-solids from a municipal waste water treatment plant will have 

proteins in the material. When proteins break down, they produce sulfur compounds that 

have a bad odor similar to rotten eggs. These compounds can also damage steel equipment. 

One of the most common and economic methods of removing sulfur compounds from the 

digester biogas is to run the gas through tanks filled with iron filings. The high surface area 

provides the perfect surface on which the sulfur can react and turn into rust. The steel 

processing going on at the nearby Bath Iron Works should provide an inexpensive, readily 

accessible source of waste machined steel shavings, which can become a resource for 

cleansing the biogas produced at the site from sulfur. 

11.3 Potential Issues to be Aware of and Questions to Ask the Digester Operator

Use of digester gas in the wood power plant would require transparent access of both parties to 

the gas testing results to avoid any potential harm that might come to the engines or boilers 

burning the gas if contaminants were not cleaned properly. 

There are multiple questions to ask the digester operator, including: 

1) How much experience does the operator have in operating digesters? 

2) How much experience does the operator have in operating digesters of this size digesting this 

type of substrate?

3) How do you plan to dispose of the liquids and solids leaving the digester? 
44 

4) How do you plan to deal with heavy metals in these residues? 

5) How many different digesters do you plan to operate at one time? (Redundancy issues if one 

unit becomes poisoned.) 

6) What is your back-up plan for disposing of the contents of a digester that becomes 

irrecoverably fouled/“poisoned” so the bacteria die and cannot operate? 

7) How do you plan on cleaning the biogas produced? 

8) How do you plan on storing the biogas produced? 

9) What type of safety systems will be incorporated in the system?

10) Do you plan on adding odorant to the biogas produced? 
45 

12 Smart Grid Strategies and Technologies

12.1 Smart Grid Overview

The term smart grid refers to a group of strategies involving how power is transmitted and 

managed on the wires portion of the electrical system. These strategies revolve around several 

areas: 

1) Managing electric demand: In Maine, independent system operators are entities that are

required to have an available supply of electricity to consumers whenever they demand it—

they must always have a pool of sufficient generating equipment ready to power up and 

generate power at a moment’s notice. Alternatively, they may purchase power from another 

generator at a much higher price. Because these generators are turned off much of the time, 

the capital cost just to have these generators ready and waiting to meet a potential demand for 

power is enormous. Therefore, the utilities want to find ways to pass on these costs to the 

consumers who require these non-steady spikes in demand for power and also give other 

consumers the option to opt out if they decide they do not want to pay the higher cost for 

electricity during those more expensive peak-demand time periods. By sending out real-time 

energy pricing signals, the consumers can then make decisions to not use electricity during 

times of high demand to save money. This not only saves the consumer money but can also 

save the utility money. 

2) Automated switching: By automating relays in the transmission and transformer system, 

outage times will be reduced by allowing system operators to transfer loads electronically 

instead of needing to send a person physically out to switching and transformer stations. 

3) Peak shaving using electric vehicle batteries: Under this scenario, a utility might choose to 

pay the owner of an electric vehicle to use some of the power in their vehicle’s battery to 

supply the grid during a peak electrical demand spike. 

4) Peak shaving by rolling blackouts of storage-inherent appliances: Under this scenario, a 

utility might communicate with appliances such as a hot water heater and tell it to turn off for 

15-minutes during peak power demand time periods. Because these types of appliances have 

storage inherent in their nature, a short off-cycle is hard to notice. 

12.2 Smart Grid Recommended Strategy

12.2.1 Hardware

At this time, based on the rapidly evolving landscape within the smart grid world and the very 

few tenants and known electric loads on the property, the smart grid team at NREL recommends 

waiting until additional tenants have located on the property to determine the wisest strategy to 

pursue terms of what equipment to install. 

12.2.2 Metering

With very few tenants on the property, the most cost-effective and sensible strategy for 

collecting metering data from individual meters is to use wireless transponders that transmit the 

data back to a centralized building management system (BMS). This BMS “front end” is 

equipment MRRA will need to have on the property already to accomplish other functions such 

as monitoring the systems in buildings rented out or managed for maintenance. This system 

would also be used to monitor the hot water distribution system and bill the buildings for hot 
46 

water. Given the fact that these systems already need to be in place, nothing will be wasted if the 

metering data is later transmitted to a different front end. 

12.2.3 Test-Bed Opportunity

The smart grid team at NREL is currently looking for a clean-slate location that would be willing 

to partner with NREL to test new concepts using electric vehicle batteries combined with smart 

grid technology to provide peak shaving for utilities. 
47 

13 Introduction to Systemic Economics and Opportunities

To create a long-lasting stable economy, it is important for Brunswick Landing to build with a 

long-term economic vision. This vision may build on opportunities that could be called systemic, 

synergistic, or cooperative opportunities and benefits. Around the world, thinking is starting to 

shift toward enhancing the environment for entrepreneurship through these types of cooperative 

opportunities, such as public-private cooperative partnerships, cooperative marketing of the 

companies in a whole region instead of only individual companies, and systemic production. In 

the same way in which investment advisors have advised investors for years to “diversify, 

diversify, diversify” to achieve stable long-term gains, there is now a new openness to the idea of 

diversified systemic output coming from integrated production entities or regions. 

13.1 Industrial Symbiosis

Industrial symbiosis can be boiled down to the concept of the waste from one process becoming 

the food for another process. In effect, this is collaboration between different industries for 

mutual economic and environmental benefit. It seeks to maximize the total economic output 

from the limited resources in a region by eliminating every bit of waste or inefficiency, and 

capitalizing on the synergy between companies. This method optimizes the output from the 

whole system instead of maximizing the output from only one company. The result is the 

maximization of the total overall output and opportunities within the whole community. Two 

examples of industrial symbiosis can be seen in Kalundburg, Denmark, and Lubei, China. 

Denmark is one of the countries most identified with energy efficiency, as evidenced by the fact 

that they have the largest number of towns in the world that have built combined heat and power 

(CHP) systems. Under this scenario, relatively small electric generating plants are built close to 

cities so the waste heat from these plants can be used to heat homes and businesses. In the 

United States, our large centralized power plants are normally located miles from cities, and the 

waste heat produced in the process of generating electricity (about 60%) is often directed to large 

cooling towers and vented to the sky. 

By locating these smaller plants close to cities and using the waste heat, these combined systems 

are often up to 90% efficient79 compared to most large, centralized power plants, which could be 

only 30% efficient by the time the power gets to the user.

13.1.1 Danish Industrial Symbiosis

Kalundburg, Denmark,80 currently scavenges sulfur from the exhaust stacks of its power plant. 

This process keeps the sulfur out of the air, but also eliminates air pollution penalties, and 

produces a new value-added product, gypsum, which is then used to produce two-thirds of the 

output of Gyproc Corporation’s drywall plant nearby. The waste fly ash from the boilers at the 

same coal-fired plant is used by a concrete plant in the area as a substitute for energy intensive 

cement, and some of the waste heat from the plant is used to heat a fish farm nearby. 

 

79 http://www.ambottawa.um.dk/NR/rdonlyres/C3F9F1D4-BEA9-4C29-A1FD1D7CC8617B84/0/combinedheat.pdf 80 http://www.symbiosis.dk/industrial-symbiosis.aspx. Accessed March 24, 2011.
48 

Adjacent to the power plant is the Statoil oil refinery. Statoil receives the steam for its refining 

processes from the power plant and in turn shares its water used in processing with the power 

plant. It also sends the gas that it formerly flared to the open air over to the Gyproc plant for use 

in its drywall production process. Around the corner, Novo Nordisk, one of the largest names in 

the biotech industry worldwide, has a factory growing enzymes. Waste hot water produced by 

the electric power plant heats this factory. In turn, Novo Nordisk sends the wastes from their 

factory in the form of yeast slurries and other organic wastes to area farms to be used as 

fertilizers and pig feed. Alcoholic wastes from this same plant are sent to the city’s waste water 

treatment plant nearby, which then converts them into methane gas for use in generating 

electricity. The city sends purified water back to the factory. 

