Pacific Gas & Electric, Retrofit Program (commercial/industrial/agricultural), Profile #25


EXECUTIVE SUMMARY



PG&E’s Retrofit Program for commercial, industrial and agricultural customers encompasses five basic end-use areas: air-conditioning, motors, lighting, agricultural, and refrigeration & cooking. Through the Retrofit Program, eligible customers receive incentives in the form of rebates for improving the efficiency of their facilities by using qualifying, high efficiency equipment. While the Retrofit Program is marketed primarily to small and medium non-residential customers, any non-residential account may apply for rebates under the program. Commercial lighting is the largest component of the program. In 1991, 59% of the lifecycle savings realized through the program resulted from lighting projects, and commercial customers’ retrofits represented 78% of those savings.



In order to participate in the program, the customer fills out a one-page application form after purchasing and installing the qualifying products, attaches the original paid invoice, and mails the form to PG&E. Upon receipt of the completed application and applicable invoices, program staff verify that the application is correct, and a rebate check is sent to the customer. The maximum rebate is $100,000 per customer per year.



Annual energy savings due to the Retrofit Program more than doubled between 1990 and 1991, peak capacity savings increased by 24%, and lifecycle savings nearly quadrupled. This increase in savings was due to a shift in program focus to lighting measures, as well as the increased activity inspired by the California Collaborative which called for a dramatic increase in DSM expenditures and emphasis on measured savings. Whereas lighting projects in all sectors made up 22% of the annual savings in 1990, lighting accounted for 41.2% of the annual program savings in 1991. The Retrofit Program’s expenditures increased six-fold between 1989 and 1990, to $6.2 million, and then doubled to $12 million in 1991. The majority of PG&E’s costs for implementing the Retrofit Program are incentive payments in the form of rebates. In 1991, incentive payments were almost $11 million, while administrative costs were approximately $1.1 million.



Perhaps the most successful part of the program, second only to the actual savings achieved, is its evolution. Through a continual process of feedback from its customers, and through comprehensive evaluation, PG&E has been able to refine the program to increase its efficacy. For instance, PG&E found that its rebate application forms were cumbersome, so it standardized the forms for simplicity. Additionally, rebate levels were increased for some measures, making them more attractive. Conversely, some rebate levels were lowered to better reflect the incentive required by the measure. Finally, the Retrofit Program is nicely dovetailed with PG&E’s Customized Rebate Program. (See Profile #4) As technologies and state-of-the-art applications become common in the customized incentive program, what were innovative efficiency measures are shifted over to and incorporated into the more straightforward Retrofit Program, serving to transform the market for energy efficiency retrofits.

 

 

[CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE ENTIRE 20 PAGE PROFILE IN PDF FILE FORMAT]


This profile was produced by
 

Energy, Mines and Resources Canada, R-2000 (residential-new construction), Profile #26


   EXECUTIVE SUMMARY



The R-2000 program was initiated by Energy, Mines and Resources (EMR) in 1981 with the goal of affecting the construction of energy-efficient homes in Canada by establishing a new energy performance standard, training builders to construct houses to that standard, and stimulating the demand for such homes. R-2000 has become one of the best known new residential construction programs of its kind. Its homes are as much as 50% more energy-efficient than homes built to Canada’s existing codes and the program has proven to be a viable means of stimulating the construction of energy-efficient homes regardless of R-2000 certification.



To date more than 6,000 R-2000 have been built, mostly in Ontario, accounting for less than 1% of all new Canadian homes built since the inception of the program. In addition, many builders incorporate R-2000 standards into their homes even though they do not seek R-2000 certification. EMR estimates that at least an additional 14,000 to 15,000 homes (about 1.5% of the new home construction market) have been built to R-2000 standards since the onset of the program.



In order to be registered as an R-2000 builder, a builder must complete the training program and construct a demonstration home which is inspected during and after construction. Certified builders must submit subsequent plans to their regional office where energy use is evaluated using the HOT-2000 heat loss simulation program. R-2000 certificates are then provided to the homebuyers.



In some regions builders can receive grants for their R-2000 homes. Ontario Hydro, for example, pays C$2,000 to the homebuyer and gives the same incentive to the builder as long as the home is built in a non-gas supplied area. In New Brunswick, the regional utility pays C$1,000 to the homebuyer and the Bank of Montreal offers a 1/4 point reduction on mortgage rates for R-2000 homes. Since the inception of the program it has saved Canadians over C$150 million in energy savings from the R-2000 homes built. However, R-2000 has impacted the entire building industry in Canada. The total program cost spent by EMR and CHBA between the years 1981 and 1991 was about C$50 million. Program costs in 1991/1992 were C$1.2 million.



Perhaps more important than the energy savings directly by R-2000 houses has been the program’s overall effect on improving energy efficiency in new homes. It is estimated that between 1980 and 1992, the average level of energy efficiency in new homes in Canada has increased by as much as 50%. Much of this improvement is due to the R-2000 program’s promotion to consumers and builders and the training provided to builders in constructing energy-efficient homes. Since the program began, over 5,000 builders have been trained, with more than 300 actively participating in the program. Many of the builders who were trained through R-2000 but are not actively participating are still constructing homes that meet or come close to R-2000 standards. EMR has also announced a new program called Advanced Houses. While R-2000 homes use about half the energy of typical Canadian standards, Advanced Houses use about a quarter the energy of typical new homes.

