E-22024 DSM Programs Evaluation Reports
92 passages
2.1.4 Effective Useful Life Review As part of the DSM MA update in 2024, the Evaluator reviewed the EUL values for existing and new measures to ensure they were valid and revised them where appropriate. The EUL update was based on a litera...
AI summary The 2024 DSM MA update reviewed and revised EUL values for energy measures using technical references from other jurisdictions. Adjusted EUL calculations considered baseline evolution and lifetime savings, applied to programs like Affordable Single-family Homes and Mi'kmaw Home Energy Efficiency Project, with updated metrics for multifamily housing heat pumps.
Table 5: Comparison of 2024 Evaluated and Tracked Energy Savings at the Generator a Tracked Results Evaluated Results Program Component Annual Gross Savings (GWh) Annual Net Savings (GWh) Annual Gross Savings (GWh) NTGR b Annual Net Saving...
AI summary Table 5 compares the 2024 evaluated and tracked energy savings for various programs in Nova Scotia. It highlights discrepancies between gross and net savings, as well as differences in net savings and net realization rates for each program component, including Appliance Retirement, Instant Savings, Affordable Multifamily Housing, and others.
Table 6: Comparison of 2024 Evaluated and Tracked Peak Demand Savings at the Generator a Program Component Tracked Results Evaluated Results Difference DSM Program Annual Gross Savings (MW) Annual Net Savings (MW) Available Capacity (MW) A...
AI summary Table 6 compares the evaluated and tracked peak demand savings at the generator for various programs in 2024. It shows results for residential, BNI, and demand response programs, highlighting differences in net savings and available capacity, along with net realization rates for each component.
Affordable Multifamily Housing - › Despite a slight increase (5%) in participation compared to 2023 levels, AMH achieved lower gross electrical energy and peak demand savings than in 2023. - › In 2024, prescriptive projects generated the m...
AI summary AMH participation rose 5% in 2024 but achieved lower energy and peak demand savings than 2023. Prescriptive projects dominated savings (80% energy, 88% peak demand). Evaluator adjusted savings upward for electrical energy (1.016 ratio) but downward for peak demand (0.003-0.006 MW reductions). Net savings aligned closely with E1 tracking despite adjustments.
Table 9: 2024 Evaluated GHG Emission Reductions DSM Program Program Component Gross Annual Avoided GHG Emissions in CO2 eq Tonnes Net Annual Avoided GHG Emissions in CO2 eq Tonnes Residential Efficient Appliance Retirement 1,981 1,117 Prod...
AI summary Table 9 presents evaluated greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reductions for 2024 under various demand-side management (DSM) programs in Nova Scotia. The table includes both gross and net annual avoided emissions in CO2 equivalent tonnes for different program components, such as appliance retirement, product rebates, and energy assessments.
Table 12: Evaluated Net Electrical Energy Savings at the Generator, 2020-2024 Energy Savings (GWh) Energy Savings (%) DSM Program Program Component 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Residential Residential Appliance Retirem...
AI summary Table 12 presents evaluated net electrical energy savings from various DSM programs in Nova Scotia from 2020 to 2024, highlighting contributions from residential, BNI, and overall portfolio programs, with significant energy savings percentages and GWh values reported for each category and year.
Table 13: Evaluated Net Peak Demand Savings at the Generator, 2020-2024 Peak Demand Savings (MW) Peak Demand Savings (%) DSM Program a Program Component 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Residential Residential Efficient Ap...
AI summary Table 13 presents evaluated net peak demand savings from various Demand Side Management (DSM) programs in Nova Scotia from 2020 to 2024. It details savings by program type, including residential and BNI programs, and provides both megawatt (MW) and percentage savings for each year.
b Affordable Single-family Homes was introduced in 2024. c Custom includes four services: Retrofit, Pay-for-Performance, New Construction, and Building Optimization. d Strategic Energy Management includes Energy Management Information Syst...
AI summary The document discusses the introduction of Affordable Single-family Homes in 2024 and mentions the integration of Strategic Energy Management with Energy Management Information Systems in 2023. It also outlines the components of the Custom program, which includes Retrofit, Pay-for-Performance, New Construction, and Building Optimization.
5 Process Evaluation Results For the 2024 evaluation, the Evaluator conducted four process evaluations for Affordable Multifamily Housing, Affordable Single-family Homes, Business Energy Rebates – Instant Rebates, and Custom New Constructi...
AI summary The 2024 evaluation focused on four programs: Affordable Multifamily Housing, Affordable Single-family Homes, Business Energy Rebates – Instant Rebates, and Custom New Construction, assessing their process effectiveness.
Affordable Multifamily Housing To collect information on participant and distributor perspectives, the Evaluator conducted interviews with program staff, energy auditors (EAs), and participants. The key findings specific to the Affordable...
AI summary The Evaluator gathered perspectives from program staff, energy auditors, and participants to assess the Affordable Multifamily Housing initiative, highlighting key findings from the process evaluation.
› The Evaluator surveyed high levels of satisfaction overall. All 10 interviewed participants said that they were highly satisfied with Affordable Multifamily Housing and "would definitely" recommend the program component to other housing...
