From: Wilson, Erika 
Sent: Friday, December 19, 2014 3:49 PM
To: M. V. Ramana
Cc: Bremer, Kristen; Hackel, Angela; Risley, David
Subject: RE: Website Comment: Carbon Pollution Standards

Hello

For the full EE calculations, please see the data file titled "GHG Abatement - Scenario 1" (http://www2.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2014-06/20140602tsd-ghg-abatement-measures-scenario1.xlsx) of the GHG Abatement Measures TSD (available here: http://www2.epa.gov/carbon-pollution-standards/clean-power-plan-proposed-rule-technical-documents).  Both the spreadsheet and TSD walk through the calculation.  In your email, you noted that to get your numbers you multiplied the incremental savings (%) by the BAU sales demand. To replicate our calculation, you should multiply the incremental savings by the previous year's "sales after net EE."  See p. 5-41 of GHG Abatement TSD for more information.

Thank you for your inquiry and your interest in the Clean Power Plan.

Erika Wilson
Clean Air Markets Division
Office of Atmospheric Programs
Office of Air and Radiation
U.S. EPA
202.343.9113
wilson.erika@epa.gov

________________________________________
From: Bremer, Kristen
Sent: Monday, October 27, 2014 9:36 AM
To: M. V. Ramana
Subject: RE: Website Comment: Carbon Pollution Standards

Yes - I received your email and passed it along to our technical team on Wednesday. Please know that we value all questions and comments and will do our best to respond in a timely manner; however, given current workloads and schedules it may take longer to receive a response.

______________________________
Kristen Bremer
Policy Analysis & Communications
U.S. EPA, Office of Air Quality Planning & Standards
Email:  bremer.kristen@epa.gov
Phone:  919.541.9424
Cell:  919.321.7652

-----Original Message-----
From: M. V. Ramana [mailto:ramana@Princeton.EDU]
Sent: Saturday, October 25, 2014 8:38 AM
To: Bremer, Kristen
Subject: Fwd: Website Comment: Carbon Pollution Standards

Dear Kristen,

I was just checking if you did get this email of mine.

Thank you,
Ramana


Begin forwarded message:

From: "M.V. Ramana" <ramana@exchange.princeton.edu>
Subject: Re: Website Comment: Carbon Pollution Standards
Date: October 22, 2014 at 3:38:32 PM EDT
To: "Bremer, Kristen" <Bremer.Kristen@epa.gov>

Dear Kristen,

I was trying to reproduce the example case for energy efficiency in the technical support document on GHG abatement measures (Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2013-0602). In the document, on page 5-45, in table 5-20, the results for South Carolina are listed as:

2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
82,451
83,359
84,278
85,206
86,145
87,094
88,054
89,024
90,005
0.34%
0.54%
0.74%
0.94%
1.14%
1.34%
1.50%
1.50%
1.50%
274
440
608
777
945
1,113
1,250
1,249
1,249
82,177
82,660
83,008
83,229
83,333
83,329
83,258
83,264
83,346
0
14
38
70
110
160
219
285
350
274
700
1,270
1,977
2,812
3,765
4,796
5,760
6,659
0.33%
0.84%
1.51%
2.32%
3.26%
4.32%
5.45%
6.47%
7.40%

However, if you carry out the operations that are mentioned in the TSD, the figures I get for the third and fourth rows are:

276
440
614
786
962
1142
1290
1302
1317
82,175
82,643
82,949
83,090
83,067
82,874
82,544
82,212
81,876

Some of the discrepancies are probably because of round-off but the latter discrepancies are too large to explain this way. Further, the last three columns have the same savings percentage, but because the BAU generation is increasing, the annual incremental savings should also be increasing. Instead, these numbers are decreasing slightly. I am attaching my spread sheet in which I did these calculations and derived the above figures.
I tried to look for the underlying calculations in the spreadsheets but I can't seem to find it. The numbers themselves are in the abatement measures scenario1.xlsx file in the Sorted by State tab (row 845 and 846, colums J through R). But that doesn't calculate anything. Each cell points to a cell in Sorted_by_State, which then points to a table in the IntermediateData tab, which then leads me nowhere. So where are these figures actually calculated? I assume that somewhere in the spreadsheet 90,005 must be multiplied by 1.50 % to derive the 1,249 figure. And so on. But it is not apparent where that is.

Please forward this question to the appropriate person.

Thank you very much,
Ramana


On Oct 22, 2014, at 10:49 AM, Bremer, Kristen <Bremer.Kristen@epa.gov> wrote:

You may contact me with any questions and I will forward them to the appropriate technical staff.

______________________________
Kristen Bremer
Policy Analysis & Communications
U.S. EPA, Office of Air Quality Planning & Standards
Email:  bremer.kristen@epa.gov
Phone:  919.541.9424
Cell:  919.321.7652

----
M. V. Ramana
Nuclear Futures Laboratory & Program on Science and Global Security Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs Princeton University
221 Nassau Street, Floor 2
Princeton NJ 08542
Email: ramana@princeton.edu
Webpages: nuclearfutures.princeton.edu & www.princeton.edu/sgs
