DUNSKY EXPERTISE EN ÉNERGIE
5492, Hutchison | Montréal Québec | Canada H2V 4B3
téléphone 514 779 7445 | courriel dunsky@vif.com
Getting Results:
Review of HQ’s 2005-10 DSM Plan
Philippe Dunsky
Eric Belliveau
John Plunkett
Presentation to Régie de l’énergie
March 16, 2005
Proposals
Overriding
Considerations
Residential
Proposals
CI & SMI
Impacts
DUNSKY EXPERTISE EN ÉNERGIE
Budget, Others
Errata & Changes
!
Benchmarking exercise:
Results update
Change to Rec.#74
!
Novoclimat
New Jersey also focuses on builders
Social housing: City of Montréal incentive
Repeal Rec.#24
!
80+ Power Supplies
Positive news since report
Likely scenario #3: 0.00005¢/kWh (+1yr@3¢)
!
Municipal leasing
More options than just leasing companies
Change to Rec.#66: broaden to innovative
financing approaches
DUNSKY EXPERTISE EN ÉNERGIE
énergie | environnement | économie
1
Proposals
Overriding
Considerations
Residential
Proposals
CI & SMI
Impacts
DUNSKY EXPERTISE EN ÉNERGIE
Budget, Others
Guiding Questions
Q1: Can the Régie expect HQ’s
plan to yield maximum
returns?
Q2: If not, what modifications
should Hydro-Québec be
directed to make?
Proposals
Overriding
Considerations
Residential
Proposals
CI & SMI
Impacts
DUNSKY EXPERTISE EN ÉNERGIE
Budget, Others
Fundamentals
!
Balance multiple goals
Primary focus on economic efficiency.
Consideration for distributional equity.
!
Barriers matter
Overcoming market barriers is the central objective
of efficiency programs
!
Program design matters
Real-world EE performance depends on the right
combination of strategies to overcome barriers
DUNSKY EXPERTISE EN ÉNERGIE
énergie | environnement | économie
2
Proposals
Overriding
Considerations
Proposals
Residential
CI & SMI
Impacts
DUNSKY EXPERTISE EN ÉNERGIE
Budget, Others
Barriers Matter
15
Unrealized
Economic
Potential
!
Without market barriers, all
consumers would adopt all
cost-effective EE practices
!
The objective of EE programs
is to overcome these barriers
Efficiency gains (TWh/yr)
10
(=waste
(due to market
barriers)
5
PGEÉ d’HQ
0
Natural
EE gains
5
Proposals
Overriding
Considerations
Residential
Proposals
CI & SMI
Impacts
DUNSKY EXPERTISE EN ÉNERGIE
Budget, Others
Many Barriers, Many Players
!
Many barriers
Information / search costs
Performance uncertainty
Asymmetry / opportunism
Hassle / transaction costs
Hidden costs or benefits
Bounded rationality
Organization practice/customs
Misplaced / split incentives
Product/service unavailability
Product inseparability
Decision irreversibility
!
Many players
Architects
Builders
Building managers
Building owners
Building occupants
Contractors
Dealers
Designers
Engineers
Home owners
Renters
Lenders
Project Developers
Real estate agents
Retail store managers
DUNSKY EXPERTISE EN ÉNERGIE
énergie | environnement | économie
3
Overriding
Considerations
Proposals
Residential
Proposals
CI & SMI
Impacts
DUNSKY EXPERTISE EN ÉNERGIE
Budget, Others
25 Years of Lessons
!
Budget ≠ Performance
$1 can provide 10 kWh or 100 kWh
EE is excellent opportunity if done right
!
