2004 2005 single family energy efficiency rebate program evaluation findings and recommendations n.
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
2004/2005 Single Family Energy Efficiency Rebate Program Evaluation * Findings and Recommendations * PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
2004/2005 Single Family Energy Efficiency Rebate Program Evaluation * Findings and Recommendations *

2004/2005 Single Family Energy Efficiency Rebate Program Evaluation * Findings and Recommendations *

150 Vues Download Presentation
Télécharger la présentation

2004/2005 Single Family Energy Efficiency Rebate Program Evaluation * Findings and Recommendations *

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

  1. 2004/2005 Single Family Energy Efficiency Rebate Program Evaluation* Findings and Recommendations * October CALMAC Meeting October 17, 2007 Contact Info Amy C. BuegeItron1111 Broadway, Suite 1800Oakland, California Contact Info Christopher Dyson KEMA Inc. 122 W. Washington Ave., Suite 1000 Madison, WI

  2. Lighting

  3. Lighting Findings • Market Characteristics • CF product availability expanded substantially in last few years. • CFL market shares have increased steadily over last decade. • Consumer awareness of CFLs and CF fixtures has increased substantially in past several years. • 95% of general population aware of CFLs • Nearly a third of the population aware of CF fixtures • The average CFL purchaser household in CA has 7 CFLs installed (out of 41 sockets). • Nearly 60% of CFL purchasers are storing CFLs.

  4. Lighting Findings • Market Barriers • CFL product quality continues to be concern for suppliers/consumers. • Many barriers to CFL purchase and installation continue to exist, no one barrier is dominant. • CFL brightness or price concerns (especially for specialty bulbs). • Both CFLs & incandescent in storage / waiting for bulbs to burn out. • Grocery store purchasers are price sensitive. • Most consumers unaware of specialty bulbs.

  5. Lighting Findings • Program Design • More than 90% of incentives in ‘04/05 were manufacturer buydowns, rest point-of-sale rebates. • Easier for retailers, more value for consumers • Program incentives tied to lumens versus watt, consistent with national ENERGY STAR program. • Program Publicity • Program provided limited direct marketing support to participating lighting suppliers. • Suppliers preferred more rebate $$ and doing their own advertising. • Small retailers were less satisfied with this approach. • In-store CFL promotions have an impact on CFL purchases • One-third of consumers learned about CFLs from in-store displays.

  6. Lighting Findings • Lighting Impacts • Gross impacts calculated based on consumer lighting on-site surveys (with random sample of 2004/2005 CFL purchasers). • Gross realization rate of 64% for kWh and 30% for kW savings. • 76% installation rate • Average hours of use estimated at 2.6 hours (vs. 3.5 ex ante) • Peak usage estimated at 7% (vs. 20% ex ante) • Net to gross ratio calculated based on participating supplier in-depth interviews combined with program tracking data. • Overall NTGR of 62% (i.e., 38% free-ridership) • Big box and home improvement stores – 66 to 75% free-ridership • Drug and small hardware stores – 42 to 51% free-ridership • Grocery and discount stores – 3 to 16% free-ridership • Net realization rate of 47% for kWh and 23% for kW savings. • 2 EULs will be used for lifetime savings estimates.

  7. Lighting Recommendations • Direct incentives of low-wattage CFLs to channels where they are most needed in order to minimize free-ridership: • Reduce or eliminate rebates in big box and large DIY stores. • Increase incentive levels in grocery, drug and discount stores, where very low free-ridership exists and purchasers are very price-sensitive. • Give preferential incentive allocations to these stores that pledge to stock products year-round. • Increase efforts to raise consumer awareness and acceptance of specialty CFLs by: • Continuing to rebate specialty CFLs, ES torchieres and hard-wired fixtures. • Increasing incentive levels for specialty CFLs. • Increasing education and awareness efforts that focus on specialty CFLs. • Supporting quality testing for specialty CFLs.

  8. Lighting Recommendations • Increase CFL installations among CFL purchaser households by: • Limiting the sale of promotional CFLs in multi-packs to keep installation rate from declining and to capture energy savings impacts sooner. • Encouraging consumers to replace working incandescent bulbs now rather than waiting for them to burn out. • Increasing Program focus on specialty CFLs to expand CFL installations. • Engage lighting manufacturers in collaborative working group process to find agreement on: • Uniform ways to provide CFL purchasers with disposal information. • Uniform ways to described mercury risk on product labeling. • Strategies for increasing CFL recycling rates.

  9. Lighting Recommendations • Direct efforts to overcome issues regarding consumer perceptions of CFL quality and performance by: • Offering consumer education regarding improvements in CFL technology. • Ensuring specialty CFLs perform well to ensure acceptance by early adopters. • Continuing Program focus on lumen equivalence to help ensure consumers select appropriate CFL to incandescent wattage. • Consider offering marketing support to smaller retailers, and/or encouraging manufacturers who serve them to provide promotional materials. • Continue to collect and make available to evaluators complete and detailed tracking data for NTG assessments.