Figure 8 shows a diagram of some of the interactions between the various entities in Kalundborg 

and the gradual integration of the various companies and public systems over the years.

In Kalundborg, all of these industrial relationships are voluntary, but the local government 

originally recognized the opportunities for the local economy and created the environment by 

putting in place incentives that made it attractive for the companies to cooperate. 

According to studies done by the city, the value of these wastes that were captured over 30 years 

through 1994 amounted to approximately $160 million. This is the equivalent to $160 million 

added to the local economy. 

Kalundborg is next planning to add a bio-fuels cluster to this systemic cooperation of processes, 

which is already in the area.81 

 

81 Cluster Biofuels Denmark. 

http://www.kalundborg.dk/Erhvervsliv/The_Green_Industrial_Municipality/Cluster_Biofuels_Denmark_(CBD).asp

x. Accessed March 24, 2011.
49 

Figure 7. Diagram of industrial symbiosis in Kalundborg, Denmark. Illustration by Troy Wuelfing & 

Gabriel Grant

13.1.2 Chinese Industrial Symbiosis

The port city of Lubei in eastern China has created another industrial symbiosis. This project 

starts by taking in large quantities of fresh seawater, which is rich with algae, seaweed, and 

plankton. The seaweed is separated and processed into a dried seaweed food product. The rest of 

the water flows into ponds growing shrimp. The shrimp eat the algae and plankton, thus cleaning 

the water. Once the shrimp are fully grown, they are harvested and processed, and a material 

called chitin is extracted from the leftover shells (chitin is also present in lobster shells). This 

chitin is next processed into a material known as chitosan, which is used for manufacturing hightech fabrics. The water continues on from the shrimp ponds to other ponds growing muscles, 

which extract even more “food” from the water. From there, the ocean water, having been 

cleansed of most biological matter, continues on to a processing facility where gypsum, sodium 

chloride, and bromide are extracted from the water. Next, the water is heated by (and at the same 

time provides cooling for) the nearby coal-fired power plant. Some of the power plant’s 

electricity is also used to extract ammonium phosphate from the water. The sulfuric acid from a 

nearby cement factory is next used to process the ammonium phosphate extracted from the water 

into a feedstock for the cement factory along with the fly ash from the coal-fired power plant 

previously mentioned. In the final stage, a pilot project at the plant next took the water one step 

further by running it though a reverse osmosis filter to create potable drinking water. A full view 
50 

of the plant in Figure 9 shows that the plant started off with only seawater and coal and ended up 

with 10 different products as well as drinking water.82

 

Figure 8. Diagram of industrial symbiosis in Lubei, China. Illustration by Li Kangmin sustainability 

consultant Wuxi China

13.1.3 Interrelationship but not Dependency

It is important to recognize that while each of the processes can take advantage of the waste 

materials from other processes in the cluster, they are not dependent on those other processes. 

 

82 Li Kangmin, sustainability consultant Wuxi China in discussions with the author in 2006 
51 

Each one of the processes is independent and can continue to operate on its own even if one of 

the others stumbles for some reason.

13.1.4 Systemic Renewable Energy

Even with growing demand and falling prices in the renewable energy sector, it is possible to 

miss the systemic opportunities available to a community if these technologies are only looked at 

individually and not integrated with other economic systems in the community. 

The attempt of this report is not only to look at the economics of individual renewable energy 

technologies but also to look at the systemic benefits that can be gained when cost-effective 

renewable energy technologies are integrated with other systems and businesses in a community 

thus multiplying the total monetary, employment, and quality-of-life benefits they can provide to 

a community. 
52 

14 A Vision of Possible Systemic Opportunities at Brunswick 

Landing

Introduction to the Vision

This section presents a vision of some of the systems which could be combined at BNAS starting 

with the core Biomass CHP system and the existing local resources and local market trends in 

the area. This is only one scenario for Brunswick moving forward, but not the only one. In 

addition the “options” presented are just that, optional technology modules which can be mixed 

and matched to the core CHP system as desired by the community or added one at a time 

gradually. 

Economics 

There are the two schools of thought of basic economics: the supply side (increasing the flow of 

money into the system) and the demand side (reducing the flow of money out of the system). 

Both approaches have great merit, and to ignore one side or the other risks losing great potential 

benefit. 

This report attempts to integrate both schools of economic thought and bring to bear the greatest 

total economic benefit for Brunswick. We do this by recommending projects that “reduce the 

demand” (drain) of money away from Brunswick while also “increasing the supply” of money 

into Brunswick. 

This report is only meant to be a starting point that shows examples of a few of the possible 

business options that could be linked together systemically and is not meant to be an exhaustive 

list of the possible options for Brunswick. 

14.1 Where Your Money Comes From (Sources of Income)

Previous studies, such as the 2007 Economic Research Associates (ERA) report83 on BNAS 

identified tourism and retirees as major sources of income entering the Brunswick area. These 

sectors and ways in which the income from these sectors can be enhanced through integrated 

planning of the energy and natural resources available in the area are discussed later in this 

report. Additional areas identified in the ERA study84 were information technology (IT), 

personal aircrafts, and composite materials. While IT is addressed in the efficiency section of the 

report, the other two industries require much more in-depth analysis in terms of exactly what 

equipment and specialized processes might be utilized by the specific companies choosing to 

locate at Brunswick Landing. These processes can be further explored for opportunities for 

energy efficiency and industrial symbiosis as these potential tenant companies emerge.

 

83 Economic Research Associates (Jan 17, 2007 ) Brunswick Naval Air Station: Project # 16746 Prepared for The 

Matrix Group. 

84 Economic Research Associates (Jan 17, 2007 ) Brunswick Naval Air Station: Project # 16746 Prepared for The 

Matrix Group.
53 

14.2 Where your Money Goes (Expenditures)

Our analysis of area economic demographics in the ERA report85 and U.S. Bureau of Labor 

Statistics (BLS) figures86 indicate that some of the largest expenditures of money leave the local 

Brunswick economy for utilities, transportation, and food. 

14.2.1 Food

BLS statistics show that average Brunswick households spend 12.4% of their yearly income on 

food, or approximately $6,419 per household. Because a relatively small percentage of that food 

is produced locally this means that a large part of that 12.4% is leaving the local economy every 

year. A recent study87 in Portland, Oregon, found that every dollar spent on locally produced 

food at the farmer’s market adds $3.30 in local economic impact. In contrast, most if not all of 

the same dollar spent at the grocery store immediately leaves the area. Nearly all of the food 

from the grocery store comes from outside the state and most often from outside the country. In 

the same study,

88 the City of Portland found that the best way to increase that 33% multiplying 

effect on the economy was to extend the season of the farmer’s market; which could also be done 

by growing food during the winter in greenhouses. 

14.2.2 Utilities

The other item at the top of the list of Brunswick resident expenditures that transfer money out of 

the local economy is utility expenditures. This report will analyze how these dollars can be spent 

locally on renewable energy technologies, thus keeping the utility dollars within the local 

Brunswick economy. 

14.3 Renewable Energy Systems 

Renewable Energy Systems rely on local renewable resources to create the energy they produce. 

Because renewable energy systems are distributed and local, more of the money spent over the 

lifetime of the system remains in the region. 

Of all the renewable resources analyzed, this study shows that the strongest opportunity, due to 

the abundant wood resources in the area, is a biomass CHP system (see Figure 10). By utilizing 

the area’s strength in wood resources, Brunswick can begin to create diversified economic 

growth for the region. 