Lessons
> Know your barriers
> Learn from others’ mistakes and successes
> Work upstream (and regionally) when possible
> Think like a business
> Focus on the prize: “maximize acquisition of
cost-effective energy resources”
Overriding
Considerations
Proposals
Residential
Proposals
CI & SMI
Impacts
DUNSKY EXPERTISE EN ÉNERGIE
Budget, Others
Overall Assessment
Plan Level: real improvement over 2003-06 Plan
" Captures more opportunities
New MC/ES includes key CFL, washer measures
" Adds valuable new tools
New CI Prescriptive program = key addition
" Provides more appropriate incentives, resources
Higher “Initiatives” incentives
Program Level: much refinement needed
! Market barriers
Program design not always built to overcome barriers
! Neglected markets
Small CI customers will be left out
! Incentive structures
“Initiatives” structure (¢/kWh) ≠ HQ’s stated goal (“% incr. cost”)
! Other key design issues
MC/ES efforts insufficient (won’t capture opportunities)
Best practice strategies not always followed
Additional opportunities / strategy improvements
DUNSKY EXPERTISE EN ÉNERGIE
énergie | environnement | économie
4
Proposals
Overriding
Considerations
Proposals
Residential
Impacts
CI & SMI
DUNSKY EXPERTISE EN ÉNERGIE
Budget, Others
Relative Effort
!
Peer Comparisons
Not “Top 15”
Rather: 15 peers
#
Same trading region
• Also = high heating loads
#
Large hydropower share
• Also = similar rates
#
+ leader
Primary Measure: $/MWh sales
Difference with HQ results
#
Proposals
C-B
MB
ON
NY
RI
Proposals
Residential
Impacts
CI & SMI
DUNSKY EXPERTISE EN ÉNERGIE
Budget, Others
Relative Effort ($/MWh)
0,16 $
0,27 $
0,30 $
0,47 $
0,50 $
!
0,63 $
!
Progression from last to 11th of 16
Still very low on scale
#
0,81 $
#
1,22 $
#
1,32 $
1,39 $
!
In bottom third
40% less than Canadian peers
80% less than leader (CA)
Considerable room for more
1,44 $
1,81 $
2,79 $
3,31 $
CT
3,47 $
VT
3,69 $
4,16 $
CA
$/MWh
MT
QC
(v.'04)
NH
WA
OR
ME
ID
QC
(v.'03)
Overriding
Considerations
MA
More recent data
DUNSKY EXPERTISE EN ÉNERGIE
énergie | environnement | économie
5
Proposals
Residential
Proposals
CI & SMI
Impacts
DUNSKY EXPERTISE EN ÉNERGIE
Budget, Others
Relative Effort (%)
0,25%
0,28%
0,45%
NH
QC
(v.'03)
ME
Overriding
Considerations
ID
0,52%
OR
0,78%
WA
0,94%
QC
(v.'04)
NY
1,28%
1,38%
ON
1,73%
MT
1,96%
C.-B.
RI
2,21%
2,44%
MA
2,81%
VT
2,90%
CT
2,94%
MB
3,44%
CA
3,54%
Overriding
considerations
Proposals
Residential
Proposals
CI & SMI
Impacts
DUNSKY EXPERTISE EN ÉNERGIE
Budget, Others
Residential
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
Diagnostic
Novoclimat
EnerGuide for Houses
Low-Income
SHQ Affordable Housing
MC/ES
Super-e Heat Pumps
DUNSKY EXPERTISE EN ÉNERGIE
énergie | environnement | économie
6
Overriding
considerations
Proposals
Residential
Proposals
CI & SMI
Impacts
DUNSKY EXPERTISE EN ÉNERGIE
Budget, Others
Diagnostic Tool
!
!
Useful “backbone”
Restructure it as such
Seamless links to programs
Also to more info, calculators, etc.
Ex: EnerGuide for Homes, Novoclimat,
others
!
