Topic:"Cost Effectiveness" in M11108

ing control are cost-effective for this case. Figure ES-12. DR Achievable Base Case, Benefit-Cost Assessment by Option (TRC and PAC Test Benefit-Cost Ratios) DR Option Benefits Costs TRC Test PAC Test (NPV 2020 (NPV 2020 Benefit-Cost Ratio...

AI summary The document presents a benefit-cost analysis of various demand response (DR) options, showing that some are cost-effective while others are not. The analysis indicates that cost-effective DR potential is expected to increase to about 80 MW by 2027 and then plateau at around 70 MW from 2035 onward. DLC and CPP are the most significant contributors to this potential.

ghest-impact measures. Additionally, Navigant developed an economic potential scenario using a PAC of 1.0 as the measure screen instead of a TRC of 1.0. Results for this scenario are shown by sector. 5.1 Approach to Estimating Economic Pot...

AI summary The text discusses the estimation of economic potential using the Total Resource Cost (TRC) test, which evaluates the cost-effectiveness of energy efficiency measures. Measures with a TRC ratio of 1.0 or higher are included in the economic potential, as they provide monetary benefits equal to or greater than their costs.

𝐶𝐶𝐶 + 𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴 𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶) Where: » PV( ) is the present value calculation that discounts cost streams over time; using the selected discount rate (6.84%); » Avoided Costs are the monetary benefits resulting from electricity and capacity...

AI summary The document explains the calculation of Total Resource Cost (TRC) ratios for energy efficiency measures, using present value of benefits and costs over the measure’s life. Economic potential is determined by selecting the most effective measure from each competition group that meets the TRC threshold, ensuring no double-counting.

e adoption of DSM measures can be broken down into calculation of the “equilibrium” market share and calculation of the dynamic approach to equilibrium market share, as discussed in more detail below. Market potential differs from program...

AI summary The text discusses the methodology for calculating market potential in energy efficiency, distinguishing it from program potential. It emphasizes the use of Total Resource Cost (TRC) as a cost-effectiveness measure with a threshold of 0.7, aligned with Nova Scotia regulatory practices. The approach focuses on portfolio-level or sector-level analysis rather than program-specific details.

s not allocated back down to measures or sectors for cost effectiveness or net benefits calculations, but was included in total portfolio spending, cost effectiveness, and net benefits calculations. 10 These payback curves represent custom...

AI summary The text discusses the allocation of costs in energy efficiency programs, noting that costs are not allocated back down to specific measures or sectors for cost effectiveness or net benefits calculations, but are included in total portfolio spending. It also mentions payback curves and challenges in estimating indirect costs related to energy information feedback.

Demand Savings (MW, net at generator) Source: Navigant analysis ©2019 Navigant Consulting, Ltd. Page 77 . REDACTED (CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION REMOVED) 2023 Load Forecast Report Synapse IR-30 Attachment 1 Page 86 of 355 Nova Scotia Energy Ef...

AI summary The document discusses the cost-effectiveness of energy efficiency (EE) measures in Nova Scotia, highlighting benefit-cost test ratios for the EE Base Case Market Potential. It notes that these ratios are generally greater than 1.0 across sectors and analysis years, except for the Rate Impact Measure (RIM) test, which shows lower ratios in certain years and sectors.

ct Measure (RIM) test, which has benefit-cost tests less than 1.0 for certain years and sectors. Figure 8-19. EE Base Case Market Potential, Benefit-Cost Test Ratios for the Portfolio and by Sector Total Program Impact Year Cost Test Measu...

AI summary The text references the Rate Impact Measure (RIM) test, which includes benefit-cost tests with ratios less than 1.0 for certain years and sectors. It also mentions Figure 8-19, which displays EE Base Case Market Potential and benefit-cost test ratios for the portfolio and by sector.

2045 3.03 4.25 4.27 0.76 ©2019 Navigant Consulting, Ltd. Page 79 . REDACTED (CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION REMOVED) 2023 Load Forecast Report Synapse IR-30 Attachment 1 Page 88 of 355 Nova Scotia Energy Efficiency and Demand Response Potential...