AI summary The Evaluator found high satisfaction with the Affordable Multifamily Housing (AMH) program, with all 10 interviewed participants reporting strong approval and a Net Promoter Score of 100. Energy Auditors praised the program's simplicity and upgrade selection, highlighting its ease of implementation and effectiveness.
› Costs and lack of budget are barriers to participation. Financial barriers constitute the main reasons most interviewed dropped-out participants withdrew from the program component. The majority had no budget available for building maint...
AI summary Financial barriers and lack of budget are primary reasons for participant withdrawal from programs, with most dropped-out participants citing unavailable funds for maintenance and efficiency upgrades. Affordable Multifamily Housing participants also highlighted low rental rates and ad-hoc repair approaches. Co-funding and low-interest financing are proposed as critical support mechanisms.
› Term lengths are not a significant problem. No participants, dropped-out participants, or non-participants expressed significant concern about Affordable Multifamily Housing term lengths. Reducing the agreement terms from 12 years to 10...
AI summary The Evaluator concludes that term length adjustments for Affordable Multifamily Housing (AMH) projects (reducing from 12/6 to 10/5 years) did not significantly affect stakeholder concerns, and E1 need not revise operating agreement terms. No major objections were raised by participants or non-participants.
Custom New Construction To explore opportunities to expand service presence outside of the electrically heated MURB market, the Evaluator analyzed the tracking sheet, performed secondary research, conducted interviews with participants, mo...
AI summary The Custom New Construction service evaluation found higher success in MURBs than non-MURBs, with 24 of 27 2024 projects being MURBs. HRM dominance is expected due to population density and streamlined permitting. Adjusting building size eligibility criteria could expand reach outside HRM, aligning with NECB 2020 Part 9 standards.
EfficiencyOne
AI summary The document introduces EfficiencyOne (E1), a program under Nova Scotia's energy efficiency initiatives, and lists related acronyms and terms. It outlines programs like Demand-Side Management (DSM), Affordable Multifamily Housing (AMH), and Business Energy Rebates (BER), highlighting their roles in energy conservation and affordability.
AMH Findings and Recommendations This subsection presents the key findings and recommendations from the 2024 AMH evaluation. 2024 AMH-Finding: AMH generated high levels of satisfaction overall. Interviewed participants were highly satisfie...
AI summary The 2024 AMH evaluation found high participant satisfaction but noted confusion over incentive tax calculations and a need for project management support. Recommendations include case studies for clarity, technical guides, and audit template improvements. EAs expressed dissatisfaction with audit reporting templates, prompting suggestions for streamlining.
1 AMH Overview This section describes Affordable Multifamily Housing (AMH), follows up on past evaluation recommendations, and provides an overview of AMH participation history.
AI summary This section outlines Affordable Multifamily Housing (AMH), addresses past evaluation recommendations, and summarizes participation history. It focuses on program oversight and implementation progress for AMH initiatives in Nova Scotia.
1.1 AMH Description AMH provides affordable housing owners and non-profit organizations, such as rehabilitation or transition houses, with incentives for building-wide energy retrofit projects with the intent of reducing electrical and non...
AI summary AMH provides incentives for energy retrofits in affordable multifamily housing and non-profits, requiring energy audits unless using a prescriptive path. Funding comes from electricity ratepayers and the Province of Nova Scotia, with incentive amounts adjusted over time. The program targets 1.900 GWh in electrical savings and 1.581 MW in peak demand reduction by 2024.
1.2 Follow-up on Past Evaluation Report Recommendations No recommendations were made for AMH in the 2023 evaluation.
AI summary The 2023 evaluation report did not provide recommendations for Affordable Multifamily Housing (AMH), indicating no follow-up actions were required based on previous evaluations.
1.3 Participation History Since 2021, AMH savings are generated by two types of projects, namely comprehensive and prescriptive projects. In 2024, 83 projects generating electrical energy savings were completed under AMH, including 19 comp...
AI summary The Affordable Multifamily Housing (AMH) program in Nova Scotia saw 83 projects completed in 2024, generating 1.159 GWh of electrical energy savings and 0.570 MW of peak demand savings. Prescriptive projects dominated (80% of savings), though savings per project decreased compared to 2023. Comprehensive projects increased from 11 to 19, reflecting stabilization after prior growth driven by heat pump projects.
2 AMH Evaluation Approach The 2024 AMH evaluation comprised a comprehensive impact evaluation as well as a process evaluation. The main objectives of the 2024 AMH evaluation were as follows: - › Collect information on participant and EA pe...
AI summary The 2024 AMH evaluation involved both impact and process evaluations, with objectives including collecting participant and EA perspectives and calculating energy savings and GHG emissions. Research questions, methods, and sample sizes were outlined in a table.
Table 5: 2024 AMH Evaluation Approach Evaluation Objectives Research Questions Methodology Collect information on program staff, participant, and EA perspectives › How did participants become aware of the program component? › What is the l...
AI summary Table 5 outlines the 2024 evaluation approach for the Affordable Multifamily Housing (AMH) program, focusing on collecting perspectives from program staff, participants, and Energy Auditors (EAs). It includes research questions about participant awareness, motivations, satisfaction, challenges, and recommendations, with methodology involving interviews.
Energy Auditor Interviews In October and November 2024, Narrative Research conducted interviews with four EAs involved in AMH to obtain their perspectives on the program component and to assess its perceived effectiveness. The guide used f...
