Topic:"Cost To Customer" in M06733

Appendix D, Attachment 3 Line# Rate and Bill Impacts of DSM on the Small General Class 1 Impacts of DSM on the Small General Rate Class 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 Units 2 Incremental DSM Savi...

AI summary This table outlines the rate and bill impacts of Demand Side Management (DSM) on the Small General Class from 2016 to 2030. It includes incremental and cumulative DSM savings, costs, and average savings per participant, highlighting a decline in savings and costs after 2018.

Appendix D, Attachment 3 1 2 Impacts of DSM on the Large General Rate Class 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 Units 3 Incremental DSM Savings 7.5 7.3 7.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0...

AI summary The table details the impacts of Demand Side Management (DSM) on the Large General Rate Class from 2016 to 2030. It shows incremental and cumulative DSM savings, costs, and savings per participant over time, highlighting a decline in savings after 2018 and a decrease in cost per kWh saved.

Line# Rate and Bill Impacts of DSM on the Medium Industrial Class 1 Impacts of DSM on the Medium Industrial Rate Class 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 Units 2 Incremental DSM Savings 3.4 3.4 3.3 0...

AI summary The table presents the rate and bill impacts of Demand Side Management (DSM) on the Medium Industrial Class from 2016 to 2030. It includes incremental and cumulative DSM savings, DSM costs, and cost per kWh saved, showing a decline in savings and costs after 2018.

pdf 4 Based on average household usage of about 800 kWh or approximately $130 per month, including the monthly customer charge.

AI summary The text provides an average household electricity usage of 800 kWh or approximately $130 per month, including the monthly customer charge, as part of a summary of findings.

ncy: Rates, Bills and Participation Impacts Slide 21 Date Filed: March 27, 2015 NSPI IR-12 Attachment 1 Page 22 of 26 Benefits of EE that Flow to All Customers - III • Energy efficiency will avoid costs of transmission and distribution lin...

AI summary The text discusses the benefits of energy efficiency (EE), including avoided transmission and distribution costs, with estimates of $423 million in savings from MA Three-Year Plans. It also highlights the impact of EE on New England's peak and energy demand, as well as large commercial and industrial rate impacts.

3 In addition to Nova Scotia having the highest spending level on DSM, the ICFI Report 4 also reveals the unit cost of DSM is comparatively expensive relative to other 19 Please refer to Appendix A, Attachment B, Review of NS Energy Saving...

AI summary The document discusses the high unit cost of Demand Side Management (DSM) in Nova Scotia compared to other Canadian jurisdictions. It references figures showing the 2015 budgeted DSM first year unit cost per kWh for E1 and highlights that Nova Scotia's installed DSM costs have consistently been higher than those in other provinces.

BC, MB, and NB. Alberta is not included as it does not provide DSM. & lt;sup>29 Please refer to Appendix A, Attachment B, Review of NS Energy Savings Portfolio, April 8, 2015, page 6. those of other DSM providers30 1 and that there may als...

AI summary The text discusses Nova Scotia's Demand Side Management (DSM) investment levels compared to other Canadian provinces, noting that Nova Scotia has the highest investment. It references a report showing that the 2015 DSM plan proposes 1.1% savings of electricity sales and highlights the cost and payback period for DSM programs.

MeasureLevel Results for Baseline E1 and Optimized Case D Scenarios Pro m T gra ype Sub ͲPro gra m Me asu re Mo del Bui ldin g T ype End Use Cat ego ry Sto ck T tme nt rea Dem and (kW ) Ene rgy (M Wh ) Tot l. Cos al I mp t ($ ) luti olu 42...

AI summary The table presents MeasureLevel results for Baseline E1 and Optimized Case D scenarios, comparing demand, energy, and total cost impact across different building types and programs. It highlights differences in metrics such as building type, end-use category, and stock treatment, with varying percentages and financial figures.

2016-2018 DSM Plan (NSUARB M06733) NSPI Responses to EfficiencyOne Information Requests 1 Request IR-3: 2 3 Reference: On page 14 of its Evidence, lines 16-17, NS Power mentions "the objective of 4 lowering costs for customers" 5 6 Please...

AI summary NS Power explains that in its evidence, the term 'costs' refers to increased rates customers may face if more DSM is procured than needed or is affordable. It clarifies that this does not include long-term cost reductions from efficiency measures. NS Power also notes that DSM spending adds to rate pressure, especially with the amortization of past DSM expenditures.

1 Request IR-1: 2 - 3 In the interest of ratepayer affordability, please explain any reasons why the DSM - 4 programs should not be financed solely from debt as opposed to debt plus equity, in order - 5 to minimize the total ratepayer cost...