 

85 Economic Research Associates (Jan 17, 2007 ) Brunswick Naval Air Station: Project # 16746 Prepared for The 

Matrix Group.

86 http://www.bls.gov/cex/2007/msas/norteast.pdf. 87 Barney and Worth Inc. (November 2008). “Growing Portland’s Farmer’s Market.” Prepared for the City of 

Portland, Oregon.

88 Barney and Worth Inc. (November 2008). “Growing Portland’s Farmer’s Market.” Prepared for the City of 

Portland, Oregon.
54 

Figure 9. Biomass combined heat and power system. Illustration by Colleen McCulla

Creating a wood-powered electric generation system would allow MRRA to create “green” 

sustainable electricity and to be one of the first net-zero commercial developments in the world. 

This project would allow MRRA to leverage a number of different opportunities. By utilizing 

the State of Maine Community-Based Renewable Energy Production Incentive Pilot Program,89

MRRA can enter into a long-term agreement with the public utility commission (PUC) and the 

local utility that ensures MRRA the cost to generate the wood-powered electricity plus a 

reasonable profit. The PUC has the authority to mandate a rate of up to $0.10/kWh that the utility 

will pay to MRRA, and contracts can be signed for up to 20 years. In addition, if MRRA created 

a L3C corporation (as described in Section 15.1) to operate the project could take advantage of 

the Production Tax Credit (PTC)90 which would provide 2.2¢/kWh in tax incentives to the L3C 

corporation. On top of these federal incentives, the project could also take advantage of the 

Modified Accelerated Cost Recovery System (MACRS)91 with a bonus depreciation of 50% of 

the value of the project in the first year of operation, and the other 50% depreciated over 7 years. 

Tenants and other companies located on site would still be able to purchase lower cost power 

from Central Maine Power at about $0.07/kWh, while all of the power output from the wood 

power plant was sold to Central Maine Power at $0.10/kWh. 

If a piping network were built to connect all of the buildings on the campus with the woodpowered electric generating plant, the waste heat from the wood power plant (if designed 

correctly) could be used to heat the buildings in the winter and (with additional equipment) cool 

the buildings in the summer. These systems may also qualify for the first year 50% Bonus 

depreciation. 

 

89 DSIRE. http://www.dsireusa.org/incentives/incentive.cfm?Incentive_Code=ME13F&re=1&ee=1. Accessed 

March 24, 2011. 90DSIRE. http://www.dsireusa.org/incentives/incentive.cfm?Incentive_Code=US13F&re=1&ee=1 Accessed Sept 

18, 2011

91 DSIRE. 

http://www.dsireusa.org/incentives/incentive.cfm?Incentive_Code=US06F&re=1&ee=1http://www.dsireusa.org/inc

entives/incentive.cfm?Incentive_Code=US06F&re=1&ee=1. Accessed March 24, 2011.
55 

Beyond the environmental and surface economic benefits, this waste heat can be used as 

leverage to incentivize further economic growth at Brunswick Landing. 

One way of leveraging this resource is to offer free heat for a number of years to new businesses 

that choose to locate on the property. A precedent for this can be seen in the apartment rental 

industry and provides an additional way to market the property and attract the attention of 

potential tenants. 

MRRA can use the heat in other ways to add value, which can create growth. By doing energy 

improvements on its property, businesses could receive a business tax deduction from the federal 

government through the Energy Efficient Commercial Buildings Tax Deduction.

92 This would 

pay for a portion of the cost of the improvement project. In addition, MRRA could offer free 

heat as a form of pay-in-trade for the facility upgrade, which increases property and tax values 

and attracts new tenants with the opportunity to rent a facility with upgraded comfort and 

appearance. 

Low/no interest loans guaranteed by the federal government as well as grants could be procured 

for these energy projects from various federal and state programs. Free heating might be 

provided for the number of years required to pay off these loans. 

Another benefit of this program is that often when energy improvements are done (like adding 

exterior wall insulation), these improvements also end up providing additional value to the 

property in the form of cosmetic improvements. Even for projects that do not involve adding a 

new cosmetic surface; if they involve adjacent surfaces, they can often lower the incremental 

costs of doing cosmetic improvements, thus improving the real estate value and tax base to the 

city’s and the Navy’s benefit. The Navy has a cooperative agreement with MRRA that allows it

to benefit from improving property values. 

14.4 Leveraging Win-Win Systemic Incentives

In the previously described pay-in-trade scenario, Brunswick would contribute an incentive of 

free heat to pay off part of the improvement loan. The tenant or property owner would contribute 

tax deduction money, time, and effort to apply for low interest loans toward the improvement of 

the property. This provides a win for the business owner who ends up with lower utility costs 

over the long term and a win for MRRA by improving the appearance of the BNAS building 

stock and property values as well as improving the local economy by keeping utility money in 

Brunswick where it can create local jobs and businesses in the local economy. The waste heat is 

first transformed into avoided rent for the tenant and next when combined with the tax 

deductions is transformed into jobs for local remodeling companies. In the end, these incentives 

“trickle down” from the energy efficiency incentive programs and turn these dollars many more 

times in the local economy than simply spending the money on utility bills that leave the region. 

Projects can become a catalyst, which can leverage and bring additional outside federal and state 

resources into the community that would not have been coming into the area otherwise. 

 

92 DSIRE. http://www.dsireusa.org/incentives/incentive.cfm?Incentive_Code=US40F&re=1&ee=1. Accessed March 

24, 2011.
56 

14.5 Option of Creating a Greenhouse Industry

Another opportunity for leveraging free heat from the wood power plant is to invest in starting 

up a whole new industry in the area, which (like the Kalundborg model93) can take maximum 

advantage of the waste resources being shed from this particular power plant. Due to the large 

amount of waste heat and carbon dioxide, which may be available from the wood-powered 

electric generators on the property, there is a good opportunity to start up a greenhouse industry 

growing salad greens and fresh herbs using rain water. Rainwater collected from the greenhouse 

roofs could water the plants, the reduced cost heat would lower the cost of growing food for the 

region, and the carbon dioxide would accelerate the growth of the plants by at least 30%.94 This 

carbon dioxide growth strategy is used extensively in Europe. Operators of large commercial 

greenhouses such as Backyard Farms in Madison, Maine,95 where they mainly grow tomatoes, 

actually purchase commercial bottled carbon dioxide to enrich the carbon dioxide levels in the 

greenhouses and thus accelerate the growth of their plants. In the future, absorbing carbon 

dioxide directly with plants might also allow MRRA to claim carbon credits for carbon 

sequestration (or possibly better described as carbon short-cycling). Estimated start-up costs for a 

half-acre greenhouse is in the range of $280,000. Based on the wholesale price of produce, the 

simple payback of such a combined system would be in the range of 2.4 years. 

