E-2Evidence of ENSC as DSM Administrator
14 passages
DATE FILED: February 27, 2012 Page 1 of 45 1 The June 30, 2011 UARB Order also directed ENSC to: 2 3 engage stakeholders regarding changes to the Program Development 4 Working Group (PDWG) or the creation of a new stakeholder process – 5...
AI summary The UARB directed ENSC to engage stakeholders regarding changes to the Program Development Working Group, meet quarterly with UARB staff, and provide enhanced information on rate and bill impacts for the 2013 DSM Plan. ENSC was also ordered to review cost allocation methodology and address three issues related to CFL disposal, financing, and savings evaluations.
To aid in the preparation of the 2013-2015 DSM Plan, ENSC retained the advice and assistance of Navigant, Dunsky Energy Consulting (Dunsky) and Elenchus Research Associates Inc. (Elenchus). ENSC also received input and counsel from DSM sta...
AI summary ENSC worked with consultants and stakeholders to develop the 2013-2015 DSM Plan, drawing on prior experience and engaging in multiple consultation sessions. Topics discussed include cost allocation methodologies and multi-year DSM planning frameworks.
An avoided cost of $135/MWh was provided by NSPI in February 2012 and includes the combined cost of energy and capacity. & lt;sup>a Lifetime benefits are expressed as the net present value of the avoided costs, including energy and capacit...
AI summary The text discusses avoided costs provided by NSPI in 2012, including energy and capacity costs, and introduces metrics such as lifetime benefits, TRC, and PAC for evaluating program efficiency. It references figures showing program level savings and investment for 2013 to 2015.
An avoided cost of $135/MWh was provided by NSPI in February 2012 and includes the combined cost of energy and capacity. DATE FILED: March 30, 2012 & lt;sup>a Lifetime benefits are expressed as the net present value of the avoided costs, i...
AI summary The text discusses an avoided cost of $135/MWh provided by NSPI in February 2012, which includes energy and capacity costs. It also references metrics like TRC and PAC, which compare lifetime benefits to program costs, and mentions participation by low-income households.
An avoided cost of $135/MWh was provided by NSPI in February 2012 and includes the combined cost of energy and capacity. & lt;sup>a Lifetime benefits are expressed as the net present value of the avoided costs, including energy and capacit...
AI summary The text discusses avoided costs provided by NSPI in 2012, including energy and capacity costs. It also explains metrics such as lifetime benefits, TRC, and PAC, which compare benefits and costs over the life of program measures, including participation by low-income households.
An avoided cost of $135/MWh was provided by NSPI in February 2012 and includes the combined cost of energy and capacity. DATE FILED: March 30, 2012 & lt;sup>a Lifetime benefits are expressed as the net present value of the avoided costs, i...
AI summary The document references an avoided cost of $135/MWh provided by NSPI in February 2012, which includes both energy and capacity costs. It also introduces metrics such as TRC and PAC, which are benefit/cost ratios used to evaluate the lifetime benefits of energy efficiency programs against associated costs.
DATE FILED: February 27, 2012 Page 28 of 45 1 5. COST ALLOCATION, RATE AND BILL IMPACTS ENSC's 2012 DSM Plan included a preliminary program cost allocation for allocating electricity DSM costs to NSPI ratepayers in accordance with the DSM...
AI summary ENSC's 2012 DSM Plan included a cost allocation approach for NSPI ratepayers based on a 2009 settlement agreement. The Board ordered ENSC to review and propose a new methodology for cost allocation in conjunction with its 2013 DSM Plan.
On June 30, 2011, the Board ordered ENSC to develop and file, no later than September 30, 2011, its policy to track time and costs for electric and other fuel mandates. The June 30, 2011 Board Order also directed ENSC to undertake the nece...
AI summary In 2011, the UARB ordered ENSC to develop a policy for tracking time and costs related to electric and fuel mandates, and to consult stakeholders on cost allocation for DSM programs. ENSC hired Elenchus to develop a cost allocation model, review DSM cost allocation approaches, prepare preliminary cost tables, and analyze rate and bill impacts.