  10. Lighting Recommendations • Continue to emphasize manufacturer buydowns over POS rebates since consumers and the Program get more value per dollar spent. • POS rebates may be offered for strategic reasons, e.g., recruiting retailers who are unlikely to participate via the manufacturer buydown. • Continue to calculate free-ridership and spillover using Supplier self-report approach. • This method generated defensible NTG ratio estimates by retail channel and product type and was preferable to attempting to estimate these rates from customer interviews. • Encourage participating suppliers to respond to evaluator requests for surveys and continue to collect and provide current supplier contact information.

  11. Lighting Recommendations • Update Program per unit savings parameters to reflect installation rates of 76%, operating hours of 2.6 hours per day and peak usage of 7%. • Low electricity and demand savings for lighting measures were realized (64% of gross electricity, 30% of claimed gross demand savings). • Gross RR below 100% for most CF bulb categories due to lower evaluation-estimated operating hours and installation rate as compared to Program assumptions.

  12. Non-Lighting

  13. Non-Lighting Findings • Market Characteristics • California consumers rate themselves as fairly knowledgeable about conservation and EE – down since energy crisis • FYP Awareness continues to be high (52% aware, 37% took action) • Program Influence and Participant Satisfaction • Contractors have high level of influence on consumers decision to purchase EE equipment • 40% reported they were very influential, double that of other influences • Majority of Program participants (consumer and supply-side market actors) were satisfied with Program • Most satisfied with Program, equipment and contractor • Least satisfied with rebate turnaround time and bill savings • Appliance dealers and HVAC contractors believe Program needs to improve communications regarding changes

  14. Non-Lighting Findings • Program Design • CA IOUs doing good job of promoting VSDs in residential CAC • 2/3 of HVAC contractors report Program has encouraged greater use of VSDs • Greatest barrier to expanding use of VSDs remains initial cost • HVAC contractors, pool retailers/contractors felt Program needs to increase rebate levels • Reported multi-speed pump rebate too low to encourage participation • Program has increased POS rebates for some measures • Reduces program administration costs and expands participation but may increase FR • Appliance dealers believe Program staff need to do more to enroll them in POS process • Program Publicity • Program has recently prioritized incentives over marketing • Main channels of awareness were utility mass marketing, retail salespeople/POS materials and contractors • More customers report getting rebate applications on-line • HVAC contractors and Pool retailers/contractors have low satisfaction with Program marketing • Retailers miss Program staff visits • Contractors would like more direct consumer marketing

  15. Non-Lighting Findings • Program Impacts • Onsite audits found 97% of HEER measures were installed and qualifying • Non-lighting measures achieved roughly half of goals • 52% of net kWh, 49% of net kW and 46% of net Therm goals • Gross RR of 71% for kWh, 68% for kW and 46% for Therms • Overall NTGR of 62% for kWh and 65% for Therms • Net RR of 52% for kWh, 51% for kW and 37% for Therm savings

  16. Non-Lighting Findings • Measure Level Impact Findings • Central ACs made up 8% and 17% of net kWh and kW savings • High estimated gross savings based on Eng analysis (exceeded estimates by 10-36%) • Insulation savings heavily weighted to SCG (78% kWh, 70% Therm savings) • SCG claimed per unit kWh and Therm savings 3.5x and 2.5x larger than other utilities -- Billing analysis found 55% of kWh and 23% of Therm savings • Clothes Washers accounted for 33% of net Program Therm savings • Engineering models found only 65% of the ex ante Therm savings • Discrete choice analysis estimated 19% FR for clothes washers • Pool Pumps made up ~17% of net Program kWh and kW savings and had Gross RR of 48% (kWh), 33% (kW) based on Eng and Billing analysis • Gross RR linked to model assumption changes re: Pgm mandated runtime and hp reduction • Ex Ante demand reductions difficult to achieve given size of baseline pumps • P-Stats made up > 34% of net Program kWh and Therm savings and had gross and net impacts lower than expected • Billing analysis found < ½ expected kWh, 10% Therm savings (models unstable) • DC and SR NTG estimated ~50% Program participants were free-riders • Heat pumps, dishwashers, gas furnaces, and water heaters had high levels of free-ridership (greater than 42%) based on SR NTG analysis

  17. Non-Lighting Recommendations • Increase efforts to raise Program awareness, such as: • Ramp back up retailer support efforts • Leverage FYP more effectively by tying it to Program measures • Support Pool Pump standards changes: • Help develop educational campaign to prepare contractors for new standards • Increase awareness of utility training opportunities for PP contractors • Increase Rebate Levels for multi-speed pumps • Continue outreach efforts to trade allies to keep them informed • Consider increasing interactions with HVAC contractors and appliance dealers • Offer increasing incentive levels for VSDs to overcome cost barrier • Continue collecting POS data for further analysis • Include NTG ratio updates as key component in future evaluations • Ex ante NTG ratios appear to be high given current CPUC NTG definitions

  18. Questions and Comments??