Figure 10. Hydroponic lettuce growing in a greenhouse. Credit: Mary Donnel

14.6 Aquaponics

Growing techniques have even been developed that combine hydroponics with organic growing 

techniques. The process has extremely high growth density and utilizes the biologically cultured 

 

93 http://www.symbiosis.dk/industrial-symbiosis.aspx. Accessed March 24, 2011. 94 Discussions with European Greenhouse CO2 enrichment system manufacturers and greenhouse operators while 

attending Green-Sys 2007 March 2007 Naples Italy 95 Ladd, C. (31 March 2010). “Giant Greenhouses Mean Flavorful Tomatoes All Year.” New York Times. 
57 

wastes of fish being farmed in adjacent ponds as liquid fertilizer to grow lettuce using a method 

called thin-film hydroponic technology. Essentially, the lettuce roots are submerged between two 

layers of plastic, which have a nutrient liquid continually flowing between them. In normal 

hydroponic greenhouses, the nutrients flowing through these sheets are synthetic fertilizers. In 

this variation, the nutrients are natural fertilizers created by culturing the wastes of the fish being 

fed and raised in tanks nearby. This culturing (using the same bacteria that is in everyday 

yogurt), improves the usability of the nitrogen in the fish waste. By growing the lettuce in 

different stages in a greenhouse, the harvest can be timed so that there is a continual flow of 

produce being harvested every day, and it provides continuous stable full-time employment for 

workers without the need for boom-bust cycles. Preliminary indications are that a half-acre

traditional thin-film hydroponic growing operation in this area could produce about 130,000 lbs 

of lettuce per year and about $110,000/year in profits.96

United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) statistics indicate that the average American 

eats 34.5 lbs of lettuce per year.97 Ninety-three percent of the lettuce consumed in the United 

States is grown on the border between Arizona and California. This means the fuel bill just for 

shipping the lettuce to the tri-city area around Brunswick is in the range of $153,000/year.98

In addition, hydroponic systems use 90% less water than if this lettuce was being grown in 

Arizona and California using conventional, non-greenhouse lettuce-growing methods.

99 

 

96 Donnel, M. Telephone conversation. Professional greenhouse financial planner spreadsheet model, January 2011 97 Commodity Profile: Lettuce, UC Davis Agricultural Marketing Resource Center 

http://aic.ucdavis.edu/profiles/lettuce.pdf. Accessed March 24, 2011. 98 Commodity Profile: Lettuce, UC Davis Agricultural Marketing Resource Center 

http://aic.ucdavis.edu/profiles/lettuce.pdf. Accessed March 24, 2011. 99 Commodity Profile: Lettuce, UC Davis Agricultural Marketing Resource Center 

http://aic.ucdavis.edu/profiles/lettuce.pdf. 
58 

Figure 11. Map of the 3,026 miles that lettuce must travel from California to Brunswick, Maine. 

Credit: ©Europa Technologies Image ©2009 Sanborn ©Google Gray Buildings ©2008 Sanborn

There are a number of other produce products that could also be grown in these greenhouses. 

Possibilities include herbs, tomatoes, or fresh flowers. Other possibilities might be contract 

“designer vegetables” for high-end restaurants or weekly mixed boxes of vegetables pre-sold 

direct to residents using a community-supported agriculture (CSA) business model. Given the 

fact that Brunswick Landing is located less than four miles from the main campus of Bowdoin 

College as well as having a Bowdoin satellite campus located adjacent to Brunswick Landing, 

Bowdoin would provide a huge “local-food-friendly” potential market for the food produced in 

the greenhouses. With 1,700 students, Bowdoin College could easily use that much lettuce on its 

own. 

14.7 Fish and Aquaculture Option 

Asian carp, sometimes called Shanghai bass, can be raised in aquaculture tanks inside the 

greenhouses using sustainable feeds. There are a few possibilities as to where the feed can come 

from. Fish raised in fish farms have more recently been raised using unsustainable methods, 

which utilize fish feed pellets made from industrial byproducts and ground-up fish meal made 

from the excess fish found in nets that cannot be sold for high prices. A much more sustainable 

source of protein to feed these fish are naturally grown insects and “fishing worms” grown on 

restaurant and grocery store food and produce wastes. This process “up-cycles” the value of 

these food wastes instead of “down-cycling” them into low value products like lawn compost. 

Additional profits can be made by charging restaurants for hauling away their “waste.” Another 
59 

source of feed for the fish could be leftover waste grain substrate used in mushroom growing 

operations as described in section 14.9. 

The Food Channel100 lists two of the top-10 trends in seafood to be “Sustainable Aquaculture” 

and “Baby Boomer Interest in Seafood.” With the baby boomers entering their retirement years, 

these two factors combine to make this an attractive industry that could fit in perfectly with the 

regional “foodie” movement101 and the local retiree market. 

14.8 Freshwater Crab

Freshwater crab can be raised using materials that are most like the food they eat in their normal 

environment: dead fish parts. By utilizing the fish wastes produced by some of the few local fish 

processing plants surviving in the area, it may be possible to raise freshwater crab.

14.8.1 Insects and Worms as Fish Food

The kitchen scraps collected from local restaurants could provide food for insects grown as 

natural feed for the fish (see Figure 12). In addition, seasonal agricultural surpluses such as 

potatoes can be fed to insects which transform them into compact nutrient rich protein. These 

insects could then be easily dried and stored for use at a later time for fish feed. 

14.8.2 Nursery “Starter Pots” 

The nitrogen rich insect and worm wastes (called castings) from the insects being grown for fish 

food could be molded into nursery planting pots creating a value-added product with a proven 

market. 

Figure 12. Greenhouse and aquaculture fish and crab module interactions. 

Illustration by Colleen McCulla

 

100 http://www.foodchannel.com/articles/article/top-10-trends-in-seafood/. 101 (22 October 2010). “Midcoast Maine: Invasion of the Foodies.” The Week; p. 36
60 

14.8.3 Worm Enzyme Business

In addition to using worms as feed for fish, there are a number of other ways they can be used. 

Worms create huge quantities of natural enzymes. One of the current products produced from 

worm enzymes is drain clog-up preventer. The worm enzymes gradually eat away at the grease 

and other materials that accumulate on sink drains to prevent them from forming clogs. The 

worm enzymes could be removed and the high protein worm bodies dehydrated to be sold or 

used later for high protein fish feed. 

14.9 Mushrooms

Another local waste opportunity that fits into this system could be to collect the waste coffee 

grounds from coffee houses in the area102 as a low cost, sterile medium on which gourmet 

shitake or oyster mushrooms can be grown (see Figure 13). Examples of previous profitable 

projects occurred in New Mexico, Colombia, and California.103 

Additional resources that would normally be considered wastes leftover from the wood power 

plant , are large amounts of moisture and heat exhausted from the equipment used to pre-dry the 

green wood chips before they enter the wood-burning system. Normally there is no way to 

capture and utilize all of this sensible and latent heat and it is lost to the atmosphere. But in the 

winter, this moist heat, which would otherwise be lost, could be used to heat mushroom 

“growing houses,” which require a constant flow of moist oxygen rich outside air so the 

mushrooms can grow faster. 

 

102Hitachi Foundation Entrepreneur award based on ZERI inspired mushroom industry selling gourmet mushrooms 

grown on waste coffee grounds to Whole Foods. http://www.hitachifoundation.org/our-work/yoshiyama-youngentrepreneurs-program/meet-our-entrepreneurs/alex-velez-and-nikhil-arora 103 “Sustainable or Not Sustainable? Mushrooms and Coffee.” The Specialty Coffee Chronicle. 

http://www.zeri.org/mush.pdf. Accessed March 24, 2011.
61 

Figure 13. Optional mushroom module interaction. Illustration by Colleen McCulla

14.10 Greenhouses on Roofs

In addition, both greenhouses and mushroom houses (with the exception to those containing fish 

farms) could be retrofitted onto the roofs of existing buildings by adding additional exterior 

support if necessary. This could provide a green image similar to a “green roof” and may 

improve the building’s appearance while also having the potential to decrease original building’s 

utility bills. In some cities including New York,104 businesses like Whole Foods are looking at 

rooftop greenhouses as a strategy to increase the percentage of food produced inside the city 

while responding to buyer’s desires for local food. Brunswick Landing could increase the overall 

area of space available to develop by installing rooftop greenhouses in areas/spaces that would 

normally not be attractive for new potential tenants. 

