Some Good News On Climate
It is hard to believe right now, but reason can prevail. From The Years Project via YouTube
Gleanings from the web and the world, condensed for convenience, illustrated for enlightenment, arranged for impact...
TODAY AT NewEnergyNews, November 19:
It is hard to believe right now, but reason can prevail. From The Years Project via YouTube
Arnold Schwarzenegger tells the President to correct his misguided support for Old Energy and see the big benefits of New Energy. From Taro TurTiainen via YouTube
Consumers Energy, Michigan’s biggest electricity provider, decided solar and energy efficiency are cheaper than natural gas. That’s called market transformation.From greenmanbucket via YouTube
Kennedy’s Retirement Could Clear Path for Trump’s Environmental Rollbacks
Brad Plumer, June 28, 2018 (NY Times)
“The retirement of Justice Anthony M. Kennedy from the Supreme Court could significantly reshape environmental law in the decades ahead and potentially make it easier for the Trump administration to roll back Obama-era climate change policies in the coming years…In his 30 years on the court, Justice Kennedy was frequently a crucial swing vote on major environmental questions. While he tended to be skeptical of expansive federal regulations that intruded on private property rights, he was also willing to break with the court’s conservative wing in favor of more aggressive government action to limit air and water pollution…
Perhaps most notably, in 2007, he sided with the court’s four liberal justices in Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency to rule that the E.P.A. had the authority to regulate greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act. That case laid the groundwork for many of the Obama administration’s major climate policies, including the Clean Power Plan to cut emissions from coal-fired power plants…It is far from certain that a new court would quickly overturn Massachusetts v. E.P.A. and take away the government’s authority to regulate greenhouse gases altogether, legal experts said. The court has already upheld that ruling twice in subsequent cases, and, during oral arguments in 2014, Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. indicated that he considered the case an established precedent…” click here for more
Green economy almost as valuable as the fossil fuel sector, says report; FTSE Russell, a subsidiary of the London Stock Exchange Group, says the green economy is worth about $4tn and continues to rise in value as the fossil fuel sector falls
James Walker, 6 June 2018 (Compelo)
“…[T]he renewable energy industry is worth about $4 trillion (£2.98 trillion) and 6% of the market value…[According to a new report from the UK stock market operator, it is about the same size as the fossil fuel economy and] will be 7% of that value by 2030, should it continue to rise…[Sectors huddled under the green economy umbrella] include green energy, food and agriculture, waste management and transportation companies…Two-fifths of the green economy is held up by the eco-friendly energy management sector, with energy generation making up 11% of the eco economy…[An estimated 3,000 global listed companies are] involved in these sectors…[The U.S. hosts] just over two-fifths of the green economy, while Japan and China represented 13% and 12%...[The U.K. has] 4% of the eco economy…[Large companies represent] about two thirds of the eco sector…[But] small and medium-sized companies, frequently being snapped up by larger firms, are still behind many innovations.” click here for more
World Energy Rankings Suggest Countries Need Energy Efficiency to Meet Paris Goals
June 26, 2018 (American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy)
“…No country came close to a perfect score [in new rankings from the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy], and the average remained the same as in 2016 — 51 out of a possible 100 points. Overall, Germany and Italy tie for first place this year with 75.5 points, closely followed by France (73.5), the United Kingdom (73), and Japan (67)…Within sectors, Germany scored best for national efforts, including cross-cutting targets and programs. Spain nabbed the top spot for buildings-related efforts, while Japan led on industry and France on transportation...In a troubling development, the United States slid from 8th place in 2016 to 10th in 2018…
“…The current administration continues to dismantle key regulations…[Its] focus on energy production rather than efficiency has meant that progress on federal energy efficiency policies has largely stalled…On a positive note, the most improved country this year is Mexico…[It] sits just below the United States and Canada in the rankings this year, suggesting that the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) may be playing a role in harmonizing efforts…Energy efficiency will need to account for almost half of all the greenhouse gas emission reductions necessary through 2040 to limit the global increase in temperature to 2 degrees Celsius…” click here for more
Judge Dismisses Suit Against Oil Companies Over Climate Change Costs
John Schwartz, June 25, 2018 (NY Times)