AI summary In October and November 2024, Narrative Research interviewed four Energy Auditors (EAs) involved in Affordable Multifamily Housing (AMH) to assess the program's perceived effectiveness. The interview guide is detailed in Appendix II.
3 AMH Stakeholder Perspectives This section presents an analysis of stakeholder perspectives on AMH. Stakeholders include AMH participants, dropped-out participants, non-participants, EAs, and E1 staff. It should be noted that, due to the...
AI summary This section analyzes stakeholder perspectives on Affordable Multifamily Housing (AMH), including participants, non-participants, and Energy Auditors (EAs). Due to small sample sizes, results are presented as raw numbers rather than percentages.
3.1 Awareness About AMH
AI summary This section addresses awareness regarding Affordable Multifamily Housing (AMH) within a regulatory proceeding, focusing on its significance and potential implications for stakeholders in Nova Scotia.
3.2.2 Reasons for Initial Interest Among Dropped-out Participants and Non-participants As seen above among participants, when it comes to why dropped-out participants and non-participants were initially interested in AMH, cost-related fact...
AI summary Dropped-out participants and non-participants in AMH were primarily motivated by rebates/financial support, followed by energy efficiency and cost savings. Expectations were vague, with most anticipating financial incentives but unclear on specifics. Negative past rebate experiences tempered some expectations.
3.3.1 Participant Satisfaction Overall, participants were highly satisfied with AMH , with all 10 participants providing a score of 9 or 10 and the average overall satisfaction score being 9.7.[7](#page-16-0) When asked about their satisfa...
AI summary Participants in the Affordable Multifamily Housing (AMH) program expressed high satisfaction, with all scoring 9 or 10. They were particularly pleased with installed upgrades, work quality, rebate amounts, and the application process. One participant had neutral satisfaction with upgrade selection, program duration, and rebate timing, but overall complaints were minimal and likely unrelated to AMH.
In general, participants who were able to answer were highly satisfied with the AMH forms and reports , including preapproval documentation, the rebate request form, and the upgrade recommendation report. The one comprehensive path partici...
AI summary Participants generally expressed high satisfaction with the AMH forms and reports, including preapproval documentation, rebate request forms, and upgrade recommendation reports. Some feedback suggested improvements, such as allowing bulk submissions and saving progress on online forms.
3.3.2 Energy Auditor Satisfaction As with AMH participants, EAs appear satisfied overall with AMH as illustrated in [Figure](#page-21-0) 12 below. They are particularly content with the selection of upgrades available through the program c...
AI summary Energy auditors (EAs) are generally satisfied with the AMH program, particularly with the selection of upgrades and communication with EfficiencyOne (E1). However, dissatisfaction arises from the 10-day reporting timeframe, the simulator software, and the non-user-friendly Word-based reporting templates. EAs also noted a lack of information on building systems prior to visits.
Managing Projects and Finding Contractors Over and above the E1 service provided throughout AMH participation, some EAs receive requests from participants for additional project management assistance . EAs mention that participants are som...
AI summary Energy Auditors (EAs) report that Affordable Multifamily Housing (AMH) participants often lack project management skills and struggle to secure contractors, causing delays and affecting rebate calculations. E1 staff recommend enhanced project management support, while supply chain cost increases have influenced incentive adjustments.
EA Staff Planning Finally, one EA mentioned that having a limited number of AMH projects makes it difficult for them to ensure an adequate staff complement at all times and that their staff may forget aspects of AMH if only a few audits ar...
AI summary An Energy Auditor (EA) highlighted challenges in maintaining adequate staffing for Affordable Multifamily Housing (AMH) projects due to their limited number, risking staff unfamiliarity with AMH-specific audit requirements.
3.3.4 Affordability Covenant
AI summary The Affordability Covenant section outlines commitments related to ensuring energy programs and initiatives are accessible and affordable for residents and businesses in Nova Scotia, particularly focusing on low-income and multifamily housing.
AMH Participant Perceptions Questions about perceptions of the affordability covenant were posed to the six AMH participants with MURBs.[9](#page-24-0) All six indicated they charge rent to their tenants and therefore were obligated to agr...
AI summary Six AMH participants with MURBs reported positive or neutral perceptions of the affordability covenant, citing fairness in term length and rental rates. Most were already affordable housing providers, so the covenant did not alter their operations. One concern noted government divestment risks, while one participant suggested adjusting HRM rent caps.
Dropped-out Participant and Non-participant Perceptions Across the 14 dropped-out participants and non-participants who charge rent to tenants, opinions on the AMH operating agreement/affordability covenant tended to be highly polarized ;...
AI summary Perceptions of dropped-out participants and non-participants regarding AMH's affordability covenant were highly polarized. Positive views linked higher rental rates to current market levels, while opposition stemmed from perceived low rates. E1 is revising affordability criteria and rental rate methodologies, with some advocating for Halifax-specific rates. Term lengths had minimal impact on opinions.
3.3.5 Participant Questions and Concerns Participants' questions to EAs during the initial energy audit visit vary based on their level of understanding of AMH, their knowledge of their building's construction, and/or their interest in the...
AI summary Participants ask Energy Auditors about AMH rebates, next steps, and building operations, with heating systems and insulation being the most common topics. Questions include backup heating, insulation costs, and electrical system compatibility.