14.11 The Local Food Movement

The national news weekly The Week recently ran a story under the heading “Midcoast Maine 

Invasion of the Foodies,”105 commenting that, “Thanks to an influx of former urbanites, the 

small towns of Midcoast Maine have developed an appetite for good food that seems 

‘insatiable,’” according to Meredith Goad in the Portland Maine Press Herald. The article went 

on to say “no wonder the Midcoast possesses a ‘growing reputation as a great place to eat.’” The 

increasing demand for foods that are locally grown means that the only way to obtain them year-

 

104http://ny.curbed.com/archives/2010/11/29/bks_first_whole_foods_to_have_rooftop_greenhouse_gowanus_views.

php. 105 (22 October 2010). “Midcoast Maine: Invasion of the Foodies.” The Week; p. 36
62 

round is to use a greenhouse. The availability of local, organically grown food all year long 

provides added economic growth to the area amenities, and could increase the likelihood of 

attracting additional tourism and second-home-buying residents who desire a lifestyle with 

access to locally grown food and who may be serial entrepreneurs. 

14.12 On-Site Restaurants and High Value-Added Food Processing

On-site restaurants and a regional food processing incubator kitchen would provide an 

opportunity to create higher value (higher profit) products while eliminating spoilage losses from 

the foods being grown in the greenhouses and fish tanks. This would also provide an added 

amenity for the existing on-site hotel and the convention center business Brunswick is hoping to 

attract. Food grown on the premises with access to live freshwater fish and crabs is a unique 

attraction and a huge draw for various ethnic populations and food aficionados.106 This live-fish 

business strategy also limits competition from the existing ocean-based fish industry in the area. 

The on-site restaurant kitchen might also initially be able to serve a dual purpose as the incubator 

kitchen and be eligible for the grant programs associated with them. 

14.13 Additional Businesses

The optional business clusters discussed above are only options. Individual options are not 

required to be exercised and as such some may or may not be implemented. Other options may 

exist in the large number of lobsters harvested in the area. Lobster shells are high in a substance 

called chitin, which can be extracted and turned into chitosan. Chitosan is a material which can 

be used in the manufacture of edible antimicrobial food wrap,107 high tech fabrics, and 

biomedical devices with anti-microbial properties.108 

Additional in-depth investigations will no doubt uncover additional potential interactive business 

opportunities. As new businesses enter Brunswick Landing and the Midcoast area in general, the 

opportunities for interactive business opportunities will expand. This is especially true of 

manufacturers with specialized manufacturing processes that result in unique wastes, which also 

could be seen as unique opportunities. Ongoing analysis of all of these potential interactive 

opportunities should continue to be explored. 

 

106 Meyers, J.J.; Govindasamy, R.; Ewart, J.W.; Liu, B.; You, Y.; Puduri, V.S.; O’Dierno, L.J. “Consumer Analysis 

of and Business Network Development for Ethnic Live Seafood Markets in the Northeast Region Fish and Seafood 

Division of N.J. Dept Agriculture.” Abstract Aquaculture America 2006 107 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ia4gwKYAdh4 108 Vol. 007, Pg 32 Food Technology International 

http://www.fpiinternational.com/articles/ingredients_additives/032_FTI007.pdf
63 

Figure 14. Biomass CHP with all optional module interactions. Illustration by Colleen McCulla

14.14 Transportation

While a full analysis of transportation needs and possible solutions is beyond the scope of this 

study, several initial synergies have been proposed. These include the possibility of using the 

batteries from electric vehicles to back-feed electricity into the local utility grid during periods of 

peak electric demand. A processing facility could be created to reclaim waste oils from regional 

restaurants to create biodiesel. The same trucks transporting the oils could also transport 

restaurant food scraps, which would then be used to feed and grow insects to feed the 

aquaculture fish. The transport costs of both of these could offset the avoided tipping fees 

normally paid by restaurants to garbage haulers but now paid to transport “insect food” and 

biodiesel feed stock. 

14.15 Food Miles

Significant amounts of fuel, money, and carbon are spent each year on transporting food and 

other materials into the region. The costs associated with these functions need to be included in a 

total accounting of the economics, energy, and carbon in the area.

As previously mentioned in the discussion of the role economics plays in the local economy, 

quick calculations show the transportation of just lettuce into the tri-city area around Brunswick 
64 

costs $153,000/year in diesel fuel alone, not counting capital costs, depreciation for wear and 

tear on the truck, driver salaries, or trucking company profit.109 

It is recommended that a full study be done on the local food shed of the area to determine the 

opportunities and vulnerabilities that exist. 

As locally grown food is substituted for transported food, there are additional benefits that occur 

such as the opportunity for local entertainment centered on higher quality food grown in the area. 

The growth of venues like the Food Channel110 demonstrates the ways in which Americans have 

started to rediscover the entertainment value of food. Worldwide movements like the “slow 

food” movement also indicates that there are a growing number of people who value the social 

interactions and accompanying community that this creates as local food turns into an 

opportunity for celebrations and enhanced quality of life.111 

14.16 Eco-Tourism

Eco-tourism strategies can manage an influx of non-residents visiting an area while minimizing 

their impact. For example, offering a tour bus service for out-of-town visitors would save fuel by 

allowing more people to take the train up from areas like Boston to the Midcoast region, then 

providing local transportation to get them out to the local tourist towns (see Figure 15). The bus 

could be fueled with locally produced biodiesel or possibly bio-gas. Brunswick Landing’s hotel 

and on-site restaurants could become a “base camp” for these train-tourists. If marketed 

effectively, the sustainable features at Brunswick Landing could easily turn it into a national ecotourist destination spot. The Green Zone in Umea, Sweden, developed such a project, which 

quickly became an eco-tourist destination.112 

14.17 Unemployed and Veterans

Discussions of locating a “one-stop-shop” for social services and daycare at Brunswick Landing 

might mean that local residents who are out of work could take public transportation or drive out 

to a one-stop center, where they could then be plugged into job openings at the newly created 

greenhouses and mushroom growing businesses or the restaurants and hotels. Agriculture and 

greenhouse jobs are now also being used as an effective environment in which veterans can 

transition from overseas environments to conventional jobs.113 

 

109 Commodity Profile: Lettuce, UC Davis Agricultural Marketing Resource Center 

http://aic.ucdavis.edu/profiles/lettuce.pdf

110 Villarreal, Y July 20, 2011 (TV Gorging on Food-Show Programming) Los Angeles Times; Watching What 

We Eat: The Evolution of Television Cooking Shows Collins, K, Continuum Publications Group 2009

111 Slow Food. www.slowfood.com. Accessed March 24, 2011. 112 Nyquist, A. (2005). Telephone conversation with the planner and architect of The Green Zone Sweden. 

http://www.greenzone.nu/index_e.shtml. Accessed March 24, 2011. 113 Brown, P L. (5 Feb, 2011). “Helping Soldiers Trade Their Swords for Plows” New York Times 

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/06/us/06vets.html?_r=1 http://www.farmvetco.org/; 
65 

Figure 15. Preliminary diagram of some transportation options. Illustration by Colleen McCulla
66 

14.18 Incentives 

14.18.1 Federal Programs These Systems May Qualify For

1) USDA Conservation Innovation Grants114 (CIG) is a voluntary program intended to stimulate 

the development and adoption of innovative conservation approaches and technologies while 

leveraging federal investment in environmental enhancement and protection, in conjunction 

with agricultural production. Under CIG, Environmental Quality Incentives Program funds 

are used to award competitive grants to non-federal governmental or non-governmental 

organizations, tribes, or individuals.

CIG enables the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) to work with other public 

and private entities to accelerate technology transfer and adoption of promising technologies 

and approaches to address some of the nation's most pressing natural resource concerns. CIG 

will benefit agricultural producers by providing more options for environmental enhancement 

and compliance with federal, state, and local regulations. NRCS administers CIG.