“…[A closely watched lawsuit brought by San Francisco and Oakland against Exxon, Chevron, Shell, BP, and ConocoPhillips over the costs of dealing with climate change was dismissed in] a stinging defeat for the plaintiffs…[that] raises warning flags for other local governments around the United States that have filed similar suits…[Federal District Court of San Francisco Judge William Alsup] acknowledged the science of global warming and the great risks to the planet, as did the oil and gas companies being sued…[But he ruled the court ‘will stay its hand in favor of solutions by the legislative and executive branches’ because] the companies were not solely at fault…[He wrote that] the industrial revolution and the development of our modern world has literally been fueled by oil and coal…[and he asked if it is right to] ignore our own responsibility in the use of fossil fuels and place the blame for global warming on those who supplied what we demanded…” click here for more
1st Third 2018: Renewables Top 20% Of U.S. Electrical Generation; Solar Up By 30.9% - More Than 2% Of Total Production, Wind Grows 10.5% - Hits 8% Of Total Output; Now The Leading Renewable…
Ken Bossong, June 27, 2018 (SUN DAY Campaign)
“Renewable energy sources (i.e., biomass, geothermal, hydropower, solar, wind) accounted for more than one-fifth (20.05%) of net domestic electrical generation during the first third of 2018, according to a SUN DAY Campaign analysis…[S]olar alone (i.e., utility-scale + distributed PV) is now [third among the renewables,] providing more than 2.0% (i.e., 2.07%) of the nation's electrical production…[W]ind accounted for 8.0% of total electrical generation during the first four months of this year, exceeding that produced by hydropower…
Adding in biomass and geothermal, electrical generation by non-hydro renewables [for January through April] exceeded 12.0% (i.e., 12.07%) of the nation's total output…[That was 11.5% more than in] the first third of 2017…[Renewable sources’ 20.05% nearly match the 20.27% from] nuclear power…” click here for more
EU predicts 3.9GW ocean splash; Commission study forecasts growth for tidal and wave sector in years to 2030
June 27, 2018 (RENews)
“Global installed wave and tidal energy capacity is forecast] to hit up to 3.9GW by 2030 based on current levels of political support…[That figure could] drop to 2.8GW and 1.3GW respectively in so-called medium and pessimistic scenarios…[According to the optimistic scenario in a new UN study,] the expected tidal stream capacity in 2030 is 2.4GW, tidal range 1GW and wave 500MW…Under the medium scenario, tidal stream capacity forecast is 1.6GW, tidal range 840MW and wave 370MW…The pessimistic scenario predicts tidal stream capacity to reach 700MW tidal range and 70MW for wave with no new tidal range installations…The study expects up to 87% of the cumulative capacity forecast by 2030 will be installed in Europe…Over €6bn has been invested worldwide into projects so far, 75% of which from private finance…The study expects investment ranging between €2.8-9.4bn to 2030, excluding tidal range…[I]mplementation of revenue support across member states is of “paramount importance” to accompany national and EU funding.” click here for more
Could rate design help California's struggle with flat demand? The commercial and industrial sector could be the front line for rate design experimentation
Herman K. Trabish, Dec. 27, 2017 (Utility Dive)
Editor’s note: This is not a sexy subject but it could be how New Energy triumphs in the marketplace.
With demand for electricity flat, utilities and regulators must cover the costs for delivering electricity as sales diminish. One solution they are testing is new rate design options for residential and commercial and industrial (C&I) consumers that add value by using customer load for grid services. California is leading these efforts. Its C&I sector makes up two-thirds of the state's power demand, which means the right rate design could unlock the potential for significant benefits for its grid. The California Public Utilities Commission is seeking to answer two overarching questions: What is the rate design utilities will support? And what will it take to get customer buy-in for that rate design?
Four fundamental economic goals compose rate design, Severin Borenstein, an energy economist at the University of California at Berkeley said at a recent forum on rate design in California. The first is to motivate customers to use electricity only when “it is valued more than the full additional cost to society,” he said. That is called “economic efficiency of consumption.” Distributing costs fairly, based on “societal views of fairness” and enabling equal access to electricity are the second and third goals. And the fourth one allows power providers to recover all costs. Inefficient rates can result in higher power prices and unwanted outcomes. As the marginal cost of electricity goes up, demand for it should go down, according to economic theory. Where they cross is the efficient price of electricity. But, for most utilities, that efficient price yields a revenue shortfall and the potential for declining revenue because much of their distribution system costs do not drop with demand…click here for more
Has Xcel Minnesota designed the ideal residential time-of-use rate? The pilot program, to determine if price signals can get customers to shift energy usage away from peak times, has garnered wide acclaim. The main concern? It doesn't start soon enough.