3.4 Participant and EA Suggestions for Improvements AMH participants were presented with a list of seven tools and supports that could be offered to help them navigate the program component. Two of the top three tools/supports mentioned as...
AI summary AMH participants emphasized affordability tools like co-funding and low-interest financing as critical. EAs suggested administrative improvements (e.g., delivery agent portals, streamlined reporting) and training enhancements. Additional recommendations included heat pump tutorials, window upgrades, and solar panel eligibility.
Alternative Programs Two dropped-out participants and five non-participants stated that they either had taken part in a program other than AMH or had plans to do so in the near future. One dropped-out participant noted that they had not ex...
AI summary Participants and non-participants in the AMH program cited administrative burdens and eligibility issues as barriers to engagement. Some opted for alternative programs like E1 (targeting affordable housing) or CMHC initiatives. Interviewees expressed interest in reapplying to AMH if other programs didn’t conflict. Limited funding sources were reported, with Housing Nova Scotia and CMHC funds mentioned as supports.
Budget Half (5/10) of interviewed AMH participants specified a numeric answer in terms of their budget for building maintenance and efficiency upgrades . The remaining five participants indicated they either did not know or did not have a...
AI summary Half of AMH participants reported annual budgets for building maintenance and efficiency upgrades ranging from $500-$300,000 (average $3,625/year after removing an outlier). Non-participants and dropped-out participants typically lacked formal budgets, relying on ad hoc repairs. Non-profit organizations and smaller buildings were more likely to lack structured budgets.
3.7 Overview of AMH Strengths and Challenges The following provides a summary of the strengths and challenges associated with AMH.
AI summary The section outlines a summary of strengths and challenges associated with Affordable Multifamily Housing (AMH), though specific details are not elaborated in the provided text.
AMH Strengths: - › Financial support for affordable housing - › Provides a comprehensive list of upgrades that can be implemented over time - › 50% incentive received before project end - › Potential energy cost savings - › High overall sa...
AI summary The AMH program offers financial support, 50% upfront incentives, energy cost savings, and high participant and EA satisfaction. It features clear forms, a 100 NPS, and no concerns about agreement terms, highlighting its effectiveness and user-friendliness in multifamily housing upgrades.
AMH Challenges: - › Participation limited by availability of capital funds and lack of budget - › Rent control requirements make AMH unattractive to some - › Some participant confusion over proportion of costs covered by rebate - › Increas...
AI summary Affordable Multifamily Housing (AMH) faces challenges including limited capital funds, rent control disincentives, rebate confusion, rising supply chain costs, contractor shortages, building preparation needs, project management gaps, non-user-friendly templates, and inadequate initial building data for Energy Auditors (EAs).
4 AMH Impact Evaluation The objectives of the 2024 AMH impact evaluation were to determine gross and net electrical energy and peak demand savings, annually avoided GHG emissions, as well as the EUL and associated lifetime energy savings.
AI summary The 2024 AMH impact evaluation aimed to assess gross and net electrical energy and peak demand savings, annually avoided GHG emissions, and the Effective Useful Life (EUL) of AMH programs alongside their lifetime energy savings.
4.2 Gross Savings Gross savings correspond to the change in energy consumption resulting from various electrical energy saving upgrades such as building envelope measures, space heating measures, and domestic hot water (DHW) measures imple...
AI summary Gross savings reflect energy consumption reductions from electrical upgrades by AMH participants, including building envelope, heating, and DHW measures. Methodology for evaluating 2024 AMH gross savings includes assessing interactive effects and EUL values.
4.2.1 Energy Savings For the 2024 AMH evaluation, the Evaluator conducted desk reviews of five comprehensive projects and 10 prescriptive projects. The reviews served to establish the evaluated savings and adjustment ratios if possible.
AI summary The 2024 AMH evaluation involved desk reviews of 15 projects (5 comprehensive, 10 prescriptive) to assess energy savings and determine adjustment ratios. This process aimed to quantify program effectiveness and inform energy efficiency outcomes for affordable multifamily housing.
Adjustment Ratio Summary The above changes resulted in three different adjustment ratios for energy savings[. Table](#page-31-0) 8 summarizes the energy savings adjustment ratios and margins of error obtained for the different AMH project...
AI summary The text outlines three energy savings adjustment ratios for AMH project categories, with Table 8 detailing values (e.g., 0.873 for Comprehensive, 1.016 for Prescriptive Heat Pump) and margins of error. One-time adjustments are noted for non-extrapolatable categories, while prescriptive categories apply to all 2024 projects.
4.2.3 Interactive Effects In a home, interactive effects occur when the implementation of energy efficiency measures has an impact on the energy consumption of other factors such as heating and cooling. The interactive effects of space hea...
AI summary Interactive effects in energy efficiency measures, such as heating and cooling, are addressed in savings calculations for comprehensive projects. The 2024-2025 DSM MA includes these effects for prescriptive projects. Evaluators assumed lamps operating 10+ hours daily coincided with peak hours, using a peak coincidence factor of 1, while others used annual operating hours divided by total yearly hours.
Table 11: Evaluated 2024 AMH Gross Energy and Peak Demand Savings Prescriptive Comprehensive Heat Pumps Lighting Total Number of Projects 19 57 7 83 Energy Savings Tracked Gross Energy Savings – at the Meter (GWh) 0.226 0.681 0.153 1.061 A...