2) USDA Risk Management Agency115 (RMA) is a program that has in the past funded 

agricultural job training programs serving veterans transitioning from the military into 

civilian life.

3) USDA Rural Development Fund116 (RDF) is a program that funds community development 

projects in areas classified as non-urban. Under these criteria, Brunswick Landing qualifies 

as a rural area.

4) Small Business Administration (SBA) Loans117 are loans provided to small businesses to 

assist them in the expansion of their business. 

5) New Markets Tax Incentive Program118 provides tax incentives to induce private sector 

investment in economically distressed communities. Initial discussions with consultants who 

specialize in New Market tax incentives indicate that there is a high possibility that 

Brunswick Landing would qualify for these tax incentives. These tax incentives would be in 

addition to the tax incentives already included in the financial calculations presented in this 

report. 

14.19 Alternate Remediation Project

The existing remediation program currently in place at the site of the former BNAS is effectively 

treating the traces of solvents found in groundwater. While the system is effective, it also uses a 

tremendous amount of energy. Currently, the tainted groundwater is pumped up from the aquifer 

and treated with a mechanical “air stripping” system, which evaporates the solvent into the 

atmosphere thus using a great deal of electricity for fans in the process. A complimentary project 

could resolve two problems with one solution while also saving a huge amount of energy and 

money for the Navy. This project could take the water, which is already being pumped up from 

the aquifer, and use it to water bushy low-coppiced hybrid poplars grown in sealed growing 

 

114 http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/technical/cig/index.html. Accessed March 24, 2011. 115 http://www.rma.usda.gov/aboutrma/agreements/. Accessed March 24, 2011. 116 http://www.rurdev.usda.gov/Home.html. Accessed March 24, 2011. 117 http://www.sba.gov/category/navigation-structure/loans-grants Accessed July 25, 2011 118 http://www.novoco.com/new_markets/resources/maps_data.php Accessed Sept 18, 2011 
67 

containers. The powerful fungus growing in symbiosis with the roots of these plants have the 

ability to break down and remediate hydrocarbon substances into harmless elemental 

components. Fungus is now being used in collaborative research by Battelle for the Department 

of Homeland Security to break down pollutants such as relatives of Sarin nerve gas and 

biological agents such as small pox.119 By utilizing this biological method as well as the natural 

transpiration of the plant, the water is cleaned and at the same time the growth of the tree is 

accelerated by having access to additional water to facilitate its growth. The process yields clean 

water and biomass,120 as well as energy savings from the elimination of the fan energy. 

Occasionally the biomass could then be harvested, dried, and used to fuel the CHP system. 

 

 

119 Stamets, P. Mycelium Running 2005 Pg 36, 94,95, Ten Speed Press, Berkeley, California 

http://books.google.com/books?id=NPI8_-

omzvsC&pg=PA94&lpg=PA94&dq=paul+stamets+sarin&source=bl&ots=39jw3X9mZN&sig=D3eTFbms46oA5K

UitFq1E4_Gmo&hl=en&ei=OvORTZi8Joubtwel6rRy&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CBgQ6A

EwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false

120 E.Aitchison, S. Kelley, P. Alvarez, J. Schnoor May/June 2000; 72,3 “Phytoremediation of 1,4- Dioxane by 

Hybrid Poplar Trees” Water Environment Research; 
68 

Figure 16. Optional phyto-remediation module. Illustration by Colleen McCulla
69 

15 Additional Financing and Incentive Options 

15.1 L3C Corporate Structure

The newly created L3C corporate structure121, which will go into effect in Maine on July 1, 

2011, allows newly created start-up (or low-profit) corporations to take money from non-profit 

foundations if the company’s goals are in line with the foundation’s mission. This could, for 

instance, be fostering the rebuilding of an economically distressed area, promoting 

environmentally sensitive energy growth, or sponsoring research in new technologies or 

medicines. The foundation must agree to a limited or low return, but will still be repaid instead 

of the money being an outright grant. This allows the foundation to give away its IRS-mandated 

5% of its principle each year and yet still preserve some of that principle over time by getting it 

back. The company in return has new sources of funding opened up to it that it traditionally 

would not have access to. This funding can be especially valuable for lower return ventures like 

start-ups and can actually be used to buy-down the risk of a venture. Because these L3C 

companies can segment their investors, they could possibly give a lower return during start-up 

mode and then switch to giving a higher rate of return in order to get the kind of investments 

required for second phase funding. This may be a way for start-ups to possibly leap-frog the 

“funding valley of death” between proof-of-concept and reaching the $5 million threshold so 

common for venture capital financing nowadays.122 

15.2 Other Mechanisms

The tax code allows the use of tax-exempt bonds by private sector developers even if backed by 

DOE guarantees. These tax-exempt bonds can also be used in combination with other incentives 

such as Treasury 1603 grants, PTC/ITC, and new market tax credits. 

1) Clean Renewable Energy Bonds (CREBs): The federal government buys down the interest 

rate of the bond; no funding is currently in place but new funds could be announced at any 

time

2) Qualified Energy Conservation Bonds (QECBs): The federal government buys down the 

interest rate of the bond; no funding is currently in place but new funds could be announced 

at any time 

3) Other bonds: Build America Bonds (BAB); Recovery Zone Bonds 

4) Property Assessed Clean Energy (PACE): This method allows a municipality to issue landsecured (real estate) bonds to finance renewable energy projects done on these properties. 

Property owners are then allowed to pay off the bonds through their property taxes. It is not 

envisioned that this could be used at Brunswick Landing at this time. 

5) Small Business Administration (SBA) – 7A loan, 90% loan guarantee, Small Business 

Innovative Research (SBIR) grants, and Small Business Technology Transfer (SBTT) 

programs: These programs may be accessed by the various companies that started up through 

MRRA’s incubator. NREL has strong relationships within the small business 

administration’s Washington office, which may be able to provide assistance with various 

projects and start-ups. 

 

121 http://americansforcommunitydevelopment.org/downloads/What%20is%20the%20L3C%20080711-1.pdf 122 http://americansforcommunitydevelopment.org/concept.php 
70 

15.3 State of Maine Incentives for Alternative Fuels

1) The State of Maine Office of Energy Independence and Security will issue a report on 

February 15, 2011, with recommendations for an alternative fuel incentive program.

2) The State of Maine Clean Vehicles Refueling Station Loan Fund, a revolving loan fund, may 

be used for direct loans and grants to support the production, distribution, and consumption 

of clean fuels and biofuels. 

3) The Finance Authority of Maine may insure up to 100% of mortgage payments with respect 

to mortgage loans for clean fuel vehicle projects. 

16 Conclusion

This analysis has found that a Biomass CHP system appears to be an attractive renewable energy 

opportunity which will not only pay for itself but which will also provide an opportunity to use 

the waste heat to attract new tenants to the existing buildings, and create new business and job 

opportunities at the former Brunswick Naval Air Station. 

Initial analysis shows that leasing a Biomass CHP system over a 10 year period would provide 

free heat during that time which could be used to entice new tenants to the property as well as 

providing the cash flow to purchase the CHP system at the end of the lease. Many energy 

projects are financed over 15 or 20 years. These longer finance periods would provide additional 

positive cash flow for MRRA, property redeveloper at the former BNAS site.

Additional cashflow analyses can be run to allow MRRA to customize the project to suit their 

financial preferences closer to the time the project is implemented.
71 

Appendix A. Information on Renewable Energy Certificates, 

Carbon Credits, and Green Claims

Renewable Energy Certificates

Retail Products

Renewable Energy Credits (RECs) are documentation provided by a certifying authority that 

certain standards have been met regarding the methods used to generate electricity promoted as 

being renewable. They may be sold by the entities generating the renewable power to other 

entities that want to offset their consumption of non-renewable energy sources. Sometimes this is 

done because a renewable energy generator is producing more power than they can use on their 

site or because (as is the case often with wind farms) the generation source is not associated with 

a particular energy-consuming site. 