With this Application, ENSC is seeking: - approval of the 2013-2015 DSM Plan, provided as Appendix A, and its associated multi-year framework as outlined in Section 3 - approval to transfer the responsibility for filing the annual DCRR adj...
AI summary ENSC is seeking approval for the 2013-2015 DSM Plan, transfer of responsibility for filing the DCRR adjustment to ENSC from NSPI, and revisions to the DSM Cost Allocation Methodology starting with the 2013 DSM plan year.
Figure 1.1 - 2013-2015 DSM Plan Savings and Investment Year Investment ($ million) Lifetime Benefits ($ million) a Incremental Annual Net Energy Savings at Generator (GWh) Incremental Annual Net Demand Savings at Generator (MW) Total Resou...
AI summary Figure 1.1 presents data on the 2013-2015 DSM Plan Savings and Investment, including investment amounts, lifetime benefits, energy savings, and cost tests. The data is presented in millions of dollars and gigawatt-hours, with figures for each year and total investments and savings over the period.
CRITERIA: PERFORMANCE DRIVERS LATITUDE OVERSIGHT Components No D isin ce nti ve s Inc en tiv es Re so urc es Re sp on siv en es s Ab ilit y t o C om mi t Tra ns pa ren cy Sa feg ua rds Inf lue nc e Co st Examples Are profits unaffected by...
AI summary The document evaluates the performance drivers and oversight criteria for Efficiency Nova Scotia (ENSC), focusing on incentives, resources, transparency, and cost considerations. It notes that ENSC has no sales disincentives, has a budget on the higher end of the typical range, and has moved to a 3-year approval process with some long-term predictability still missing.
Attachment 1-4 E-ENSC-R-12 Line # TA BLE 3 (2013) I Preliminary Al location of I Program Costs s among rate classes 1 2 COLUMN Α В C D E F G Н 3 4 FORMULA Table 2 Table 1 Table 2 5 Column K Column H Column L C + E 6 diture by Rate lass the...
AI summary The document presents a table detailing the allocation of program costs across various rate classes in 2013, including the distribution of expenses among different categories such as residential, industrial, and municipal. It shows the amounts and relative shares for each category, indicating how costs are divided and allocated.
E-ENSC-R-12 ne# т. ABLE 3 (2014) F Preliminary A llocation of I Program Costs among rate classes 1 2 COLUMN Α В С D E F G н 3 3020 _ • _ _ • • •• 4 FORMULA Table 2 Table 1 Table 2 5 Column K Column H Column L C + E 6 Total Expendit ure by...
AI summary The document presents a table detailing the allocation of program costs among different rate classes in 2014. It shows the distribution of expenditures across various categories, with percentages and dollar amounts provided for each rate class, including residential, small general, general demand, large general, industrial, and others.
COLUMN A B C D E F G M N O Program cost s incurred on p articipating rate classes Small General $ 1,796,658 4.0% 265,893 2.4% 1,347,494 4.0% 1,613,387 3.6% General Demand $ 13,790,439 30.5% 2,779,174 24.6% 10,342,829 30.5% 13,122,003 29.0%...
AI summary The table presents program costs incurred on participating rate classes across various categories, including Small General, General Demand, Large General, Small Industrial, Medium Industrial, Large Industrial, and others, with associated percentages and monetary figures.
E-2(r)Revised ENSC Evidence
12 passages
DATE FILED: February 27, 2012 Page 1 of 45 1 The June 30, 2011 UARB Order also directed ENSC to: 2 3 engage stakeholders regarding changes to the Program Development 4 Working Group (PDWG) or the creation of a new stakeholder process – 5...
AI summary The UARB directed ENSC to engage stakeholders regarding changes to the Program Development Working Group, meet quarterly with UARB staff, and provide enhanced information on rate and bill impacts for the 2013 DSM Plan. ENSC was also ordered to review the cost allocation methodology and address issues related to CFL disposal, financing, and savings evaluations.
To aid in the preparation of the 2013-2015 DSM Plan, ENSC retained the advice and assistance of Navigant, Dunsky Energy Consulting (Dunsky) and Elenchus Research Associates Inc. (Elenchus). ENSC also received input and counsel from DSM sta...