Keep up to date
Technology changes quickly
Can harm credibility
~20,000 customers per month
Overriding
considerations
50%
Proposals
Residential
Proposals
CI & SMI
DUNSKY EXPERTISE EN ÉNERGIE
NovoClimat
HQ PGEÉ
Vt ES Homes
TXU ES Homes
40%
Market Share
Impacts
Budget, Others
NJ ES Homes
30%
20%
10%
0%
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
DUNSKY EXPERTISE EN ÉNERGIE
énergie | environnement | économie
2008
2009
2010
7
Proposals
Overriding
considerations
Residential
Proposals
CI & SMI
Impacts
DUNSKY EXPERTISE EN ÉNERGIE
Budget, Others
NovoClimat
Insufficient goals
Single biggest difference:
!
!
HQ: Demand focus (market pull)
Others: Supply focus (market push)
Rec.#12: shift incentives
!
Hydro-Québec ($2750 avg.):
# $2150 to buyers (cash)
# $600 to builders (cash)
• $500 standard, $750 first, $1000 “Select”
Us ($2750 avg.):
# $1000 to buyers (efficient appliances)
# $1750 to builders (cash)
• $1500 standard, $2150 first, $3000 “Select”
Overriding
considerations
!
Also: aggressive co-marketing, use EnerGuide
!
Proven strategy = $ savings, $ participants, % ¢/kWh
Proposals
Residential
Proposals
CI & SMI
Impacts
DUNSKY EXPERTISE EN ÉNERGIE
Budget, Others
EnerGuide for Homes
!
!
Excellent piggybacking measure
Opportunities for fine-tuning
Pilot project for lower ‘A’ audit cost barrier
(rec.#31)
Target high-use customers (rec.#33)
Reconsider minimum contribution for
poorest subset of low-income customers
(rec.#35)
DUNSKY EXPERTISE EN ÉNERGIE
énergie | environnement | économie
8
Overriding
considerations
Proposals
Residential
Proposals
CI & SMI
Impacts
DUNSKY EXPERTISE EN ÉNERGIE
Budget, Others
Low-Income Direct Install
!
!
Standard LI program
Opportunity for fine-tuning
Eliminate measure disincentive by
reworking payment structure (rec.#36)
Improve consultation with delivery agents
(rec.#38)
Overriding
considerations
Proposals
Residential
Proposals
CI & SMI
Impacts
DUNSKY EXPERTISE EN ÉNERGIE
Budget, Others
SHQ Affordable Housing
!
!
!
Good program opportunity
Too little known for assessment
Points of caution:
Integrate lighting opportunities
Consider select appliance replacements
Ensure design comprehensiveness
DUNSKY EXPERTISE EN ÉNERGIE
énergie | environnement | économie
9
Overriding
considerations
Proposals
Proposals
Residential
Impacts
CI & SMI
DUNSKY EXPERTISE EN ÉNERGIE
Budget, Others
MC/ES: General
!
!
Enormous, low-cost opportunity
Underlying problem:
HQ: “This is primarily an awareness program”
!
MC/ES must be aggressive
Upstream efforts (joint promos, spiffs, etc.)
Rebates (for key techs)
Market transformation
!
Key triad:
CFL lights | Washers | Windows
Overriding
considerations
Proposals
Proposals
Residential
Impacts
CI & SMI
DUNSKY EXPERTISE EN ÉNERGIE
Budget, Others
MC/ES – CFLs
Low-cost CFLs ($2-4)
High-cost CFLs ($5-10)
1,2
U.S. Northwest
New Bulbs / Household / Year
1
U.S. Northeast
0,8
0,6
HQ PGEÉ
0,4
0,2
0
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
DUNSKY EXPERTISE EN ÉNERGIE
énergie | environnement | économie
2009
2010
10
Proposals
Overriding
considerations
Residential
Proposals
Impacts
CI & SMI
DUNSKY EXPERTISE EN ÉNERGIE
Budget, Others
MC/ES – CFLs
!
1,2
Priority opportunity
Huge savings (75%)
Low cost (<2¢/kWh)
B/C ratio: >4:1
New Bulbs / Household / Year
1
0,8
!