However, if a site sells all of its RECs, it cannot make any energy claims about its site. 

Generally, a generator would want to first attempt to sell their certificates to utilities within their 

own state that are mandated by the Public Utility Commission (PUC) to obtain a certain percent 

of their electricity portfolio from renewable sources. 

If all of the utilities in the state have met their portfolio requirement, the next place to attempt to 

sell the certificates is to other utilities in neighboring states, which are connected to the same 

independent operator’s power pool. These utilities, however, may be subject to different, more 

stringent rules governing the specifics of the types of renewable energy projects and where they 

can be located. This is especially true related to biomass projects. 

If none of these utilities are interested in purchasing the certificates, another buying source 

would be the private (or voluntary) market. This consists of private companies or individuals 

who have independently decided to offset their energy consumption of their own volition. 

Because these purchases are voluntary (not required as with the utilities), the selling price of 

certificates on this market are often lower than the prices obtained from utilities. 

Table A-1 summarizes voluntary REC products available to retail customers nationally or 

regionally. 

The potential income from selling possible earned credits has not been figured into any 

calculations in this report.

Company and product listings do not represent endorsement by either NREL or the DOE. 
72 

Table A-1. National Retail REC Products

National Retail REC Products

(Last updated August 2010)

Certificate 

Marketer

Product 

Name

Renewable 

Resources

Location of 

Renewable 

Resources

Residential 

Price 

Premiums*

Certification

3 Phases 

Renewables

Green 

Certificates

100% biomass, 

geothermal, 

hydro, solar, 

wind

Nationwide 1.2¢/kWh Green-e

3Degrees Renewable 

energy 

certificates

100% new 

wind

Nationwide 1.5¢/kWh Green-e

Native Energy Cool Watts 100% new 

wind

Nationwide 0.8¢/kWh Green-e

Native Energy Remooable 

Energy

100% new 

biogas

Pennsylvania 0.8¢/kWh1.0¢/kWh***

Bonneville 

Environmental 

Foundation

Solar Green 

Tags

100% new 

solar

Nationwide 5.6¢/kWh Green-e

Bonneville 

Environmental 

Foundation

Wind & Solar 

Green Tags 

Blend

50% new wind, 

50% new solar

Nationwide 2.4¢/kWh Green-e

Bonneville 

Environmental 

Foundation

Wind Green 

Tags

100% wind Nationwide 2.0¢/kWh Green-e

Bonneville 

Environmental 

Foundation

Denali Green 

Tags (Alaska 

only)

100% new 

wind

10% Alaska, 

90% nationwide

2.0¢/kWh Green-e

Bonneville 

Environmental 

Foundation

Zephyr Energy 

(Kansas Only)

50% new lowimpact 

hydropower

Midwest, West 2.0¢/kWh Green-e

Carbon Solutions 

Group

CSG Clean 

Build

biomass, 

biogas, wind, 

solar, hydro

Nationwide 0.9¢/kWh Green-e

Carbonfund.org My Green 

Future

99% new wind, 

1% new solar

Nationwide 0.5¢/kWh Green-e

Choose 

Renewables

Clean Watts 100% new 

wind

Nationwide 1.7¢/kWh Green-e

Community Energy New Wind 

Energy

100% new 

wind

Nationwide 2.5¢/kWh Green-e

Good Energy Good Green 

RECs

Various Nationwide 0.4¢/kWh1.5¢/kWhGreen-e

Green Mountain 

Energy

Be Green 

RECs

Wind, solar, 

biomass

Nationwide 1.4¢/kWh —
73 

Juice Energy Positive Juice 

- Wind

100% wind Nationwide 1.1¢/kWh Green-e

MMA Renewable 

Ventures

PVUSA Solar 

Green 

Certificates

100% solar California 3.3¢/kWh Green-e

Maine Renewable 

Energy/Maine 

Interfaith Power & 

Light

Maine Wind 

Watts

100% new 

wind

Maine 2.0¢/kWh Green-e

Mass Energy 

Consumers Alliance

New England 

Wind Fund

100% new 

wind

New England ~5.0¢/kWh 

(donation)

—

Premier Energy 

Marketing

Premier 100% 

Wind REC

100% wind Nationwide 0.95¢/kWh2.0¢/kWhGreen-e

Renewable Choice 

Energy

American 

Wind

100% new 

wind

Nationwide 0.5¢/kWh Green-e

SKY energy, Inc. Wind-e 

Renewable 

Energy

100% new 

wind

Nationwide 2.4¢/kWh Green-e

Santee Cooper SC Green 

Power

Landfill gas, 

solar

South Carolina 3.0¢/kWh Green-e

Sky Blue Electric Sky Blue 40 100% wind Nationwide 4.2¢/kWh Green-e

Sterling Planet Sterling Wind 100% new 

wind

Nationwide 1.85¢/kWh Green-e

Terra Pass Green-e RECs 100% new 

wind

Nationwide 0.5¢/kWh Green-e

Village Green 

Energy

Village Green 

Power

Solar, wind, 

biogas

California, 

nationwide

2.0¢/kWh2.5¢/kWhGreen-e

Waverly Light & 

Power

Iowa Energy 

Tags

100% wind Iowa 2.0¢/kWh —

Wind Current Chesapeake 

Windcurrent

100% new 

wind

Mid-Atlantic 

States

2.5¢/kWh Green-e

Wind Street Energy Renewable 

Energy Credit 

Program

Wind Nationwide ~1.2¢/kWh —

Notes:

* Product prices are updated as of August 2010. Premium may also apply to small commercial 

customers. Large users may be able to negotiate price premiums. 

** Product is sourced from Green-e and ERT-certified RECs. ERT also certifies the entire product 

portfolio. 

*** The Climate Neutral Network certifies the methodology used to calculate the carbon dioxide

emissions offset. 

NA = Not applicable. 

Source: National Renewable Energy Laboratory
74 

Greenhouse Gas Offsets

Retail Greenhouse Gas Offset Products

Table A-2 summarizes GHG offset products (also known as carbon credits or carbon offsets) 

available to retail customers nationally and derived at least in part from renewable energy 

generation projects. 

If MRRA decides to advertise Brunswick Landing as being operationally carbon neutral, it could 

still sell some of the extra carbon credits it has yearly until Brunswick Landing is fully occupied. 

The list represents the range of prices that carbon credits are currently selling for.

The potential income from selling possible earned credits has not been figured into any 

calculations in this report.

Company and product listings do not represent endorsement by either NREL or the DOE. 

