ENERGY
Local Government Quantified
Savings Component of Strategic
Plan Update
Technical Appendix - Final Presentation
October 15, 2014
Navigant Reference: 150283
In collaboration with Tierra Resource Consultants
©2013 Navigant Consulting, Inc.
Confidential and proprietary. Do not distribute or copy.
D I S P U T E S & I N V E S T I G AT I O N S • E C O N O M I C S • F I N A N C I A L A D V I S O RY • M A N A G E M E N T C O N S U LT I N G
Meeting Protocols
Meeting Protocols
•
For the webinar unplugged to be a success, all callers will need to have their phones set
to mute.
•
Slides for the presentation should be downloaded from http://eecoodinator.info well in
advance of the webinar.
•
Participants should call in five minutes prior to the start of the webinar. The line will
accommodate 100 participants. First come, first served.
•
(866) 630-5989, Access Code 336 2110#
•
The presenter will prompt participants when it is time to advance to the next slide.
•
At the conclusion of each section of the presentation, the host will pause to ask if there
are questions, at which point, callers with questions may unmute.
•
At these question times and at the conclusion of the presentation, questions may also be
emailed to the presenter at Jeremy.Battis@cpuc.ca.gov.
•
All parties posing questions will have themselves and their agency identified.
©2013 Navigant Consulting, Inc.
Confidential and proprietary. Do not distribute or copy.
1
ENERGY
Meeting Agenda and Project Objectives
Meeting Goals and Agenda
1. Quick review of project objectives.
2. Quick review of the methods used to establish energy efficiency metrics (i.e. EE
potential) for goals 1, 3, and 4.
3. Present final energy metrics for goals 1, 3, and 4.
4. Present insight into additional sources of EE savings for LG’s that are not included in
the metrics.
5. Discuss limitation of the analysis.
6. Discuss recommendations.
Project Objectives
1. Establish energy metrics (i.e. EE potential) for goals 1, 3, and 4 for the Local Government
EE Strategic Plan Action Plan.
a.
Note that Navigant did not develop a metric for Goal #2 because metrics for that goal did
not align with the Potential and Goals Study model.
2. Define a template that could be used to establish EE goals and metrics for other
components of the California Strategic Energy Plan.
©2013 Navigant Consulting, Inc.
Confidential and proprietary. Do not distribute or copy.
2
ENERGY
Methodology for Goal #1
Method for Estimating Goal #1
• First the team estimated baseline LG energy usage for each IOU territory based
stakeholder discussions and data obtained from IOUs on 2012 electricity and
natural gas sales.
• A ratio was then develop by dividing the LG baseline usage by the full commercial
sector usage.
Technical Appendix Table 7. Estimated LG Facilities Consumption as a Percent of
Commercial Consumption
IOU
Fuel
Type
PG&E
SCE
SDG&E
PG&E
SDG&E
SCG
Electric
Electric
Electric
Gas
Gas
Gas
LG Facilities Share of
Commercial Sector
Consumption*
3.38%
3.36%
3.37%
2.01%
1.44%
1.72%*
• This ratio was then used to estimate LG potential as a percent of total commercial
market technical, economic, and market potential.
©2013 Navigant Consulting, Inc.
Confidential and proprietary. Do not distribute or copy.
3
ENERGY
Methodology for Goal #1 - Example of LG Energy Consumption
Technical Appendix Figure 2. 2012 PG&E Local Government Electric Energy Sales Distribution by System
PG&E 2012 LG Related
Energy Sales
13%
11%
16%
Electricity sales are
distributed between;
•
Facilities
•
Street lights
•
Water supply
•
Waste water treatment
60%
Facilities
Water Supply-Irrigation System
Sewage Treatment Facilities
Street lights
Technical Appendix Figure 3. 2012 PG&E Local Government Gas Energy Sales Distribution by System
27%
Natural gas sales are
distributed between;
•
Power generation
•
Facilities
73%
Fossil Fuel Electric Power Generation
©2013 Navigant Consulting, Inc.
Confidential and proprietary. Do not distribute or copy.