AI summary ENSC worked with consultants and stakeholders to develop the 2013-2015 DSM Plan, building on prior experience and engaging in multiple consultation sessions to refine the framework and cost allocation methodologies.
& lt;sup>a Lifetime benefits are expressed as the net present value of the avoided costs, including energy and capacity, over the life of the program measures. & lt;sup>b TRC is a benefit/cost ratio comparing lifetime benefits to the sum o...
AI summary The text discusses lifetime benefits, TRC, and PAC ratios in the context of energy efficiency programs, highlighting avoided costs and participation by low-income households.
DATE FILED: February 27, 2012 Page 28 of 45 1 5. COST ALLOCATION, RATE AND BILL IMPACTS ENSC's 2012 DSM Plan included a preliminary program cost allocation for allocating electricity DSM costs to NSPI ratepayers in accordance with the DSM...
AI summary ENSC's 2012 DSM Plan included a preliminary cost allocation methodology for DSM costs to NSPI ratepayers, based on a 2009 settlement agreement. The Board ordered ENSC to review the methodology in consultation with stakeholders and file its proposed approach with the 2013 DSM Plan.
On June 30, 2011, the Board ordered ENSC to develop and file, no later than September 30, 2011, its policy to track time and costs for electric and other fuel mandates. The June 30, 2011 Board Order also directed ENSC to undertake the nece...
AI summary In 2011, the UARB ordered ENSC to develop a policy for tracking time and costs related to electric and fuel mandates. ENSC retained Elenchus to develop a cost allocation model, review DSM cost allocation approaches, prepare preliminary tables for the 2013-2015 DSM Plan, and analyze rate and bill impacts for NSPI ratepayers.
DATE FILED: February 27, 2012 Page 30 of 45 were held in person and by telephone to provide further briefings to stakeholders and their expert advisors who were unable to attend the November 3 session. The purpose of this stage of the cons...
AI summary This document discusses the stakeholder consultations on the DSM Cost Allocation Approach, including the recommended allocation of costs based on system and participating class benefits. It outlines two key recommendations: maintaining a 25/75 split for system and participating class benefits, and using the System/Participant Benefit approach for Enabling Strategies costs.
Tables showing the preliminary allocation of DSM program costs to electricity customer rate classes are provided in Appendix C, Attachment 1. The DSM costs for 2013-2015 1 include overhead costs based on a proportional mark-up to direct pr...
AI summary The document discusses the preliminary allocation of DSM program costs to electricity customer rate classes, including changes in methodology from using customer count to proportional mark-up based on total direct costs. It also outlines the process for annual rate rider adjustments and mentions the transfer of responsibility from NSPI to ENSC.
5.1 PRELIMINARY ALLOCATION OF DSM COSTS Tables showing the preliminary allocation of DSM program costs to rate classes are provided in the Attachment 1. To prepare these costs, Elenchus used the 2013-2015 DSM costs provided by ENSC, and in...
AI summary The preliminary allocation of Demand Side Management (DSM) program costs to rate classes is detailed in Attachment 1, using 2013-2015 DSM costs provided by ENSC for reference.
5 All residential rate classes use the same unit fixed cost estimate TABLE 2 (2013) Preliminary Allocation of 75% of DSM Program Costs associated with benefits realized by participating classes Gen. Repl. / Load Foll. -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ $ - -$...
AI summary The document discusses the allocation of 75% of DSM program costs across different residential rate classes, using a uniform unit fixed cost estimate for all classes. The table outlines preliminary cost allocations for various categories such as Generation Replacement, Wholesale Market Backup, and others.
E-ENSC-R-12 1 COLUMN A B C D E F G H Program Cost Recovery by Benefits System Benefits 25% $ 12,591,593 Combined Class and Participant Benefits 75% $ 37,774,780 Total 100% $ 50,366,374 Functionalization of system Benefit DSM Classification...
AI summary The document outlines the cost recovery for a demand-side management (DSM) program, allocating 25% of the total program cost to system benefits and 75% to combined class and participant benefits. It further details the distribution of demand-related and energy-related costs across different rate classes, with the residential class accounting for the largest share of both types of costs.