Herman K. Trabish, Dec. 22, 2017 (Utility Dive)
Editor’s note: Most electricity users probably don’t know it but time-of-use rates will be their future and they will grow New Energy.
Some say pilot projects are a way to avoid the risk of real innovation, but a proposed Xcel Energy pilot to test time-of-use (TOU) rates is charging at innovation and winning praise as it goes. Xcel’s objectives are to find out how to effectively engage customers and if price signals can get customers to shift energy usage away from the peak, Aakash Chandarana, Xcel VP of Rates and Regulatory Affairs, told Utility Dive. Utility surveys consistently find customers “don’t really care,” he said. "This pilot will allow Xcel to test what our customers truly want.” The program is expected to drive greater use of renewables and reduce peak demand. Initial reactions are positive from a range of stakeholders. The pilot will require expenditures that must be paid for by customers, which rarely gets an unequivocal endorsement from ratepayer advocates. But Minnesota Citizens Utility Board (CUB) Executive Director Annie Levenson-Falk said she is happy to see Xcel moving ahead with the pilot because it will likely deliver customer savings.
In addition, utility rate design pilots are usually not structured well enough to satisfy experts. Yet Rocky Mountain Institute (RMI) rate design authority Dan Cross-Call emailed that Xcel’s “is promising and applies many good design elements.” The pilot “follows many best practices” and will likely support a “future rollout of widespread opt-out TOU rates,” RMI pilot project authority Mike Henchen added. The two-year, 17,500-customer plan to use three price tiers and drive more off-peak use of Minnesota wind has stood up to serious stakeholder scrutiny. The worst thing said about it so far? It doesn't start soon enough. Utilities across the country thinking about TOU rates may need to take a close look it… click here for more
NO QUICK NEWS
U.S. Battery Storage Market Trends
May 2018 (U.S. Energy Information Administration)
This report explores trends in U.S. battery storage capacity additions and describes the current state of the market, including information on applications, cost, and market and policy drivers. There are a number of key takeaways:
• At the end of 2017, 708 megawatts (MW) of power capacity, 1 representing 867 megawatthours (MWh) of energy capacity, 2 of large-scale3 battery storage capacity was in operation.
• Over 80% of U.S. large-scale battery storage power capacity is currently provided by batteries based on lithium-ion chemistries.
• About 90% of large-scale battery storage in the United States is installed in regions covered by five of the seven organized independent system operators (ISOs) or regional transmission organizations (RTOs) and in Alaska and Hawaii (AK/HI).
• Nearly 40% of existing large-scale battery storage power capacity (and 31% of energy capacity) lies in the Pennsylvania-New Jersey-Maryland Interconnection (PJM), which runs energy and capacity markets and the transmission grid in 13 eastern states and the District of Columbia.
o In 2012, PJM created a new frequency regulation market product for fast-responding resources, the conditions of which were favorable for battery storage. However, recent changes in PJM’s market rules have slowed battery installations in the region.
o Most existing large-scale battery storage power capacity in PJM is owned by independent power producers providing power-oriented frequency regulation services.
• Installations in California Independent System Operator (CAISO) territory accounted for 18% of existing U.S. large-scale battery storage power capacity in 2017, but they accounted for 44% of existing energy capacity. o In 2013, the California Public Utility Commission (CPUC) implemented Assembly Bill 2514 by setting a mandate for the state’s investor-owned utilities to procure 1,325 MW of energy storage by 2020.
o Large-scale installations in California tend to provide energy-oriented services and tend to serve a wider array of applications than systems in PJM. o In addition, nearly 90% of reported small-scale4 storage power capacity in the United States was reported by four California utilities.
• Costs for battery storage technologies depend on technical characteristics such as the power and energy capacity of a system.
o In general, total installed system costs for batteries of shorter duration are less expensive than long-duration systems on a per-unit of power capacity basis.
o In terms of costs per-unit of energy capacity, the reverse is true—the longer duration batteries will typically have lower normalized costs compared with shorter-duration batteries.