AI summary Figure 8-20 shows the net benefits for the achievable base case in Nova Scotia's energy efficiency and demand response potential study, by sector and for the portfolio under each benefit-cost test. Net benefits are positive in all cases except the RIM test.

manifests in greater sensitivity than other model inputs, however, any reductions in net-to-gross ratio (as a result of an increase in freeridership) would be captured in the non-programmatic savings. By contrast, the avoided costs and dis...

AI summary The analysis highlights the sensitivity of achievable energy efficiency potential to various factors such as net-to-gross ratios, carbon prices, avoided costs, and incremental costs. It emphasizes that changes in these factors significantly impact the Total Resource Cost (TRC) and the benefit-cost ratio, particularly when considering the influence of carbon pricing and administrative costs.

IR-30 Attachment 1 Page 105 of 355 Nova Scotia Energy Efficiency and Demand Response Potential Study for 2021-2045 small commercial and small industrial customers, and Auto-DR for the remaining customer classes). Industry experience sugges...

AI summary The document discusses demand response (DR) programs, including Critical Peak Pricing (CPP) and Behavioural Demand Response (BDR), and their assumptions for potential and cost-effectiveness. It highlights the need for smart meters and opt-in participation, with the start of CPP in 2022 following smart meter deployment.

below) by the technical potential estimates. Achievable potential also accounts for customer opt-out during DR events. The achievable technical potential calculation is summarized through Equation 3. Equation 3. DR Achievable Potential 𝑀𝑀𝑀...

AI summary The text discusses the calculation of demand response (DR) achievable potential, which considers both technical potential and customer opt-out during DR events. It also outlines the development of annual and levelized costs for DR programs, including various cost components such as program development, equipment, and customer incentives.

Nova Scotia Energy Efficiency and Demand Response Potential Study for 2021-2045 10.4.1.3 Program Costs and Related Assumptions for Cost-Effectiveness Navigant developed detailed itemized cost assumptions for each DR option to assess annual...

AI summary The document outlines the detailed cost assumptions for demand response (DR) programs, categorizing them into one-time fixed, one-time variable, annual fixed, and annual variable costs. These assumptions are used to calculate levelized costs and assess the cost-effectiveness of DR options using the TRC test.

load reduction ($/kW reduction), depending on the program type. It also includes additional O&M costs that may be associated with servicing technology installed at customer premises. Other than the itemized program costs, the key variables...

AI summary The text discusses cost-effectiveness calculations for demand response (DR) programs, including variables such as discount rates, line loss values, and avoided capacity costs. It outlines benefits and costs associated with DR options, such as wholesale and distribution avoided costs, program development, and participant costs.

Technology Enablement Cost O&M Cost Participant Cost 32 The enabling technology costs represents the incremental costs associated with controls and communications for making the device DR-enabled. These costs are not expected to decline me...

AI summary The text discusses enabling technology costs for demand response (DR) devices, which are modeled as static due to their incremental nature. It also references a 2019 NS Power WACC/AFUDC value and a 2014 Cost of Service Study. A cost-effectiveness assessment is mentioned, focusing on DR options with benefit-to-cost ratios of 1.0 or greater, and describes three scenarios for potential estimates.

ponse-market- research.pdf Page 102 ©2019 Navigant Consulting, Ltd. . REDACTED (CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION REMOVED) 2023 Load Forecast Report Synapse IR-30 Attachment 1 Page 111 of 355 Nova Scotia Energy Efficiency and Demand Response Potent...

AI summary This section of the 2023 Load Forecast Report discusses the demand response (DR) potential and cost-effectiveness results from a study conducted by Navigant. The analysis includes base case results, cost-effectiveness screening, and scenario analysis comparing potential and cost results.

t-effectiveness results change across scenarios and present potential and cost result comparisons across the scenarios. Accordingly, this chapter presents the analysis results in the following order: 1. Base Case potential results for all...

AI summary This section outlines the analysis of demand response (DR) options, presenting results in multiple scenarios, including base case potential and cost-effectiveness results, as well as scenario analysis comparisons. Technical potential is defined as the upper limit assuming full customer participation, while economic potential is not considered due to differences in DR and energy efficiency (EE) analysis approaches.

enerator) Source: Navigant analysis Page 105 ©2019 Navigant Consulting, Ltd. . REDACTED (CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION REMOVED) 2023 Load Forecast Report Synapse IR-30 Attachment 1 Page 114 of 355 Nova Scotia Energy Efficiency and Demand Respon...