33 E-ENSC-R-12 TABLE 3 (2015) Preliminary Allocation of Program Costs among rate classes COLUMN A B C D E F G H FORMULA Table 2 Table 1 Table 2 Column K Column H Column L C + E System Benefit Costs (25% of the total expenditure allocated t...
AI summary This table outlines the preliminary allocation of program costs among different rate classes in 2015. It shows the distribution of costs across various categories such as residential, industrial, and municipal, with a breakdown of system benefit costs and participating class benefit costs.
SAVINGS 2013 2014 2015 Gross Savings (Incr. Ann.) 1st Yr Electricity Svgs (MWh) 20,330 25,391 30,816 Levelized-Lifetime (MWh) 230,543 290,735 358,749 Net Savings (Incr. Ann) 1st Yr Electricity Svgs (MWh) 10,150 12,768 15,664 Levelized-Life...
AI summary The Green Heating Systems initiative demonstrates cost-effectiveness with savings increasing from 2013 to 2015. Gross and net electricity savings rose annually, while unit costs remained stable. The program passed both the Total Resource Cost and Program Administrator Cost tests, showing that for every dollar invested, ENSC achieved approximately $2.87 in savings.
E-7ENSC (Avon) Responses to IR-1 to IR-27 (REDACTED)
5 passages
Gen. Repl. / Load Foll. 1P-RTP Wholesale Market Backup / Top-up 1 Date Filed: March 30, 2012 ENSC Avon IR-3 Page 8 of 8 2 \ Applies 2012 cost allocation forecast to estimated participation rates for 2012. This is a proxy based on available...
AI summary This document discusses the application of a 2012 cost allocation forecast to estimated participation rates for 2012, noting that these rates may not accurately reflect actual spending by customer rate class.
DSM Technical Tables Residential Table # Measure Name Peak Demand First Tear Energy I Otal Avoided Cost TRC rotarnet Resource Peak Demand Energy I Otal Avoided Cost TRC rotarnet Resource Peak Demand First fear Energy ι οται Avoided Cost TR...
AI summary The DSM Technical Tables present data on demand-side management measures, including savings, energy usage, costs, and benefits for various residential energy efficiency programs. The tables compare different years and metrics such as total avoided cost and TRC (Total Resource Cost) ratios.
Lifetime benefits are expressed as the net present value of the avoided costs, over the life of the program measures.
AI summary The text discusses the calculation of lifetime benefits for program measures, expressed as the net present value of avoided costs over the life of the program.
20 1 The funding for the national market study on fenestration is shared with the Nova Scotia 19 enabling strategies will be able to be more accurately assigned reflecting a truer cost 20 of service? 21 22 e) Does ENSC agree that the DSM t...
AI summary The text discusses cost allocations for Enabling Strategies under the 2012 DSM Plan, including revisions to amounts allocated to the Large Industrial and Residential classes. It also references a true-up lag and a response confirming the shared funding for a national market study on fenestration.
21 5 Source: 2012 DSM Revised Appendix B Preliminary Program Cost Allocation 1 Request IR-22: 2 3 Reference: Appendix C, Footnote 1 to Attachment 1-4, Table 2(b) (2013), Attachment 1-9, 4 Table 2(b) (2014) and Attachment 1-14, Table 2(b) (...
AI summary The document discusses a request for updated forecasts and cost allocation tables related to the 2012 DSM Revised Appendix B. ENSC confirmed they received an updated forecast for 2012 from NSPI and made adjustments to the Preliminary Cost Allocation Tables based on this information. They also made additional adjustments using 2011 actual allocated costs and estimated the allocation of Enabling Strategies by customer sectors.
E-7(r)ENSC (Avon) Responses to IR-1 to IR-27 (REVISED) (REDACTED)
5 passages
Date Revised: April 18, 2012 1 Request IR-7: 2 3 Reference: Figure 4.1 ENSC Evidence, p. 18 states that "an avoided cost of $135/MWh was 4 provided by NSPI in February 2012 and includes the combined cost of energy and 5 capacity." (Also no...