• Battery storage can serve many applications. However, the functional ability of storage to serve these applications has traditionally been not well defined under existing market rules and policies. As the technology has matured and as the industry stakeholders in some regions have gained experience financing, procuring, and operating storage installations, the situation has changed and more clarity has begun to be provided. Most of the activity has been led by specific ISOs/RTOs and state-level regulators.
Large-Scale Battery Storage Trends…Regional Trends…Ownership Trends…Chemistry Trends…Current Applications…Battery Storage Costs…Small-Scale Energy Storage Trends…Market Drivers…
As of December 2017, project developers report to EIA that 239 MW of large-scale battery storage is expected to become operational in the United States between 2018 and 2021. Given the short planning period required to install a storage facility, the reported planned capacity does not necessarily reflect the entirety of builds over this period, but the estimates can be used as an indicator of trends.
California accounts for 77% of planned large-scale battery storage currently reported. In 2013, California set an energy storage mandate (Assembly Bill 2514), which requires its investor-owned utilities to install 1,325 MW of energy storage across the transmission, distribution, and customer levels by 2024. (See the section on market and policy drivers for more information.)
The Annual Energy Outlook (AEO), provides projections to 2050 on the supply and demand needs for energy markets in the United States. The 2018 AEO report was the first year to include operational or capacity projections of energy storage outside of pumped hydroelectric storage in the model results. The Reference case, which assumes implementation of current U.S. laws and policies, projects largescale wind capacity growth of 50 gigawatts (GW) and large-scale solar photovoltaic capacity growth of nearly 150 GW by 2050. Over this same period, large-scale battery storage capacity is projected to grow to 40 GW, as shown Figure 11. In the longer term, wind and solar growth are projected to support economic opportunities for storage systems that can provide several hours of storage and enable renewable generation produced during the hours with high wind or solar output to supply electricity at times of peak electricity demand.
Challenges exist when modeling energy storage technologies in long-term planning models. Because these models are designed to deliver multi-decade results, simplifications in the structure of the model often occur. One simplification that has significant consequences for the representation of energy storage technologies is the temporal resolution of the model. AEO2018 included energy storage as a 4-hour battery system that can be utilized to avoid curtailments of excess solar- and wind-generated electricity, shift energy within a day, and help meet regional reliability requirements; however modeling sub-hourly markets, such as battery systems participating in frequency response, remains a challenge for many long-term planning models. As a result, the AEO projections shown do not represent all of the available storage technology options nor the full suite of applications that storage can serve. See the list of possible applications for storage in an earlier section of this report.
EIA is collaborating with other modeling entities on a multi-model comparison23 to enhance the representation of technologies that challenge conventional long-term planning model design, such as wind, solar, and energy storage. The representation of battery storage in the AEO will continue to develop as the markets and applications for energy storage evolve…
New Head Of Trump’s New Energy Office Backs Coal?!?!?! Trump’s Pick to Head the Renewable Energy Office Has a Soft Spot for Coal; Who is Daniel Simmons—and does he really believe the government should treat all energy sources equally? (His boss doesn’t.)
Jeff Turrentine, June 22, 2018 (Natural Resources Defense Council)
“…[Daniel Simmons, who heads the Department of Energy’s Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, previously worked for the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) and the Institute for Energy Research (IER), which are pro-fossil-fuels organizations funded by Koch brothers money. He] has published opinion essays in major U.S. media extolling the virtues of coal…[He is on the record as opposing supports for] renewable energy through subsidies, tax incentives, or the state-level measures…He has argued that renewable energy mandates cost jobs, gouge consumers, and fleece taxpayers—even though there is a wealth of evidence to refute these arguments…[He also has argued no energy sources should get government support but has failed to speak out on White House proposals to support] coal and nuclear energy…[He goes before the Senate today] for his confirmation vote…” click here for more
Solar Tax Credit Gets Full Life IRS gives big solar two more years; The IRS, via Notice 2018-59, has modified the Investment Tax Credit to allow solar projects to begin construction by the end of the 2019, and still get the 30% – versus being in service by that date.