AI summary Table 11 presents the evaluated 2024 AMH gross energy and peak demand savings, including tracked energy savings, adjustments, and lifetime energy savings. It also outlines peak demand savings and their adjustments. GHG emissions reductions are calculated using a Nova Scotia-specific factor applied to the energy savings results.
4.3 Net Savings The Evaluator determined the net energy and peak demand savings, i.e. the electrical energy and peak demand savings that can be reliably attributed to a program component, by estimating the net-to-gross ratio (NTGR). More p...
AI summary The Evaluator calculated net energy and peak demand savings using the net-to-gross ratio (NTGR), accounting for spillover and free-ridership effects. For AMH, NTGR was set to 1.00 due to negligible free-ridership and spillover impacts from participants' limited budgets for building improvements.
Table 13: Comparison of 2024 AMH Tracked and Evaluated Savings at the Generator Gross Savings NTGR Net Savings Realization Rate Value Unit Value Value Unit Value Energy Savings Tracked Savings by E1 1.158 GWh 1.00 1.158 GWh Evaluation Resu...
AI summary Table 13 compares the 2024 AMH tracked and evaluated savings at the generator, showing that net evaluated savings are nearly identical to tracked savings, with minor differences attributed to the application of the adjustment ratio and one-time adjustments.
2024 AMH-Finding: The Evaluator surveyed high levels of satisfaction overall . All 10 interviewed participants said that they were highly satisfied with AMH and "would definitely" recommend the program component to other housing providers...
AI summary The Evaluator found high satisfaction with AMH, with all 10 interviewed participants reporting a Net Promoter Score of 100. Participants praised AMH's simplicity and ease of use, while Energy Auditors (EAs) highlighted satisfaction with upgrade selections.
2024 AMH-Finding: Some participants would benefit from project management support. Based on comments from E1, EAs and participants, project management assistance, technical/maintenance support, and help finding contractors would be useful...
AI summary The 2024 AMH-Finding highlights that participants in Affordable Multifamily Housing (AMH) programs require project management support, technical assistance, and contractor help to avoid delays and program withdrawals. Recommendations include providing technical guides, case studies, and enhanced information on energy efficiency upgrades like heat pumps and insulation.
2024 AMH-Finding: Rental rates in the operating agreement cause division among dropped-out participants and non-participants. Opinions on the operating agreement among dropped-out participants and non-participants were polarized. Negative...
AI summary The 2024 AMH-Finding highlights that rental rates in the operating agreement are perceived as below market rates by dropped-out participants and non-participants, creating division. Adjusting these rates to align with current market conditions is deemed critical to improve perceptions of AMH. E1 regularly reviews rental rates for alignment with market trends.
2024 AMH-Finding: Term lengths are not a significant problem. No participants, dropped-out participants, or non-participants expressed significant concern about AMH term lengths. Reducing the agreement terms from 12 years to 10 years (for...
AI summary Participants in the 2024 AMH program did not express significant concerns about term lengths. Adjusting terms from 12 to 10 years (comprehensive projects) and six to five years (prescriptive projects) had minimal impact on perceptions. The Evaluator concludes that E1 does not need to revise term lengths as they are not a barrier to participation.
2024 AMH-Finding: AMH net electrical energy savings and peak demand savings fell short of targets. In 2024, AMH achieved 1.159 GWh in net electrical energy savings and 0.570 in net peak demand savings at the generator, falling short of pla...
AI summary In 2024, the Affordable Multifamily Housing (AMH) program achieved 1.159 GWh in net electrical energy savings and 0.570 in net peak demand savings, falling short of targets by 39% and 64%, respectively.
2024 AMH-Finding: In 2024, despite a slight increase in participation compared to 2023, AMH achieved lower savings than in 2023. AMH reached its highest participation rate since inception with 83 completed projects generating electrical sa...
AI summary In 2024, AMH achieved lower energy and peak demand savings compared to 2023 despite an 83-project completion rate (5% higher than 2023). Prescriptive projects showed 31% and 29% declines in energy and demand savings, while comprehensive projects saw 85% and 89% increases, but overall savings remained 21% and 23% lower than 2023.
7 ASFH Evaluation Approach The 2024 evaluation consisted of a condensed impact evaluation and a process evaluation. The main objectives of the 2024 ASFH evaluation were as follows: - › Collect information on program staff, partner, and par...
AI summary The 2024 evaluation of the Affordable Single-family Homes (ASFH) program focused on collecting perspectives from program staff, partners, and participants, as well as calculating gross and net energy savings, peak demand savings, and avoided GHG emissions. The evaluation included both impact and process components, with key research questions, methods, and sample sizes outlined in a table.
Table 19: Tracked and Evaluated 2024 ASFH Equivalent EUL Values Measure Tracked Equivalent EUL [years] Evaluated Equivalent EUL [years] Building Envelope (Modelled) 20.8 20.5 Space Heating Equipment (Modelled) 20.8 20.5 9.2.5 Evaluated Gro...
AI summary Table 19 presents the tracked and evaluated Equivalent Useful Life (EUL) values for building envelope and space heating equipment in 2024. The values are slightly lower in the evaluated column compared to the tracked column, indicating a minor adjustment in the estimated lifespan of these measures.