AI summary The document contains a request (IR-7) asking for details on the avoided cost of $135/MWh provided by NSPI, including its components, time frame, and reasoning for identical costs across 2013-2015. The response refers to Synapse reports for supporting calculations and explains that the cost is levelized over 2012-2032, with factors like load and fuel cost considered.
- 2 Repository. 1 Request IR-10: 12 Reduction of costs to reflect the fact that DSM is considered less risky than 13 building generation capacity. 14 15 Lower discount rates for Net Present Value estimates. 16 17 Inclusion of partici...
AI summary The text discusses requests for adjusting cost calculations related to demand-side management (DSM), including lower discount rates, inclusion of non-energy benefits, and attributing future energy savings to residential programs. It also requests revised tables using specific avoided costs.
23 c) The potential loss of significant load would be reflected in NSPI's avoided costs. Please 24 refer to Multeese IR-6 and Synapse IR-14. 1 Request IR-17: 2 3 Reference: 4.4 Capacity Building Programs (Appendix A, pp. 27-28) 4 5 a) Plea...
AI summary The text refers to the potential loss of significant load and its reflection in NSPI's avoided costs, citing Multeese IR-6 and Synapse IR-14. It also includes a request for details on training and associated expenses for capacity building programs for trade allies, with a response providing a table of training programs, participants, and costs for 2013, 2014, and 2015.
24 1 The funding for the national market study on fenestration is shared with the Nova Scotia 19 enabling strategies will be able to be more accurately assigned reflecting a truer cost 20 of service? 21 22 e) Does ENSC agree that the DSM t...
AI summary The text discusses the funding for a national market study on fenestration shared with Nova Scotia and revisions to the preliminary cost allocation for Enabling Strategies under the DSM Plan. It outlines changes in allocation amounts for different customer classes and references supporting documents.
21 5 Source: 2012 DSM Revised Appendix B Preliminary Program Cost Allocation Request IR-22: Reference: Appendix C, Footnote 1 to Attachment 1-4, Table 2(b) (2013), Attachment 1-9, Table 2(b) (2014) and Attachment 1-14, Table 2(b) (2015), s...
AI summary The document discusses a request for updated forecasts from MEUNSC and NSPI for 2012 and 2013-2015, as well as the use of 2011 actual allocated costs and Enabling Strategies allocation estimates in updating preliminary cost allocation tables.
E-9(r)ENSC (Consumer Advocate) Responses to IR-1 to IR-27 (REVISED)
4 passages
- 5 ample opportunity for the UARB and stakeholders to ensure oversight and accountability. 1 Request IR-5: 2 3 Please provide ENSC's views of the impact of a three year program versus a one year 4 program on projected Total Resource Cost...
AI summary The text discusses ENSC's response to requests regarding the impact of a three-year program versus a one-year program on Total Resource Cost (TRC) and Program Administration Cost (PAC) tests for 2013-15. ENSC suggests that a three-year program would reduce costs and improve TRC and PAC ratios. Additionally, it references load forecasts from 2006 to 2011 and compares them with those from earlier Integrated Resource Plans (IRPs).
Date Filed: March 30, 2012 ENSC CA IR-21 Page 1 of 1 1 Request IR-22: 2 3 Please provide as detailed and realistic as possible an example of the allocation of costs 4 between taxpayer and ratepayer components, based on the proposed budget...
AI summary The response to Request IR-22 provides examples of cost allocation between taxpayer and ratepayer components. It outlines how direct program costs, administrative overhead, and general program administration are allocated based on the proposed 2013 budget and anticipated program activity.
3 4 ENSC's financial statement audit is a cost that is not "caused" by the number of staff or 5 space, but by the overall business activity. In accordance with the Cost Allocation 6 Methodology, this cost is allocated to ratepayer and taxp...
AI summary ENSC's financial statement audit cost is allocated between ratepayer and taxpayer programs based on their direct program costs. In 2011, ratepayer costs were $31.7 million and taxpayer costs were $5.3 million, leading to an allocation of $19,700 to ratepayers and $3,300 to taxpayers for the $23,000 audit cost.