Need more aggressive strategy
0,6
Joint promotions (with manuf’s, retailers)
Year-round rebates (rec.#44)
Should double performance (bulbs/hh/yr)
0,4
0,2
0
1999
2000
2001
2002
Proposals
Overriding
considerations
Residential
2003
2004
2005
Proposals
CI & SMI
2006
2007
2008
Impacts
2009
2010
DUNSKY EXPERTISE EN ÉNERGIE
Budget, Others
MC/ES – Washers
60%
B as eline ES mkt s hare
HQ's P GEÉ ES mkt s hare
R evis ed P GEE ES mkt
s hare
40%
20%
0%
2003
2 00 4
2 0 05
2 00 6
2 00 7 *
2 0 08
DUNSKY EXPERTISE EN ÉNERGIE
énergie | environnement | économie
20 0 9
20 10
11
Overriding
considerations
Proposals
Proposals
Residential
CI & SMI
Impacts
DUNSKY EXPERTISE EN ÉNERGIE
Budget, Others
MC/ES – Washers
!
Priority opportunity
Huge savings (50-75%)
Low cost (~3¢/kWh)
B/C ratio: >2:1
!
Rec.#48: Reject HQ Implicit Target
<1% net market share unacceptable
Adopt 10% net market share by 2007
(new NW)
!
Need more aggressive strategy
Joint promos, Spiffs, Rebates (rec.#50)
2003
Overriding
considerations
2004
2005
Proposals
Residential
2006
Proposals
CI & SMI
2007*
2008
Impacts
2009
2010
DUNSKY EXPERTISE EN ÉNERGIE
Budget, Others
MC/ES – Others
!
Windows (rec.#51)
Low cost (<1¢/kWh)
B/C ratio: ~13:1
!
Efficient Computer Transformers
Unique opportunity for continental
collaboration
Could deliver 300 GWh
Cost next to nil (rare “free lunch”)
Narrow window of opportunity (move fast)
DUNSKY EXPERTISE EN ÉNERGIE
énergie | environnement | économie
12
Proposals
Overriding
considerations
Proposals
Residential
Impacts
CI & SMI
DUNSKY EXPERTISE EN ÉNERGIE
Budget, Others
Super-E Heat Pumps
4,0
3,5
Geothermal (ground) Heat Pump
Cold-Climate (air) Heat Pump
2,5
2,0
1,5
Electric Heat (baseline)
Coefficient of Performance (COP)
3,0
1,0
0,5
0,0
-34
-32
-29
-26
-23
-21
-18
-15
-12
-9
-7
-4
-1
2
4
7
10
13
16
Outdoor Temperature (celsius)
Residential
Proposals
CI & SMI
Impacts
DUNSKY EXPERTISE EN ÉNERGIE
Budget, Others
Super-E Heat Pumps
!
4,0
3,5
Geothermal
Gold standard (COP 3+)
Higher cost / Higher savings
Ready to deliver
Niche market opportunity
!
-34
-32
-29
-26
-23
3,0
2,5
2,0
Cold-Climate Heat Pumps
Made for Québec climate
Silver standard (COP ~2.5)
Low-cost / solid savings
Full-scale within 2 years
Enormous
market
opportunity
-21
-18
-15
-12
-9
-7
-4
-1
1,5
Coefficient of Performance (COP)
Proposals
Overriding
considerations
1,0
0,5
0,0
2
4
7
10
13
16
Outdoor Temperature (celsius)
DUNSKY EXPERTISE EN ÉNERGIE
énergie | environnement | économie
13
Proposals
Overriding
considerations
Proposals
Residential
CI & SMI
Impacts
DUNSKY EXPERTISE EN ÉNERGIE
Budget, Others
Geothermal
!
Roll-out slowly
NW Territories
Nunavut
Yukon
Newfoundland
Prince Edward Is.