Facilities
4
ENERGY
Proposed Metrics for Goal 1
Technical Appendix Figure 6. Goal 1 Incremental Annual GWh
Goal 1
Local governments lead by example by
designing and implementing programs
that reduce their own energy use and
greenhouse gas emissions
Goal 1 Metrics
Between 2015 and 2020, achieve an
average annual incremental ex-post
gross savings of 27 GWh and 0.2 MM
Therms from the implementation of
standard efficiency measures (i.e.,
measures eligible for IOU rebates)
captured in facilities owned and/or
occupied by LGs.
©2013 Navigant Consulting, Inc.
Confidential and proprietary. Do not distribute or copy.
Technical Appendix Figure 7. Goal 1 Incremental Annual MMTherms
5
ENERGY
Methodology for Goal #3
Method for Estimating Goal #3
• The 2013 potential included the capability to increase code compliance over time.
• Assume baseline code compliance rate increases by 10 percentage points.
• Applies to constituent and LG facilities.
• Applies to new construction and retrofit/replace on burnout.
• Attribution of savings from advocacy and code compliance enhancements to be
established between LG and affiliated IOU.
©2013 Navigant Consulting, Inc.
Confidential and proprietary. Do not distribute or copy.
6
ENERGY
Proposed Metrics for Goal 3
Technical Appendix Figure 8. Goal 3 Incremental Annual GWh
Goal 3
Local governments accelerate the
implementation of energy efficiency,
zero net energy and greenhouse gas
reduction goals through the use of
their regulatory authority.
Goal 3 Metrics
Between 2015 and 2020, achieve an
average annual incremental ex-post
gross savings of 29 GWh and 0.1 MM
Therms from an increase of 10
percentage points in compliance with
existing codes for new construction
and renewal/renovation projects.
©2013 Navigant Consulting, Inc.
Confidential and proprietary. Do not distribute or copy.
Technical Appendix Figure 9. Goal 3 Incremental Annual MMTherms
7
ENERGY
Methodology for Goal #4
Method for Estimating Goal #4
• Navigant assumes that the aggregate results from goals 1, 2, and 3, in combination
with improvements in overall energy management, will increase the potential for
energy.
• Improving energy management is a process and can occur in many ways. One
example of this process might include the following 5 steps;
1.
Include a complete analysis of historic usage load sources and load profiles.
2.
Develop a clear and accurate understanding of the potential for energy efficiency that is
based on engineering analysis such as technical potential audits, and covers the full scope of
LG operations.
3.
Establish the ability to develop and use guidance documents, such as strategic energy plans,
to organize and direct sustained efforts at achieving energy efficiency over a long time
horizon.
4.
Organize an effective management structure that includes the ability to transition authority
and commitment to a strategic approach to energy management as staff positions evolve and
turnover occurs, and
5.
Continuously improves the project delivery process to include increasingly complex projects
that include data rich and real-time energy management capability.
• Metrics for goal 4 were estimated by multiplying the mid case scenario potential
provided in goal #1 by a factor of 1.25.
©2013 Navigant Consulting, Inc.
Confidential and proprietary. Do not distribute or copy.
8
ENERGY
Methodology for Goal #4 - Example of improving energy management as a process.
A Comparison of EE Savings Achieved by Two Similar Institutions
250,000,000
Energy Saved (kWh)
200,000,000
Bond funding for EE projects
authorized by management
150,000,000
100,000,000
Strategic Energy Plan
formally adopted
50,000,000
Date
Institution 1
©2013 Navigant Consulting, Inc.
Confidential and proprietary. Do not distribute or copy.
Institution 2
9
ENERGY
12-12
10-12
08-12
06-12
02-12
04-12
12-11
10-11
08-11
06-11
02-11
04-11
12-10
10-10
08-10
06-10
02-10
04-10
12-09
10-09
08-09
06-09
02-09
04-09
12-08
10-08
08-08
06-08
02-08
04-08
12-07
10-07
08-07
06-07
02-07
04-07
12-06
-
Proposed Metrics for Goal 4
Technical Appendix Figure 10. Goal 4 Incremental Annual GWh
Goal 4
Local government and private
sector energy management
expertise becomes widespread and
prevalent.