Date Filed: March 30, 2012 ENSC CA IR-23 Page 1 of 1 1 Request IR-23: 2 3 Please provide all available information on the planned allocation of the costs of enabling 4 strategies. 5 6 Response IR-23: 7 8 Please refer to Avon IR-14. 1 Reque...
AI summary The document contains a series of requests and responses related to cost allocation, rate riders, and bill impact tables. It references prior filings (Avon IR-14, Avon IR-22) and outlines the need for updated information on cost-recovery mechanisms and energy requirements.
E-11(r)ENSC (Multeese) Responses to IR-1 to IR-11 (REVISED) (REDACTED)
3 passages
upgrades, in the Low Income program. 1 Request IR-2: 23 within a Program, plus the summation of the ENSC incentive costs by measure within a 24 program. 25 26 Lifetime Benefits is a summation of the avoided energy costs and avoided capacit...
AI summary The text discusses the Low Income program, focusing on the calculation of incentive costs, energy savings, and demand savings by measure. It outlines the TRC and PAC tests used to evaluate program effectiveness, including specific data for the Efficient Products program, such as measure life, NTG, participant numbers, and cost details.
CONFIDENTIAL (Attachment 3) 1 Request IR-6: 2 3 With respect to NSPI's avoided costs, as provided by NSPI in February: 4 5 a) Please describe the method used to estimate these avoided costs. 6 7 b) If the method in a) is not based on adjus...
AI summary The document outlines a request and response regarding Nova Scotia Power Inc.'s (NSPI) avoided costs from demand-side management (DSM). The response explains that the 2012 avoided costs were calculated using the same methodology as the 2009 Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) Update, comparing the costs of a plan with and without DSM. The avoided costs include both energy and capacity, with a 20% increment for reserve margin requirements.
3 c) With fixed costs representing less than 10% of the total costs, a 25% increase or decrease 4 in participation, on a weighted average basis, would increase or decrease the PAC ratio 5 by less than 0.02 and the TRC ratio by less than 0....
AI summary The text discusses the minimal impact of a 25% change in participation on the PAC and TRC ratios, given that fixed costs are less than 10% of total costs, with changes in the ratios being less than 0.02 and 0.01 respectively.
E-12ENSC (Synapse) Responses to IR-1 to IR-14 (REDACTED)
3 passages
Figure 4.4 2015 Lifetime Benefits ($ million) a TRC Lifetime Costs ($ million) b TRC Lifetime Net Benefits ($ million) c Total Resource Cost Test (TRC) d RESIDENTIAL DSM PRO GRAMS Efficient Product Rebates e 10.9 7.0 3.9 1.6 Existing Resid...
AI summary Figure 4.4 presents a table summarizing the lifetime benefits, costs, and net benefits of various demand-side management (DSM) programs in Nova Scotia, including residential, business, and enabling strategies. The table highlights the Total Resource Cost Test (TRC) for each program category.
Request IR-7: 2 1 - With regard to Figures 4.3, 4.4 and 4.5 of the Evidence, please provide the results for the - 4 PAC test in terms of costs, benefits, and net benefits in cumulative present value dollars for - 5 each year, for each prog...
AI summary The request asks for the results of the 4 PAC test in terms of costs, benefits, and net benefits for each program, sector, and the total portfolio of programs, as presented in Figures 4.3, 4.4, and 4.5 of the Evidence.
12 Rate Class 2013 2014 2015 7 workpapers and calculations. 8 9 b) Please provide separate estimates of avoided energy costs and avoided capacity 10 costs, for each year 2012 through 2032. 11 12 c) Please provide a table presenting the Nov...
AI summary The document requests detailed information on avoided energy and capacity costs for Nova Scotia Power Incorporated from 2012 to 2032, including transmission and distribution costs and compliance with greenhouse gas regulations. Response IR-14 explains the methodology, referencing a confidential attachment and a long-term value of $135/MWh.
E-19ENSC Financial Statements - December 31, 2011
4 passages
8. INTERFUND TRANSFERS The Corporation's management transferred $435,591 (2010 - $51,844) from the EDSM Fund and $112,593 (2010 - nil) from the Provincial Fund to the Capital Asset Fund for the purchase of furniture and fixtrures and lease...