Nova Scotia
New Brunswick
Québec
Ontario
Manitoba
Saskatchewan
Alberta
British Columbia
#
Rec.#55: Financing, not rebates (at outset)
Focus on qualified supply
Develop leasing strategy
Follow Manitoba’s lead
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
CCHPs
!
Launch pilot
Work with manufacturer
Aggressively enable commercialisation
Overriding
considerations
Proposals
Residential
Proposals
CI & SMI
Impacts
DUNSKY EXPERTISE EN ÉNERGIE
Budgets, Others
CI & SMI Overview
!
CI Buildings Initiatives
> HQ’s Proposal
> Incentive Design Problems
> Recommended Solution
> Note on municipal
!
!
Small CI Customers
SMI Process Initiatives
DUNSKY EXPERTISE EN ÉNERGIE
énergie | environnement | économie
14
Proposals
Overriding
considerations
Impacts
CI & SMI
DUNSKY EXPERTISE EN ÉNERGIE
Budgets, Others
CI Buildings Initiatives
0,60 $
0,55 $
!
0,50 $
HQ “marginal” incentives ≠ “total” incentives
EX (gov't)
NC (gov't)
EX (standard)
NC (standard)
Old Plan
0,45 $
0,40 $
¢ / ann.kWh
Proposals
Residential
0,35 $
0,30 $
0,25 $
0,20 $
0,15 $
0,10 $
0,05 $
0,00 $
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Electricity Savings
Proposals
Overriding
considerations
Residential
CI & SMI
Impacts
DUNSKY EXPERTISE EN ÉNERGIE
Budgets, Others
CI Buildings Initiatives
0,60 $
0,55 $
!
0,50 $
!
0,45 $
Critical Program
Very diverse sector
Efficiency costs vary tremendously between
businesses, buildings
Eg. Cost for CMNÉB+25% (Technosim):
0,40 $
¢ / ann.kWh
Proposals
0,35 $
#
0,30 $
#
0,25 $
0,20 $
!
Fast food (McDonald’s): $0.16/kWh
Small secondary school: $1.16¢/kWh
Proposal problems
% cost (goal) ≠ ¢/ann.kWh (mechanism)
Likely results:
0,15 $
0,10 $
# Missed
0,05 $
0,00 $
0%
10%
opportunities
# Wasted
financial
resources
20%
30%
40%
Electricitylower
Savings savings
# Higher costs,
DUNSKY EXPERTISE EN ÉNERGIE
énergie | environnement | économie
50%
60%
15
Overriding
considerations
Proposals
Proposals
Residential
Impacts
CI & SMI
DUNSKY EXPERTISE EN ÉNERGIE
Budgets, Others
Incentive for CMNÉB+25%
High-volume Fast Food (E)
230%
Small Food Retail (E)
206%
Supermarket (E)
173%
Low-volume Fast Food (E)
157%
Family Restaurant (E)
118%
Small Hotel/Motel (E)
70%
Small Retail (E)
69%
Dry Storage Warehouse (E)
!