Goal 4 Metrics
Between 2015 and 2020, achieve an
average annual incremental ex-post
gross savings of 7 GWh and 0.05
MM Therms in addition to the
metrics stated for goal 1.
©2013 Navigant Consulting, Inc.
Confidential and proprietary. Do not distribute or copy.
Technical Appendix Figure 11. Goal 4 Incremental Annual MMTherms
10
ENERGY
Proposed Metrics Summary
Local government incremental market EE potential, by goal (GWh)
•
Applies to consumption associated with facilities.
•
Does not include potential for street lighting and water delivery / waster water treatment.
•
Goals 1 and 4 are for LG owned/operated facilities.
•
Goal 3 represent 10% improvement in compliance for both new construction and
retrofit/replace on burnout projects for LG and constituent facilities.
•
These goals indicate the potential exists to reduce electricity consumption in local
government operated facilities by approximately 16% to 20%.
•
This represented an estimated total reduction in annual LG electricity spend of
approximately 9% to 12%.
Technical Appendix Table 1. Local Government Strategic Plan
Update Incremental Market EE Potential, by Goal (GWh)
Year
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
Goal 1
29.6
30.9
29.1
20.9
23.4
27.1
30.6
34.3
37.8
41.4
Goal 3
32.6
56.8
32.1
22
18.3
13
7.1
3.6
1.7
1.1
Goal 4
7.4
7.7
7.3
5.2
5.8
6.8
7.7
8.6
9.4
10.3
Total
69.7
95.4
68.5
48.1
47.5
46.9
45.3
46.4
48.9
52.8
©2013 Navigant Consulting, Inc.
Confidential and proprietary. Do not distribute or copy.
11
ENERGY
Additional Potential for EE not in Metrics
Additional source of EE savings not in metrics
•
Street lights.
•
•
For example, in PG&E’s service territory, streetlights are about 13% of total LG
spend on electricity in 2012.
Water delivery and waste water treatment facilities.
•
For example, in PG&E’s service territory, wastewater treatment and water
supply are about 11% and 16%, respectively, of total LG spend on electricity in
2012.
Technical Appendix Figure 2. 2012 PG&E Local Government Electric Energy Sales Distribution
13%
11%
60%
16%
Facilities
Water Supply-Irrigation System
Sewage Treatment Facilities
Street lights
©2013 Navigant Consulting, Inc.
Confidential and proprietary. Do not distribute or copy.
12
ENERGY
Additional Potential for EE not in Metrics – Street lighting
•
The potential for street lights was reviewed in detail in the 2013 potential model.
•
As shown in figure 13, the potential exists to reduce streetlight energy use by about 45% through a
mix of LED and induction lamp technologies and advanced controls.
•
Potential varies by IOU according to who owns the lighting.
•
Overall, the potential exists to reduce annual local government sector electricity consumption by
about 7%.
Technical Appendix Figure 13. California Street Lighting Savings Potential as a Percent of
CEC Street Lighting Forecast (Technical and Active Cumulative Market Potential)
80%
70%
60%
GWh
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2012
2013
2014
Technical Potential
©2013 Navigant Consulting, Inc.
Confidential and proprietary. Do not distribute or copy.
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
Economic Potential
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
Mid Cumulative Market Potential
13
ENERGY
Additional Potential for EE not in Metrics – Street lighting
Street lighting ownership distribution and annual incremental potential for LGs, by
territory.
Technical Appendix Table 2. Street Lighting Ownership, by Lamp Count
IOU
IOU-Owned
CustomerOwned
Statewide
57.1%
42.9%
PG&E
26.3%
73.7%
SCE
82.4%
17.6%
SDG&E
19.0%
81.0%
Technical Appendix Table 16. Total LG Streetlight Market Potential (GWh)
Year
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
PG&E
11
11
10
9
8
8
7
7
7
6
SCE
3
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
SDG&E
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Total
15
15
15
14
13
12
12
12
12
11
©2013 Navigant Consulting, Inc.
Confidential and proprietary. Do not distribute or copy.