The annual gross savings at the meter of modelled and non-modelled measures are presented in [Table](#page-69-0) 20 and [Table](#page-69-1) 21 below respectively. [Table](#page-70-0) 22 further below combines the savings of all ASFH measur...
AI summary The text discusses the presentation of annual gross savings for modelled and non-modelled measures in tables, with a specific focus on Affordable Single-Family Housing (ASFH) measures and their combined savings.
As presented in [Table](#page-70-0) 22 below, appliances replaced through Appliance Replacement (refrigerator, freezer, and dehumidifier replacements) resulted in gross electrical energy savings at the generator of 0.045 GWh and gross peak...
AI summary Appliance replacements in Nova Scotia resulted in significant energy savings, with 0.045 GWh of gross electrical energy savings and 0.008 MW of peak demand savings. The average Effective Useful Life (EUL) for Affordable Single-Family Housing (ASFH) was 20.0 years in 2024.
As presented in [Table](#page-70-1) 23, GHG emission reductions were calculated by applying the Nova Scotia-specific factor[25](#page-70-2) for GHG emissions generated by electricity production to ASFH gross savings results.
AI summary GHG emission reductions were calculated using a Nova Scotia-specific factor applied to ASFH gross savings results, as presented in Table 23.
Affordable Multifamily Housing Appendix I: AMH Tracking Sheet Audit Appendix II: AMH Energy Auditor Interview Guide Appendix III: AMH Participant Interview Guide Appendix IV: AMH Dropped-out and Non-participant Interview Guide Appendix V:...
AI summary The document outlines appendices related to Affordable Multifamily Housing (AMH), including audit tools, interview guides, and evaluation protocols, supporting program implementation and participant engagement tracking.
APPENDIX II AMH Energy Auditor Interview Guide
AI summary This document is an interview guide for energy auditors in the Affordable Multifamily Housing (AMH) program, part of a Nova Scotia regulatory proceeding. It outlines procedures for assessing energy efficiency in multifamily housing, aligning with broader demand-side management (DSM) and energy efficiency initiatives.
Table 1: Overview of Data Collection Activity Descriptor This Instrument Instrument Type Telephone interview Estimated Time to Complete 20 min Target Audience Affordable Multifamily Housing program (AMH) Energy Advisors Expected Number of...
AI summary This document outlines data collection activities for evaluating the Affordable Multifamily Housing (AMH) program, focusing on feedback from Energy Advisors. It includes research objectives and sections for assessing program strengths, challenges, and recommendations for improvement.
Introduction Please could I speak with ? - 1. Yes [CONTINUE] - 2. Not available [ASK WHEN PERSON MIGHT BE AVAILABLE] Hello, my name is ____________________ and I'm calling from Narrative Research, a Halifax based market research company, o...
AI summary The text is a script for contacting program partners to evaluate Efficiency Nova Scotia's Affordable Multifamily Housing Program, which offers free energy audits and rebates for energy upgrades. The goal is to gather opinions through 15-minute interviews.
A. Motivations for Participating - A1. From your experience, what are participants' main motivations for taking part in the Affordable Multifamily Housing program? [MULTIPLE RESPONSES. RECORD FIRST MENTION SEPARATELY] [DO NOT READ] - 1. (T...
AI summary The text asks about motivations for participating in the Affordable Multifamily Housing program, with responses including financial incentives, energy efficiency, cost savings, comfort improvements, and environmental benefits.
B. Overall Strengths and Weaknesses - B1. What are the main strengths of the Affordable Multifamily Program in your opinion? What else does the program do well? [OPEN END] . - B2. And what are the main challenges of or barriers to the prog...
AI summary The section seeks input on the Affordable Multifamily Program's strengths, weaknesses, and challenges, focusing on its effectiveness and barriers to implementation. It includes open-ended questions about program performance and areas for improvement.
E. Satisfaction - E1. On a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 is "Not at all satisfied" and 10 is "Completely satisfied," how satisfied are you with each of the following ten aspects of the Affordable Multifamily Housing program? [DO NOT RANDOMIZE]...
AI summary The text outlines a satisfaction survey for the Affordable Multifamily Housing program, evaluating aspects like information provision, audit processes, software tools, and communication with Efficiency Nova Scotia, including open-ended feedback opportunities.
F. Recommendations for Program Improvements - F1. What information, tools, support, or training would make your role in the Affordable Multifamily Housing program easier? [OPEN END] - F2. Do you have any ideas how to better communicate or...
AI summary The section seeks stakeholder input on improving the Affordable Multifamily Housing (AMH) program through better tools, communication strategies, and additional recommendations. Four open-ended questions focus on enhancing program effectiveness, participant engagement, and overall improvements.
APPENDIX III AMH Participant Interview Guide
AI summary This document is the title of an appendix containing an interview guide for participants in the Affordable Multifamily Housing (AMH) program, part of a Nova Scotia regulatory proceeding.
B. Awareness and Motivations for Participating - B1. How did you first become aware of the Affordable Multifamily Housing program? [DO NOT READ. SINGLE RESPONSE] - 1. (Efficiency Nova Scotia Energy Solutions Advisor) - 2. (Contractors) - 3...