67%
Bars & Entertainment (E)
61%
Dealerships (E)
56%
Large Retail (E)
53%
Small Offices (E)
51%
Refrigerated Warehouse (E)
37%
Shopping Centers (E)
32%
Large Hotel (E)
32%
Arenas (E)
52%
Outdoor Recreation (E)
50%
CHSLDs (E)
36%
Small Universities (E)
HQ’s fixed ¢/ann.kWh
incentive covers
radically different
shares of incremental
costs
33%
Small Cegeps (E)
33%
Indoor Recreation (E)
32%
Cegeps (E)
29%
Elementary School with Ventilation (E)
28%
Small Secondary School (E)
28%
0%
50%
100%
150%
200%
250%
Index of Actual v. Targeted Coverage of Incremental Cost
Overriding
considerations
Proposals
Residential
Proposals
CI & SMI
Impacts
DUNSKY EXPERTISE EN ÉNERGIE
Budgets, Others
Incentive for CMNÉB+25%
125%
HQ actual share of cost
HQ target share of cost
75%
50%
25%
0%
le
S
m
en ma
ll
ta
Se
ry
Sc co
ho nd
ar
ol
w yS
ith
c
Ve hoo
l
nt
ila (E)
tio
In
do
n
C
(E
e
or
R gep )
e
s
(E
Sm cre
at
)
Sm al
l C ion
al
l U e g (E )
e
ni
ve ps (
E)
rs
O
iti
ut
do CH es
or
S L (E )
R
ec Ds
re
(
at E)
io
Ar n (E
e
)
La
n
S
R
rg as
ef ho
rig pp e H (E
in
er
ot )
g
at
e
ed Ce l (E
W nte )
ar
rs
e
Sm ho (E)
al use
lO
(
La ffic E)
es
rg
e
(E
Ba
)
D Re
r
ta
D s & ea
il
ry
le
(E
E
r
St
s
n
or ter hip )
ta
ag
s
in
(E
e
W me )
ar
nt
eh
(
o u E)
S
Sm m
al se
l
al
(
l H Re E)
F
ta
ot
il
Lo am
el
(E
il
/
w
)
-v y R Mo
ol
es tel
um
ta
(
ur E)
e
Fa an
t(
st
E
S
F
Sm upe oo )
H
rm d (
al
ig
lF
har E)
vo
o o ke
lu
t
m d R (E
e
)
Fa eta
s t i l (E
Fo
)
od
(E
)
Share of Incremental Cost
100%
DUNSKY EXPERTISE EN ÉNERGIE
énergie | environnement | économie
16
Proposals
Overriding
considerations
Proposals
Residential
Impacts
CI & SMI
DUNSKY EXPERTISE EN ÉNERGIE
Budgets, Others
CI Buildings Initiatives
80%
0,50 $
0,40 $
60%
50%
HQ Incentive -- Gov't NC
HQ Incentive -- Reg. NC
Share of Incremental Cost -- Govt NC
Share of Incremental Cost -- Reg.NC
0,30 $
40%
0,20 $
30%
Percent of Incremental
Cents per Annual kWh
70%
20%
0,10 $
10%
0,00 $
0%
10%
20%
25%
35%
40%
Degree of Energy Savings
Overriding
considerations
Proposals
Proposals
Residential
CI & SMI
based on NYSERDA cost data
Impacts
DUNSKY EXPERTISE EN ÉNERGIE
Budgets, Others
CI Buildings Initiatives
!
Proposal
#
Rec.#59,60 & response to Régie Q#7.1
New Construction: 75-85%+ incr. cost
Existing (retrofit): 40-60%+ of tot. cost
Proposed Revised CI Initiatives Incentive
Existing (Early Retrofit)
Savings
Threshold
Percent of
installed cost
0-20%
40%
20-40%
60%
Over 40%
70%
New Construction /
Replacement
Savings
Threshold
Percent of
incremental cost
0-15%
75%
15-35%
85%
Over 35%
90%
DUNSKY EXPERTISE EN ÉNERGIE
énergie | environnement | économie
17
Overriding
considerations
Proposals
Residential
Proposals
CI & SMI
Impacts
DUNSKY EXPERTISE EN ÉNERGIE
Budgets, Others
CI Buildings Initiatives
!
Key Proposal Benefits
Fulfills HQ’s stated objective of covering
share of incremental cost
#
Accounts for different customers having
different EE costs
Pulls customers toward
comprehensiveness
#
Overriding
considerations
Proposals
Residential
Structure is progressive in practice
Proposals
CI & SMI
Impacts
DUNSKY EXPERTISE EN ÉNERGIE
Budgets, Others
CI Buildings Initiatives
!
Comparison
Hydro-Québec’s: 20-30¢/ann.kWh
#
Diff. = Gov’t / Private
Our Alt. Proposal: 18-24¢/ann.kWh
#
!