Table A-2. Greenhouse Gas Offset Products

National Greenhouse Gas Offsets Retail Products

(as of August 2010)

Offset 

Marketer Product Name Reduction Projects

Location of 

Projects

Residential 

Price 

Premiums*

Certificatio

n 

3Degrees Verified Emission 

Reductions

Methane capture, 

wind, forest 

management

Brazil, China, 

India

~$15 Gold 

Standard, 

Green-e, 

UNFCCC 

CDM, CA 

Climate 

Action 

Registry, 

VCS, CCX

Blue Source

Goldman Sachs and 

Blue Source Carbon 

Offsets

Methane capture, 

efficiency, carbon 

sequestration, 

industrial gas 

destruction

Nationwide Commercial 

customers 

only

ERT

Bonneville 

Environmenta

l Foundation

BEF Carbon Offsets New wind, new 

solar, watershed 

restoration

Nationwide ~$29 Green-e

Carbonfund.o

rg

Zero Carbon Wind, methane 

capture, biomass, 

RECs, reforestation

Nationwide, 

Brazil

$10 CCX, ERT, 

Climate 

Community 

and 

Biodiversity 

Standards, 

UNFCCC JI
75 

Clear Sky 

Climate 

Solutions

Carbon Offsets Forestry/reforestatio

n, methane capture, 

rangeland 

management 

Panama, 

Wisconsin, 

Pennsylvania, 

Texas, 

Montana

$12 CCX, 

Climate 

Community 

and 

Biodiversity 

Standard

Colorado 

Carbon Fund

Project C Local energy 

efficiency and 

renewable energy 

projects

Colorado $20 —

Community 

Energy

Community Carbon 

Offsets

New wind Nationwide ~$12 Green-e

Conservation 

Services 

Group

ClimateSAVE New wind Texas ~$21 Green-e

Dominion Carbon Offset 

Program (NC 

customers only)

Energy 

conservation and 

renewable energy

North 

Carolina

~$17 —

Duke Energy Carbon Offset 

Program (IN, SC, & 

NC customers only)

Energy 

conservation and 

renewable energy

North 

Carolina, 

South 

Carolina, 

Virginia

~$17 —

EBlueHorizonsCarbon Offsets Landfill gas 

(including efficiency 

and reforestation)

Massachusett

s, New 

Hampshire

$5 CCX, ERT

EcoVoom Clean Energy 

Credits

Hydro, wind 

(including efficiency 

and CO2 offsets)

Nationwide ~$10 —

Element 

Markets

Verified Emission 

Reductions

Various (including 

methane capture, 

renewable energy, 

and energy 

efficiency)

Nationwide Commercial 

customers 

only

Climate 

Action 

Reserve, 

CCX, VCS

GT 

Environmenta

l Finance

Resource Carbon 

Reduction Projects

Landfill gas, 

biomass, renewable 

energy, forestry

Nationwide Commercial 

customers 

only

Climate 

Action 

Reserve, 

VCS

Green 

Mountain 

Energy

BeGreen Carbon 

Offsets

Wind, biomass,

reforestation

Nationwide $14 —

Hess 

Corporation 

Hess C-Neutral Methane capture,

renewable energy

Wyoming Commercial 

customers 

only

VCS, 

Green-e 

LightWind 

Energy

EndFossilFuel 

Carbon Offset

Various (including 

wind, solar,

biomass, and 

geothermal)

Texas $12 Green-e
76 

LiveNeutral Drive/Fly/HomeNeut

ral & By The Ton

Various (including 

efficiency and CO2

offsets)

Nationwide $12 CCX

Luminant 

Energy

Green House Gas 

Renewable Offsets

New wind Texas Commercial 

customers 

only

Green-e

NW Natural / 

Climate Trust

Smart Energy 

Average Option

Methane capture Oregon ~$24 —

NW Natural / 

Climate Trust

Smart Energy 

Climate Neutral 

Option

Methane capture Oregon 10.49¢/therm —

NativeEnergy Vintage Carbon 

Offsets

Methane capture Connecticut $15.43 ERT

NextEra 

Energy 

Resources 

Carbon Offsets Wind Nationwide Commercial 

customers 

only

Green-e

Pacific Gas 

and Electric

Climate Smart Various local 

projects

California $4.31/mo. —

Progress 

Energy

Carbon Offset 

Program (NC 

customers only)

Energy 

conservation, 

renewable energy

North 

Carolina

~$20 —

Renewable 

Choice 

Energy

Bundled Wind and 

Carbon Offsets

Wind, landfill gas, 

methane capture, 

avoidance

Nationwide ~$6 ERT

Sacramento 

Municipal 

Utility District

Carbon Offset 

Program

Local carbon 

reduction projects

California $10/month —

Solar Electric 

Light Fund

Carbon Neutral Club Global PV projects International $10 (donatio

n)

—

Standard 

Carbon

Carbon Neutral 

Offsets

Methane capture, 

efficiency, 

renewables, carbon 

sequestration

Iowa $15 CCX

Sterling 

Planet

Voluntary Carbon 

Units

Landfill gas South 

Carolina

$20 VCS, 

Green-e

Sustainable 

Travel 

International

Carbon Offsets Reforestation, 

biomass, hydro, 

wind

International ~$25 Green-e, 

Gold 

Standard, 

CDM, VCS, 

Plan Vivo 

and the 

Climate, 

Community 

and 

Biodiversity 

Alliance

Terra Pass 

Inc.

Terra Pass Carbon 

Offsets

Wind, biogas, 

methane capture

Nationwide ~$13.50 CCX, 

Green-e
77 

The Carbon 

Neutral 

Company

The Carbon Neutral 

Company Offset

Methane capture, 

renewables

Brazil, China, 

Turkey

Commercial 

customers 

only

Green-e

VERUS 

Carbon 

Neutral

VERUS Carbon 

Neutral Certification

Biomass, methane 

capture, 

sequestration

Brazil, 

Georgia 

(U.S.)

$2.75 CCX

Notes:

* Product prices are all based on a metric ton of carbon dioxide avoided and were updated as of 

August 2010. Large users may be able to negotiate price premiums. 

NA = Not applicable. 

Primary Third-Party Certification 

Environmental Resources Trust (ERT) 

Climate Community and Biodiversity Standard (CCBS) 

Green-e Climate 

Voluntary Carbon Standard 

Gold Standard 

United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change Clean Development Mechanism

(UNFCCC CDM) 

United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change Joint Implementation (UNFCCC JI) 
78 

Appendix B. Financial Spreadsheet 

Biomass 2MW Steam Turbine (Condensing) Assumptions

Size of System Watts 2,000,000

Initial Cost Steam Turbine and Boiler Installed $8,400,000

ESCO Profit percentage 19%

Cost Boiler & Turbine after ESCO Profit $9,996,000

Cost Boiler & Turbine after ESCO and Incentives $9,996,000

Federal Incentives (1603 cash grant) 0.0%

State Incent (none) $0

Apportioned Pipeline Cost $1,260,795

Apportioned Pipeline Cost after ESCO Profit $1,500,346

Total Boiler Turbine & Pipe after ESCO and Incentives $11,496,346

Percentage of total to be financed 70.0%

Loan on project $8,047,442

Electrical Efficiency of unit 30%

MM Btu Fuel /Hr 22.753333

Nat Gas Produced Heat $/ MMBtu $6.80

Wood Fuel Cost/MM Btu $3.43

Fuel Cost for 24/7 Operation / Yr $683,665

Fuel Escalation Rate 0.00%

Total Electricity produced (kwh)/Yr 17,520,000

Electricity sell rate $/kwh $0.10

Electrical Sales Income Total per year $1,752,000

Peak Heat Produced by this System MM Btu/Hr 15.927333

Peak Heat of Pipeline for Entire Campus MM Btu/Hr 53.009536

Heat Produced MMBtu/yr 139,523

Heat Needed MM Btu /Yr 84,020

Heat Usable MMBtu /(9 mo) 105,120

Heat Sell Price Discount vs Nat Gas 20%

% Heat Given Free 100%

Quantity Heat Given Free MM/Yr 105,120

Peak Heat Given Free MM Btu 15.927333

Heat Income $/ Yr $0

REC rate quote Feb 2011 /MWh (Spectron) Maine $7.00

Total REC Sales $/yr $122,640

REC Escalation Rate 0%

O&M cost per KWH $0.017

OM Escalation Rate 0.00%

Total O&M cost/yr $297,840

Replacement Lifetime Yrs 40

Years of Analysis 20

Discount rate 0%

Corp Tax Rate 0%

Loan Interest Rate 4%

Simple Payback Yrs 9.93

Leveraged IRR 10.34%