AI summary The Corporation transferred funds from the EDSM Fund and Provincial Fund to the Capital Asset Fund for purchasing furniture, fixtures, and leasehold improvements. The transfer amounts were determined based on the Full-Time Equivalents of staff resources assigned to the programs, as per the CAM.
10. ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE 2011 2010 Electricity Electricity Demand Side Demand Side Management Provincial Management Provincial Fund Fund Total Fund Fund Total $ $ $ $ $ $ NSPI receivables 11,100,184 - 11,100,184 4,126,627 - 4,126,627 Other...
AI summary The section discusses accounts receivable for 2011 and 2010, including receivables from the Electricity Demand-Side Management (EDSM) Fund and other receivables. In 2011, other receivables were $998,573, net of a valuation allowance of $272,000, compared to $0 in 2010.
$ 2012 131,386 2013 131,386 2014 131,386 2015 65,693 c) The Corporation entered into contract commitments for various energy efficiency programs. Commitments for customer incentives are recognized in the year the energy savings have been c...
AI summary The document shows consistent values of approximately $131,386 for the years 2012 to 2014, followed by a significant decrease to $65,693 in 2015. The Corporation has entered into energy efficiency program commitments, with customer incentives recognized when energy savings are claimed and material commitments for program service delivery in 2012 totaling approximately $418,000.
17. COST ALLOCATION METHODOLOGY The Corporation engages in electricity demand-side management ("EDSM Fund") and other energy efficiency and conservation programs ("Provincial Fund"). The costs in each fund include direct costs of the progr...
AI summary The Corporation manages EDSM and Provincial Fund programs, allocating costs based on FTEs and direct costs, with oversight by the UARB. This methodology includes joint and common costs, administrative overhead, and salary expenses.
E-24Avon (Drazen) Evidence (Redacted)
4 passages
- The above numbers include some capital cost. In fact, the avoided fuel cost in 2012 was1 - calculated by NSPI to be $53.6/MWh.2 - 3 Q IN THE LOAD RETENTION RATE PROCEEDING, NSPI STATED THAT THE AVOIDED COSTS - 4 FOR THAT PURPOSE WERE BAS...
AI summary The text discusses the avoided fuel costs and load retention rate proceeding, highlighting differences in cost calculations between the load retention rate and DSM. NSPI explains that the difference is not due to the time frame of avoided costs or the magnitude of load reduction but rather due to the running costs of base load fossil-fired units.
- 2013 , as compared to the "with DSM" forecast of GWh. Lingan 2, which is forecast11 1 to have 2013 output of GWh in the "with DSM" forecast is now only forecast to 2 have output of GWh (a capacity factor) in the 2013 GRA. 3 Another indic...
AI summary The document discusses discrepancies in avoided energy cost estimates, specifically highlighting a reduction in load forecast by NSPI and its impact on fuel savings. It also addresses anomalies in the avoided cost backup data, including a mismatch between DSM load reduction and generation forecasts, and the lack of complete data on unit performance.
Table 9 Measures with Negative Net Benefits Program Measure TRC Costs (000) TRC Net Benefit ($000) TRC Ratio Residential–existing houses Solar Hot Water Heater, replacing electric water heater (Table 2.1) $1,633 -$893 0.5 Residential–Low I...
AI summary Table 9 identifies measures with negative net benefits, including solar hot water heaters and retrofit envelope measures for low-income residential programs. The table highlights TRC costs, net benefits, and ratios. The question focuses on the impact of lower avoided costs on TRC benefit/cost ratios.
Table 10 TRC Benefit/Cost Ratio with Change in Avoided Costs TRC Costs TRC Ratio TRC Ratio Program Measure ($000) As Filed Revised Residential – Power Bar $275 0.9 0.7 Efficient Products With Timer (Table 1) Residential – Refrigerator 2,05...
AI summary Table 10 presents the TRC benefit/cost ratio for various residential energy efficiency programs, showing that changes in avoided costs have reduced the ratio for the Residential Existing Home and Residential Low Income programs to below 1.0, with total costs exceeding $12 million.