John Weaver, June 25, 2018 (PV Magazine)
“…[Medium- and large-scale solar power projects that expect to take a year to two (or more) for development and construction just got a two year extension on the Investment Tax Credit (ITC)…[A new Internal Revenue Service (IRS) ruling officially replaced the requirement to bring solar projects online by the tax credit’s deadline date with a requirement to begin construction by a deadline date. That means that instead of the solar project having to finish by December 31st, 2019, it must now begin construction, defined as 5% of the work or investment, on or by that date to qualify for 30% tax credit. The same time schedule] applies to the follow two years and their 26% and 22% tax credits…This two year window will give investors and utilities reasonable motivation to invest in more projects, even as end of year dates arrive. And this in turn can have repercussions for fossil generation, as Xcel noted that this would allow it to close two coal plants a decade early…[T]here could also be projects whose timelines are extended…under the expectation of continued declines in hardware pricing…” click here for more
May 2018 (Artis Energy Intelligence)
The energy industry adage emphasizing “the cheapest energy is the energy you don’t use in the first place,” may not be 100% accurate. This prevailing adage involves only looking at reducing kWh consumption via energy conservation measures. This approach, however, does not consider time-of-use. Using energy during periods of high grid demand can have significant cost implications for coincident users and for the entire system.
Using our energy analytics software (EAS), RTIS®, on several client sites has clearly demonstrated that if facility managers, energy management vendors, legislators, and regulators all operate based on this conservation principle alone, the adverse consequences to facility energy usage, costs, and greenhouse gas emissions (GHGs) could be significant.
Consider the following:
• A few instances of peak demand can cause spikes that lead to significantly increased monthly costs, often including demand ratchets that result in increased costs for the entire year ahead. In many cases, even if a facility uses considerably more demand during just one billing interval when compared to all other times during the year, the facility will pay for the maximum demand sizing for that delivery “pipe” in their monthly demand charges all year long.
• To ensure that enough power can be generated during peak demand periods, utilities need to build substations, transformers, and other infrastructure to meet peak demand, even if a large amount of peak demand occurs over a short duration in any given area. Eventually, all customers pay for this in the form of rate increases.
• During periods of peak demand, additional and dirtier “load following” power plants are deployed, resulting in significantly higher GHG emissions and fine particulate matter emissions. The difference in GHG emissions between a peak day and non-peak day can be as high as 50%.
• In some jurisdictions, distribution utilities can also charge a punitive “critical peak” demand charge for periods of peak societal demand, a pricing strategy to discourage use during peak periods.
• Similarly, regarding kWh power supply costs, suppliers incorporate capacity charges into their cost of goods. This cost can constitute up to 20% of the kWh price and it is expected to rise as much as four-fold in some areas over the next few years.
The Importance of Time-of-Use
A common recommendation stemming from an energy audit is to use a building or energy management system (BMS or EMS) to cut back kWh usage during evenings, weekends, and other unoccupied periods to achieve energy-efficiency targets.
Logically this makes sense, but in the absence of additional information a strategy like this can backfire. For example, on successive days of a heatwave, a building can retain too much heat from day to day, and if efficiency setbacks prevent the building from being cooled during the evening or weekend, HVAC systems will work much harder to maintain comfort, thereby using more energy and causing significantly more kW demand and related charges during more expensive, onpeak utility billing periods.
Case in Point: High School Campus (HSC)
The following chart was exported from our real-time energy analytics software platform, RTIS®. It contains an actual example of the staggering budget impact of “avoidable” peak demand costs that occurred at a high school with a fine-tuned EMS being managed under an energy savings performance contract.
The X-axis of the load curve represents the extent of time a peak demand level was reached throughout the year; the Y-axis represents the actual kW demand level. For this high school, reducing an incremental peak of 295 kW by managing the peak usage that is occurring during just 1% of the year would reduce their annual energy costs by approximately 12%.
Had the high school been cooled more aggressively during just a few unoccupied evenings and weekends during heat waves, significant kW demand would have been avoided. Moreover, evening/weekend kWh usage would have been during off-peak hours, when the kWh costs are much lower. The facility’s kWh power supply capacity cost of goods would have been much lower for the year as well
Adding Intelligence to Understand Nuance
Modern energy efficiency measures (EEMs) like HVAC and lighting controls can be harnessed to provide addressable end points to better manage demand, and reduce energy costs and GHG emissions. The key is deploying an intelligent EAS like RTIS® that can analyze real-time data from different sources to determine the optimal treatment of a given situation. Rather than simply curtailing loads during unoccupied periods, RTIS® takes into account weather conditions, facility usage, historical performance, and power grid demand, adding a new level of intelligence. Further, by integrating RTIS® with a BMS or EMS that can control individual EEMs, the system can autonomously capture previously invisible avoidable cost opportunities.