AI summary NS Power explains that financing DSM programs solely from debt could lead to inequities in financing costs across different customer segments, as their capital structure is maintained within a targeted range of debt and equity to meet overall financing requirements.

5 2016-2018 Demand Side Management Resource Plan (M06733), Transcript, June 19, 2015, pages 976-977, lines 1-22 and lines 1-18. 6 Public Utilities Act , R.S.N.S. 1989, c.380, s. 79L(9). 1 representatives. Nova Scotians expect such cost red...

AI summary The document highlights concerns with E1's 2016-2018 DSM Plan, noting that it proposed higher costs per kWh and excessive energy savings compared to what is needed. It also points out flaws in E1's rate and bill impact model, suggesting that lower savings and costs would be more economically beneficial for NS Power's customers.

& lt;sup>24 2016-2018 Demand Side Management Resource Plan (M06733), Transcript, June 19, 2015, pages 780-781. 1 Although NS Power is confident E1 can deliver a program in the range of $22 million 13 14 MS. VINCENT: Our Director of Program...

AI summary The discussion revolves around the 2016-2018 Demand Side Management (DSM) Resource Plan, with participants debating the impact of DSM on non-participants' bills. It is noted that non-participants may face higher bills in the short term, and evidence shows they may be worse off over 20 years when considering the full revenue requirement.

& lt;sup>69 2016-2018 Demand Side Management Resource Plan (M06733), Transcript, June 18, 2015, page 470, lines 4-8. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 The Board's decisions regarding the 2016-2018 program will most likely set—or at least strongly influenc...

AI summary The 2016-2018 Demand Side Management (DSM) Resource Plan is discussed, with E1 arguing that cutting back on DSM programs would lead to higher costs and loss of momentum. E1 claims that DSM is more economical than fuel costs, citing a 50% return on investment. NS Power disagrees, stating E1's arguments are misleading.

72 2016-2018 Demand Side Management Resource Plan (M06733), Transcript, June 18, 2015, page 635. 1 DSM spending is not immediately offset by reduced fuel costs within the year the funds 2 are spent on DSM activities. The funds are spent bu...

AI summary The text discusses the delayed financial benefits of DSM spending, highlighting that while DSM activities reduce fuel costs over time, the initial costs are borne by customers in the short term. It notes that customers may face increased rates in the near term, with financial benefits only becoming apparent after 19 years if energy savings are achieved as forecasted.

1 Affordability has always been, and remains, a key consideration of EfficiencyOne (and before - 2 that, Efficiency Nova Scotia) in its DSM Plan development. EfficiencyOne recognizes that - 3 affordability means different things to differe...

AI summary EfficiencyOne emphasizes that affordability in the context of the DSM Plan should focus on reducing electricity costs for Nova Scotia ratepayers. It argues that DSM programs are more cost-effective than generating additional electricity and should be implemented to the fullest extent possible as long as their cost is lower than generation costs.

1 MS. RUBIN: And some of them would pay for themselves in as little as three to four 2 months? 3 4 one33 MS. VINCENT: Some may. We haven't specifically looked at every 5 6 Ms. Vincent did not state that EfficiencyOne "had not looked at the...

AI summary The discussion focuses on the factors influencing customer adoption of energy efficiency measures, with a particular emphasis on simple payback periods and the impact of electricity rates. EfficiencyOne considers customer payback and other factors, such as access to capital, when determining incentives for efficiency upgrades.

5.2 Cost Pressure E1 states that, "the level of DSM in the Quantum Agreement – on its own – will not impact rates. This is an important short-term affordability consideration." NS Power submits that this statement is a misrepresentation of...

AI summary E1 claims that DSM in the Quantum Agreement won't impact rates, but NS Power argues this is a misrepresentation, stating that all costs, including DSM, affect rates. NS Power also provided evidence on additional cost pressures over the next three years.

nly realized after expressing the upfront costs over the energy saved for the 15 year life of the measures. First year costs of DSM programming as proposed by E1 are 29 cents/kWh to 31 cents/kWh. 22. DSM above the levels required to avoid...

AI summary The text discusses the long-term benefits of Demand Side Management (DSM) programs, noting that while upfront costs are significant, energy savings and cost benefits may not be realized for many years. NS Power highlights that customers may not see fuel savings until 2034, if savings are achieved as forecasted.

& lt;sup>46 Exhibit E-33, NS Power Revised Evidence, June 1, 2015, Figure 3.8, page 33 1 2 3 the application's accepted, $38.5 million on DSM to save 6 to $8 million on fuel. So it'll be an incremental cost to customers in that year of app...

AI summary The document discusses the financial implications of a DSM (Demand Side Management) plan, including a proposed investment of $38.5 million, expected savings on fuel costs, and potential incremental costs to customers. It also highlights the debate over the optimal level of DSM investment and the importance of consistency in funding.