AI summary The document surveys participants in Nova Scotia's Affordable Multifamily Housing (AMH) program, asking about awareness channels (e.g., Efficiency Nova Scotia, contractors) and motivations (e.g., rebates, energy savings, environmental impact). It also explores knowledge of the program's two pathways (Prescriptive vs. Comprehensive) and reasons for selecting one.
C. Satisfaction C1. [NET PROMOTER SCORE] Using a 0 to 10 scale, where 0 means "Definitely would not" and 10 means "Definitely would", what is the likelihood that you recommend the Affordable Multifamily Housing program to other housing pro...
AI summary The text outlines survey questions assessing participant satisfaction with the Affordable Multifamily Housing (AMH) program, including Net Promoter Score (NPS) and overall satisfaction ratings on 0-10 scales. Instructions specify recording responses without ranges and referencing a visual aid.
[0-10 SCALE WITH END POINT LABELS– RECORD NUMBER] - 98. Don't Know - 99. Refused - C3. [IF [D<](#page-13-1)8] What is the main reason you are not more satisfied with the program overall? Are there other reasons? [PROBE FOR SPECIFIC REASON....
AI summary The text outlines a survey assessing customer satisfaction with Nova Scotia's Affordable Multifamily Housing program, focusing on aspects like application processes, rebate satisfaction, and form usability. It includes 0-10 scales, open-ended responses, and specific probes for dissatisfaction reasons.
- C12. What, if any, unanswered questions do you have about the different technologies installed in your building through the program? Specify 97. None 98. (Don't know) 99. (Refusal) D. Operating Agreement (Affordability Covenant)
AI summary The document asks about unanswered questions regarding technologies installed in buildings through the program, with options for respondents to indicate none, don't know, or refusal. It then moves to a section titled 'Operating Agreement (Affordability Covenant)' on page 23-3.
E. Recommendations for Program Improvements - E1. Do you have any (other) recommendations for improving the Affordable Multifamily Housing program? [PROBE] Anything else? [DO NOT READ. ACCEPT MULTIPLE KEEPING CODE 97, 98 AND 99 EXCLUSIVE]...
AI summary The section seeks recommendations to improve the Affordable Multifamily Housing program, focusing on rebate adjustments, program simplification, and communication methods. It includes options for increasing rebates, improving online portals, and enhancing participant support tools.
F. Annual Energy Efficiency and Budget - F1. Moving on to a different topic, what is your annual budget for building maintenance and efficiency upgrades? - 1. Specify $______________ - 98. (Don't know) - 99. (Refusal) - F2. Did you conside...
AI summary The document includes questions about annual energy efficiency budgets, payback periods for the Affordable Multifamily Housing (AMH) program, and tenant utility cost responsibilities. Respondents are asked to specify budgets, confirm payback period considerations, and disclose tenant utility payment practices.
APPENDIX IV AMH Dropped-out and Non-Participant Interview Guide
AI summary Appendix IV presents an interview guide for engaging with individuals who dropped out of or did not participate in the Affordable Multifamily Housing (AMH) program, focusing on understanding barriers and experiences.
[NOTE FOLLOWING VARIABLES FROM DATABASES: - - PATH (PRESCRIPTIVE OR COMPREHENSIVE) - - HOUSING TYPE (MURB, ROOMING HOUSE, RENTAL/CO-OPERATIVE (1-3 UNITS), RENTAL/CO-OPERATIVE (4+ UNITS), NON-BED, SHELTER] S2. [ASK DROPPED OUT PARTICIPANTS...
AI summary The document requests participants to specify the number of units in a multi-unit residential building (MURB) at a given address, with options for 1-3 units, 4+ units, or refusal to disclose. The question focuses on building type and unit count for regulatory proceedings.
A. Program Awareness and Initial Motivations to Participate - A1. To start, how did you first learn about Efficiency Nova Scotia's Affordable Multifamily Housing program? [DO NOT READ LIST. ACCEPT MULTIPLE RESPONSES] - 1. (Efficiency Nova...
AI summary The text outlines survey questions about awareness and motivations for participating in Efficiency Nova Scotia's Affordable Multifamily Housing program. It asks how respondents learned about the program, what attracted them, and their expectations. It also mentions two participation pathways: Prescriptive and Comprehensive.
B. Reasons for Ending / Barriers to Participation - B1. [ASK DROPPED OUT PARTICIPANTS ONLY] The information I have shows that you have not continued your participation in the Affordable Multifamily Housing program for the building at < INS...
AI summary The document outlines reasons for participants dropping out of the Affordable Multifamily Housing (AMH) program, including communication issues, ineligibility, application difficulties, and dissatisfaction with program terms. It seeks detailed feedback on the stage of exit and specific barriers encountered.
C. Affordability Covenant - C1. [ASK IF HOUSING TYPE NON-BED. IF HOUSING TYPE = NON-BED, CODE AS NO] Do you charge rent to tenants in your building/at your facility? - 1. Yes - 2. No - 99. (Refused) - C2. [ASK IF C1=YES] You may recall tha...
AI summary This section of the regulatory proceeding focuses on the Affordability Covenant, specifically the terms of the multi-year transferrable Affordable Multifamily Housing Operating Agreement. It seeks input on perceptions of the agreement, including its term length, rental rates, and potential modifications to improve its appeal.