 

[CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE ENTIRE 15 PAGE PROFILE IN PDF FILE FORMAT]


This profile was produced by
 

Seattle City Light, Lighting Design Lab (commercial), Profile #27


   EXECUTIVE SUMMARY



The Lighting Design Lab (referred to as "the Lab" and "LDL") is a unique project in the Northwest, conceived by the Natural Resources Defense Council and the Northwest Conservation Act Coalition, funded jointly by the Bonneville Power Administration, Seattle City Light, and a growing list of other sponsors (including in-kind donations by manufacturers of energy-efficient lighting technologies). The lab is operated by Seattle City Light.



In 1986, Seattle City Light, the Natural Resources Defense Council, and the Northwest Conservation Act Coalition developed a proposal to Bonneville Power Administration for a 1.5-year pilot research and demonstration project to promote state-of-the-art lighting strategies for commercial buildings. The Lab was to be part of an $18 million program that would provide the region with a host of lessons on commercial sector efficiency, akin to BPA's Hood River Conservation Project. (See Profile#12) While the grand scheme was not ultimately accepted, negotiations resulted in a commitment by BPA to provide 70 percent of the Lab's $2 million cost while the remaining 30 percent would come from various other sponsors.



LDL is located in Seattle and was opened in 1988 with the objective of providing energy-efficient lighting information to a wide variety of lighting professionals in the commercial sector, and to conduct tours, consultations, classes, demonstrations, and other educational activities on state-of-the-art energy-efficient lighting strategies and design.



Unlike most Results Center case studies, the Lighting Design Lab is focused on education, acting as a centralized resource center on efficient lighting products for the Pacific Northwest. The Lab's product is information, conveyed through the physical demonstration of new technologies and strategies. LDL demonstrates a variety of products from over 40 different manufacturers. The information is presented functionally through free classes, demonstrations, displays, tours, consultations and simulations available to anyone in the region.



In 1991, BPA extended the Lighting Design Lab budget for an additional five years, (from 9/1/91 through 12/31/97) with a total cost of $3,917,933. While its effect is difficult to quantify, and an imprecise exercise at best, the success and competence of the Lighting Design Lab has sparked interest all over the world.

  

[CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE ENTIRE 16 PAGE PROFILE IN PDF FILE FORMAT]


 

 

 

This profile was produced by

Southern California Edison, Energy Mgmt Hardware Rebates (com'l/ind'l/agricultural), Profile #28


   EXECUTIVE SUMMARY



Southern California Edison’s Energy Management Hardware Rebate Program (EMHRP) has been providing incentives for energy efficiency improvements to commercial, industrial, and agricultural (CIA) customers since 1978. Measures range from lighting and space conditioning improvements to building envelope enhancements to motor upgrades. As a function of the program all installations are preapproved and cash rebates are issued for up to 30% of the installed cost of the measures with no maximum rebate.



Customers are guided through the simple rebate process by an SCE Energy Services Representative who conducts an energy survey, recommends applicable energy-efficient measures, and issues a coupon authorizing the customer to proceed with installation of selected measures. After installation is completed, the representative returns and performs an inspection, receives copies of the invoices, and validates the coupon. Customers then redeem the coupon, receiving a check within four to five weeks after the coupon is received by SCE.



Although the EMHRP has existed in one form or another since 1978, several program enhancements have been made over the years including adding measures to the list of eligible measures and changing rebate amounts. In 1988 a new customized rebate category was added that allows customers to receive rebates for measures not on the eligible measure list.



Rebate amounts are calculated in a number of ways. In no case will a rebate be paid for more than 30% of the customer’s investment. SCE awards rebates based on savings of kW and kWh, based on tonnage of cooling saved, square footage of windows treated, thousands of BTUs saved (water heating improvements), and horsepower saved through motor retrofits.



Between 1987 and 1991, EMHRP generated a total of 596.4 GWh in annual energy savings, and 147.5 MW in annual capacity savings. Lifecycle savings have totalled 8,312 GWh. The program has shown significant progress since the Collaborative stimulated activity in 1990. Annual savings between 1990 and 1991 more than doubled to 192 GWh, with capacity savings in 1991 of 35.8 MW. Most of the 1991 savings were attributed to projects within the commercial sector, where 123.8 GWh in annual savings were realized.



Program expenditures in 1991 far exceeded expenditures in any other year, and were accompanied by unprecedented participation rates and energy savings. In fact, the budgeted incentive funds were depleted by April, 1991, and program managers had to reapportion the budget in order to meet program needs without requesting additional funding. Expenditures on incentives in 1991 were $20.5 million, with total program cost of $23.8 million. The Results Center calculates the cost of saved energy for the program, using a 5% discount rate, ranging from 0.26 ¢/kWh in 1987 to 1.23 ¢/kWh in 1991.

  

[CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE ENTIRE 18 PAGE PROFILE IN PDF FILE FORMAT]


This profile was produced by