Diff. = NC / Existing
Net Impact:
$$
Savings
$$ Participants
$% Excess payments
$% Unit costs (¢/kWh)
DUNSKY EXPERTISE EN ÉNERGIE
énergie | environnement | économie
18
Proposals
Overriding
considerations
Residential
Proposals
CI & SMI
Impacts
DUNSKY EXPERTISE EN ÉNERGIE
Budgets, Others
CI Buildings Initiatives –
Municipalities
Very specific problems:
!
Decision-making process:
#
#
#
#
Lay people (school commissions, etc.) provide design
inputs
Designer estimates cost
Lay people authorize bond amount
In-house staff and/or outside professionals write RFP
based on bond amount
If bond amount does not include EE measures, ex-post
EE changes are extremely difficult
Rec. #66: HQ can pay design professionals to
assist early in process
Rec. #67: Fallback strategy – HQ can facilitate
innovative financing (municipal leasing co’s,
others) paid for by operating savings (%bills)
!
!
Overriding
considerations
Proposals
Residential
Proposals
CI & SMI
Impacts
DUNSKY EXPERTISE EN ÉNERGIE
Budgets, Others
CI Small Customers
!
Same Barriers, Much Higher
More split incentives (tenants)
Less ability to estimate savings
A lot less time
Lower access to capital
Analogous to low-income residential
!
Require direct install (rec.#70)
Covers significant share of cost
In-house or ESCOs
DUNSKY EXPERTISE EN ÉNERGIE
énergie | environnement | économie
19
Proposals
Overriding
considerations
Residential
Proposals
CI & SMI
Impacts
DUNSKY EXPERTISE EN ÉNERGIE
Budgets, Others
MC/ES for Business
Critical new tool
Insufficient incentives
!
!
Avg. 5¢/ann.kWh ≈ 0.7¢/kWh
Experience: <50% is insufficient to motivate participation
#
Primarily serves free riders
Need to increase substantially
!
Target 75% incremental cost
Avg. ~14¢/ann.kWh ≈ 2¢/kWh (rec.#71)
Very cost effective
!
Avoided costs ~8¢/kWh
Benefit/cost ratio 4:1
Overriding
considerations
Proposals
Residential
Proposals
CI & SMI
Impacts
DUNSKY EXPERTISE EN ÉNERGIE
Budgets, Others
SMI Initiatives for Ind. Process
!
Roll into Initiatives for Buildings
¢/ann.kWh created need for separate
process incentive
#
Lower incremental costs than buildings
% of incremental cost allows for
streamlined approach
#
If measure costs less, incentive is less
% barriers, no risk of wasted resources
DUNSKY EXPERTISE EN ÉNERGIE
énergie | environnement | économie
20
Proposals
Overriding
considerations
Residential
Proposals
CI & SMI
Impacts
DUNSKY EXPERTISE EN ÉNERGIE
Budgets, Others
2005 Cost Impacts
!
Significantly lower than contingency
No-cost process (17)
No-cost changes (23)
Very low-cost changes (12)
#
Staff time, consulting, misc. fees
Incentives, other changes (19)
#
!
Order-of-magnitude cost: ~3-4%
Proposals
Overriding
considerations
Novoclimat marketing, MC/ES (CFLs,
washers, windows), heat pumps, CI Buildings
Initiatives, MC/ES business incentive
Residential
Proposals
CI & SMI
Impacts
DUNSKY EXPERTISE EN ÉNERGIE
Budgets, Others
Conclusion
!
!
PGEÉ requires changes to maximize
returns from ratepayer funds
Recommendations:
Rooted in best practice experience
Insignificant impact on Y2005 budget
# well within contingency
Expected results:
# more $ savings for more customers
# more $ savings for HQ
# lower free-ridership rate
# higher kWh/$ yield
# greater environmental benefit
!
= No regrets approach
DUNSKY EXPERTISE EN ÉNERGIE
énergie | environnement | économie
21