C7. [ASK IF CODE 2 AT C5 OR C6] What would be an acceptable term length in your opinion? [SINGLE RESPONSE.] PRESCRIPTIVE PATH ACCEPTABLE TERM: years COMPREHENSIVE PATH ACCEPTABLE TERM: years 98. 99. (Don't know) (Refusal) D. Alternatives f...
AI summary The text presents a series of questions related to energy efficiency programs, including acceptable term lengths for programs, participation in other energy efficiency initiatives, and energy efficiency upgrades implemented in the past year. The questions are part of a survey or data collection process.
E. Suggested Improvements - E1. What could Efficiency Nova Scotia do to improve the Affordable Multifamily Housing Program? [OPEN END] - E2. How helpful would the following tools or support be to the program? [READ AND RANDOMIZE. ASK FOR E...
AI summary Efficiency Nova Scotia seeks input on improving the Affordable Multifamily Housing Program, including tools like case studies, contractor assistance, and low-interest financing, as well as preferred communication methods for rebate information.
F. Interest in the AMH Program - F1. [DO NOT ASK IF INELIGIBLE AT ANY PART OF [B4](#page-32-0) (CODE 3, 4, 5)] Would you be extremely interested, interested, not very interested or not at all interested in [INSERT IF DROPPED-OUT PARTICIPAN...
AI summary The text outlines survey questions assessing participant interest in completing or reapplying to the Affordable Multifamily Housing (AMH) Program. It explores reasons for disinterest, potential motivators, and willingness to engage with Efficiency Nova Scotia. The focus is on gauging program engagement and identifying barriers to participation.
APPENDIX V AMH Protocol for Desk Reviews Desk reviews were conducted to measure information and validate if this information was correctly modelled or used in savings calculations. Table 1 presents the protocol used for project reviews.
AI summary Desk reviews were conducted to assess the accuracy of information and its correct modelling or use in savings calculations, as outlined in Table 1 of the AMH Protocol for Desk Reviews.
Table 1: Protocol Used for Project Reviews Project ID Facility Address Project Contact Name Project Contact Phone Number Project Contact Email Measure Count 1 2 Total Measure Description Energy Savings Methodology Used for Calculating Savi...
AI summary The document outlines a protocol for project reviews, focusing on verifying energy savings calculations, ensuring proper modeling and calibration of buildings, and assessing discrepancies between claimed savings and documentation. It also includes a section on recommendations for Affordable Multifamily Housing (AMH) in 2024.
This appendix summarizes all the recommendations made by the Evaluator as part of the 2024 AMH evaluation. Section Recommendations Executive Summary Recommendation #1: To further aid understanding, consider providing participants with case...
AI summary The appendix outlines four recommendations from the Evaluator's 2024 AMH evaluation, focusing on improving participant understanding, support, audit reporting efficiency, and awareness of co-financing options. The document also references an appendix containing a telephone survey questionnaire for ASFH participants.
This appendix summarizes all the recommendations made by the Evaluator as part of the 2024 ASFH evaluation. Section Recommendations Executive Summary Recommendation #1: To assess progress with participant wait times, E1 could track wait ti...
AI summary The appendix outlines seven recommendations from the Evaluator for improving the 2024 ASFH evaluation, focusing on participant experience, program clarity, communication, and administrative efficiency for delivery agents and contractors.
4.1.1 Subsector Participation As shown in [Figure](#page-195-3) 6, [14](#page-195-4) MURBs have made up most of the New Construction projects since 2022. MURB and non-MURB participation was about equal during 2020 and 2021, then non-MURB p...
AI summary The text discusses trends in subsector participation for New Construction projects, noting that Multi-Unit Residential Buildings (MURBs) became the majority since 2022. While overall participation slightly declined, MURB projects remained dominant, with significant growth in 2024. Non-MURB participation decreased during this period.
2024 Custom NC Process Highlights - › There is a relatively high level of participant satisfaction with Custom New Construction overall. - › The service has been more successful in reaching MURBs than non-MURBs inside the HRM. - › There ar...
AI summary The 2024 Custom NC Process shows high participant satisfaction but faces challenges in reaching non-MURBs due to eligibility rules and municipal codes. Builders cite financial risks and upfront costs as major barriers to decarbonization, with concerns about NECB 2020 compliance timelines. Key barriers include high modelling costs, limited modeller participation, and low developer awareness, though the service addresses some issues outside its logic model.
ABBREVIATIONS ADL Average number of dried loads AHRI Air-Conditioning, Heating, and Refrigeration Institute AHRI Air-Conditioning, Heating, and Refrigeration Institute AMH Affordable Multi-family Homes (program component) ARet Appliance Re...
AI summary This document provides a comprehensive list of abbreviations and their expansions relevant to Nova Scotia's regulatory proceedings, covering energy efficiency programs, technologies, and metrics.
Summary Table 39 presents a summary of the values used to calculate faucet aerator savings. The detailed methodology follows.
AI summary Table 39 summarizes the values used to calculate faucet aerator savings, with a detailed methodology provided in the following sections.
5.2.4 Pump Measures
AI summary The section '5.2.4 Pump Measures' outlines regulatory considerations for heat pump technologies, including efficiency standards, rebate programs, and compliance with energy codes like NECB 2020. It addresses implementation challenges, cost recovery, and performance metrics for heat pump adoption in residential and commercial sectors.