14
ENERGY
Additional Potential for EE not in Metrics – Water supply and waste water treatment
•
The 2013 potential model did not analyze water supply and waste water treatment.
•
Navigant undertook a quick very, high level literature review that indicates savings potential across all water
service operations is over 4%.
•
Overall, the potential exists to reduce total annual local government sector electricity consumption by about
over 1%.
•
Potential should be studied in detail.
Technical Appendix Table 35. Top Energy Savings Opportunities for LG Water Management
Water Service
Type
Measure
Upper Bound
Savings % of
End-Use
Consumption
Potable &
Non-Potable
Improved Motor
Efficiency
6%
4.0%
5.0%
0.2%
Potable &
Non-Potable
Pump System
Optimization
20%
12.4%
10.0%
1.0%
Potable &
Non-Potable
VFDs
50%
27.5%
10.0%
Potable &
Non-Potable
Supervisory Control
and Data Acquisition
(SCADA)
20%
15.0%
5.0%
Non-Potable
High Efficiency
Aeration Blowers
35.0%
10.0%
Potable &
Non-Potable
Other
Potable &
Non-Potable
©2013 Navigant Consulting, Inc.
Confidential and proprietary. Do not distribute or copy.
Average
Savings % of
End-Use
Consumption
Market
Applicability
Factor
NA
Potable & Non-Potable Total
End-Use to
Sector
Adjustment
Factor
80.0%
Applicable
Average Savings
% of Total Sector
Consumption
2.2%
4.3%
0.6%
8.8%
% Savings
Potential for
all Water
Service
Consumption
0.3%
11.2%
100.0%
15
ENERGY
Limitations of the Analysis
Limitations of the Analysis
•
Since the PGT model was developed for a different purpose than the Strategic Plan metrics, the results
provided in this technical appendix represent order-of-magnitude, directional opportunities rather
than precise estimates of potential for any single local government, end use measure category, or
building type.
•
The metrics for Goals 1 and 4 are specific for facilities for which local governments either owns the
building, or for which they are the utility account holder of record. Many local governments are
engaged with their communities to promote energy efficiency and create additional energy efficiency
momentum with their constituents. These metrics for goals 1 and 4 do not include constituent
facilities and do not reflect potential for LG constituent outreach efforts.
•
Estimates of energy efficiency potential are limited by the requirements of the Potential, Goals, and
Targets (PGT) project. The PGT work is based on all measures that will screen in a TRC cost test, and
meet all other criteria for inclusion in IOU incentive type programs. Additional potential may be
available under different TRC cost effectiveness thresholds or different cost effectiveness tests.
•
The analysis of the potential for municipal water operations is preliminary and illustrative in nature,
and should be viewed as an order of magnitude estimate only.
©2013 Navigant Consulting, Inc.
Confidential and proprietary. Do not distribute or copy.
16
ENERGY
Limitations of the Analysis
Recommendations
• Further research should be completed through the CPUC potential modelling efforts to refine estimates
of energy efficiency potential in water systems operated by local governments.
• The savings associated with goal 3 include savings from codes and standards related activities at LG
facilities, and also constituent facilities. A more accurate assessment of this goal could be accomplished
by more clearly establishing the relationship between IOU programs and LG activities in the realm of
codes and standards.
• As new program delivery mechanisms that involve local governments are developed, such as PACE
financing and regional energy networks (RENs), it is likely new sources of savings will be defined, and
new methods to develop that potential will be implemented. In order to capture this potential, future
revisions to the strategic plan metrics should be expanded beyond the definition of potential used in
the 2013 potential study.
• Additional data on energy sales to LGs from SCE and SDG&E would allow more specific direction on
where energy efficiency potential might be clustered at LGs operating in the service territories for these
utilities.
• Additionally, most cities and counties have developed energy action plans (EAPs) as part of their
carbon action planning process. These EAPs include details on usage for the three categories discussed
above. The research team could not identify a source where all information from these EAPs has been
collected and warehoused. Such a database would help further define where potential exists and how
it could be most effectively captured.
©2013 Navigant Consulting, Inc.
Confidential and proprietary. Do not distribute or copy.
17
ENERGY