AI summary This section of the Nova Scotia Energy Efficiency and Demand Response Potential Study for 2021-2045 presents base case cost-effectiveness results for various Demand Response (DR) options using the Total Resource Cost (TRC) test. It also includes results based on the Program Administrator Cost (PAC) test.

e Total Resource Cost (TRC) test. Navigant also calculated the cost-effectiveness results based on the Program Administrator Cost (PAC) test. 11.3.1 Benefit-Cost Assessment by Demand Response Option Figure 11-4 shows the TRC benefits, cost...

AI summary The document presents a benefit-cost assessment of various demand response (DR) options using the Total Resource Cost (TRC) and Program Administrator Cost (PAC) tests. It shows that most DR options are cost-effective, except for Behavioral DR, BTM Battery Control, and EV Charging control. The TRC and PAC tests yield different benefit-cost ratios due to differences in how incentives are treated.

Options (MW at generator) Source: Navigant analysis 11.4.4 Achievable Potential by Building Type for Cost-Effective Demand Response Options This section presents the breakdown of cost-effective potential by building type or customer segmen...

AI summary This section discusses the achievable potential for cost-effective demand response (DR) by building type, highlighting that residential customers on market rates account for the majority of the potential in 2045. It also outlines the annual program investment for cost-effective DR options in the base case.

lso varied by case as these were tied to the different demand reduction scenario impacts from the energy efficiency potential study. 11.6.1 Comparison of Cost Results Across Demand Response Scenarios Figure 11-12 shows the cost-effectivene...

AI summary The text compares the cost-effectiveness of various demand response (DR) options across three scenarios. Under the high scenario, DLC and BNI Curtailment are not cost-effective due to fixed costs and the opt-out nature of CPP, which captures more customers. Only CPP and BDR are cost-effective in the high scenario, while the base and low scenarios show similar cost-effective DR options.

nergy consumed. An example might be [ITEM SEEN IN Q33]. Would you generally pursue an energy efficiency project where the cost to you after utility rebates is $75 if the project saved $[15] per year?

AI summary The text presents a hypothetical scenario regarding the pursuit of an energy efficiency project with a cost of $75 after rebates and annual savings of $15, highlighting considerations related to cost-effectiveness and affordability.

fication & Qualifications 2 Q: Mr. Wilson, please state your name, occupation, and business address. 3 A: I am John D. Wilson. I am the Vice President of Grid Strategies, LLC, Bethesda, MD. 4 Q: Summarize your professional education and ex...

AI summary John D. Wilson, Vice President of Grid Strategies, LLC, discusses his background in energy policy, including regulatory research, utility rate design, cost-effectiveness analysis of energy projects, and experience with conservation programs and cost recovery mechanisms in utility efficiency initiatives.

SELECTED PRESENTATIONS “Clean Energy Solutions for Western North Carolina,” presentation to Progress Energy Carolinas WNC Community Energy Advisory Council, February 7, 2008. “Energy Efficiency: Regulating Cost-Effectiveness,” Florida Publ...

AI summary The text lists presentations and testimonies on energy efficiency, renewable energy, and regulatory approaches by organizations like the Southern Alliance for Clean Energy (SACE) and individuals, focusing on regions such as Florida, the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA), and Southeastern U.S. regulatory discussions. Topics include cost-effectiveness, utility-scale renewables, and energy efficiency programs.

ervice in the event of an extreme weather event on behalf of the Small Business Utility Advocates. Modifications to Critical Peak Pricing programs and Time of Use periods. Modifications to load management programs. Nova Scotia UARB Matter...

AI summary The Nova Scotia Consumer Advocate provided testimony on modifications to Critical Peak Pricing (CPP) and Time of Use (TOU) programs, Time-Varying Pricing (TVP) tariffs, and capital expenditure plans. Arguments focused on the impact of TVP on load, capacity savings, and energy costs, recommending CPP tariffs instead. Matters included analysis of power contract delays, variable capital costs, and economic models for project evaluation.