With the advent of modern IoT and analytics technology, perhaps the energy industry adage should be changed to “the cheapest energy may be the energy you don’t use, depending upon the time.”
A Solution To Answer Climate Change Deniers’ Doubts Climate change disputers are actually innovation pessimists
Bob Inglis, June 25, 2018 (The Hill)
“…Scratch a climate skeptic, and you’ll find an innovation pessimist. They don’t believe it can be done. Overwhelmed by the scale of the problem, they assume that we can’t change our trajectory. Secretly, they’re depressed about it. They need hope…Climate change crawls and creeps; it doesn’t goose step. Addressing it requires a coordinated global response, and innovation pessimists are right to doubt the ability of the United Nations and the ability of the regulatory state to solve the problem…But the innovation pessimists are missing the dynamism that comes from [adding the health and climate damages to the price of fossil fuels]…
…This accountability would shatter the illusion that energy from fossil fuels is cheap. In a transparent, accountable energy market, consumers — not regulators, not mandates, not fickle tax incentives — would drive demand for clean energy…[T]his could be accomplished through a carbon tax applied at the mine and at the pipeline. The revenue raised from the carbon tax should then be returned to taxpayers in cuts to existing taxes or in the form of dividend checks to ensure no growth of government…The strength of the American market would become evident…[and drive out innovation opponents who are] vested politically or financially in fossil fuels…” click here for more
50% New Energy Would Save AZ Billions New Study: 50% Renewables Would Save AZ More than $4 Billion
Dylan Sullivan, June 14, 2018 (Natural Resources Defense Council)
“Arizona families and businesses would get lower bills if utilities got 50 percent of their electricity from renewable energy sources like solar and wind, compared to if these same utilities go forward with their fossil fuel-heavy plans for the future…[A new report] found that average electricity bills in 2030 would be three dollars a month lower if Arizona pursues a high-renewables future, and five dollars a month lower in 2040…[The] total electricity system cost savings in the high-renewables future between 2020 and 2040 total more than $4 billion…
Arizona is the nation’s sunniest state, yet gets just six percent of its electricity from solar power…[A diverse coalition of environmental and public health advocates is] working to place a measure on the November 2018 general election ballot that would require utilities like APS and Tucson Electric Power (TEP) to [change plans to build natural gas generation and] source 50 percent of their electricity from renewables, like wind and solar power, by 2030…” click here for more
Climate change is moving in on cities around the world. From C40CitiesLive via YouTube
James Hansen is the Cassandra of climate change. He told the world is was coming in 1988, but few listened and even fewer acted. From YaleClimateConnections via YouTube
The good news about fracking is that it means reserves of the easy to get stuff are dwindling. But that's about the only good news. From National Sierra Club via YouTube
Climate change may soon hit billions of people—many cities already taking action
June 21, 2018 (Columbia University Earth Institute via PhysOrg)
“Billions of people in thousands of cities around the world will be at risk from climate-related heat waves, droughts, flooding, food shortages and energy blackouts by mid-century, but many cities are already taking action to blunt such effects [according to The Future We Don't Want]…To battle extreme heat, Seoul has planted 16 million trees and expanded its green space by 3 square kilometers. The city has also set up shaded cooling centers for those unable to access air conditioning…New York City is improving coastal flood mapping, strengthening large-scale coastal defenses and building smaller, strategically placed local storm surge barriers around the city…São Paulo has set up reward schemes to encourage citizens to use less water, while investing in the city's pipeline system to reduce water leakage…Paris plans to establish more than 80 acres of urban agriculture within the city's boundaries by 2020. By 2050, 25 percent of the city's food supply will be produced in the metropolitan region…London is improving drainage to ensure that key infrastructure can withstand heavy flooding, The city is also encouraging decentralized energy supplies to reduce the risk of widespread blackouts if any one power source is damaged…Lima has created a poverty map of the city to help policy makers focus resources on the most vulnerable and under-served areas, where people are most exposed to extreme heat.” click here for more