064632010 DSM Evaluation Reports 2/28/2011
172 passages
Program Finding Recommendation Efficient DI-F4. DI-R4. Lighting In 2010, respondents cited lack of time as the number one barrier to At the time of participant contact, provide additional information or Products pursuing additional energy...
AI summary The text discusses barriers to implementing energy efficiency measures, including lack of time and limited financing. It recommends providing additional information to participants and adjusting incentive levels for CFLs. It also suggests exploring financing options in collaboration with local banks.
NMR Evaluation of 2010 DSM Programs Executive Summary Page 31 Program Finding Recommendation New NH-F16. NH-R16. Houses Some builders and homeowners were participating in the program Consider revising the program objectives and components...
AI summary The evaluation of the 2010 New Houses Program identified that some participants received rebates for pre-planned energy efficiency measures, and that transferring rebates to builders helped reduce upfront costs. However, administrative costs were high, and builders lacked sufficient incentives to ensure program effectiveness.
L-F5. PD:CFL-R5. Anticipating having to drop regular CFLs from its lineup of rebated The program should evaluate the opportunities for rebating LEDs energy efficiency products, the PD program has sought other energy (other than Christmas l...
AI summary The PD program is considering replacing rebated CFLs with LED products due to the declining CFL market. NMR recommends conducting a socket saturation study to assess the market stage for energy-efficient lighting.
onducted evaluation estimated high free-ridership rates for both Free-ridership rates can be lowered by rebating higher efficiency Retail the refrigerators (72%) and the clothes washers (85%) rebated through appliances only, such as models...
AI summary The evaluation found high free-ridership rates for refrigerators and clothes washers in the PD program, suggesting many purchases would have occurred without the program. Strategies like rebating higher efficiency appliances and offering package deals are suggested to reduce free-ridership. Independent retailers joined the program late but achieved significant sales.
NMR Evaluation of 2010 DSM Programs Executive Summary Page 50 Program Finding Recommendation Appliance ARR-F10. ARR-R10. Retirement The single most influential factor influencing customers‘ decision to Any future program design should cons...
AI summary The evaluation of the 2010 Appliance Retirement & Replace Program found that removal and recycling services were the most influential factor in customer participation. Incentives had lower influence, and there was mixed sentiment regarding the necessity of secondary appliances like freezers and refrigerators after disposal.
ntial had a limited target for the number of refrigerators to be replaced. opportunities in the multi-family sector: Program promotions consisted solely of cold calls to potential Affordable housing property owners. This may be one the e...
AI summary The pilot program had a limited target for refrigerator replacements and lacked effective engagement with the multi-family sector. Opportunities include targeting affordable housing property owners and bundling incentives for appliance replacements. Split incentives are a common barrier in the multi-family market, and education on non-energy benefits could help mitigate this.
................................................... 43 5.5.1 Applying the Rebates ............................................................................................................................. 43 5.5.2 Rebate Processing and...
AI summary The text outlines various sections related to rebate application, processing, and verification, as well as program awareness and CFL purchase motivations and behaviors. It includes subsections on on-site visits, Energy Star awareness, and barriers to CFL purchases.
Findings and Recommendations for CFLs Findings Recommendations PD:CFL-F4. PD:CFL-R4. As the 2012 date for phase-out of incandescent bulbs gets closer, The PD program should consider offering an incandescent bounty there is likely to be som...
AI summary As the phase-out of incandescent bulbs approaches, the PD program anticipates consumer hoarding and plans to offer rebates for LED bulbs. It also recommends a socket saturation study to better understand lighting usage and diffusion of energy-efficient products in Nova Scotia.
wer Down program, we have divided the program description, program theory, and logic model into three distinct program components: CFLs; Light fixtures and controls Appliances 1.1 CFL: Program Description The 2010 Power Down program...
AI summary The 2010 Power Down program offered discounts on ENERGY STAR®-qualified CFLs, light fixtures, and appliances. Administered by the implementation contractor, it was promoted through various channels, including in-store signage, radio spots, and online resources, but did not include in-store events or an educational component.
ocessing required since retailers can provide one invoice for all POS rebates. The PD program provides coupons for stores where discounts cannot be automatically rung up at the cash register. Customer education and outreach. The PD progr...
AI summary The Power Down (PD) program uses coupons and marketing to promote energy-efficient lighting, particularly CFLs. It collaborates with retailers and uses various outreach methods to raise awareness and encourage purchases. The program assumes that marketing efforts will lead to increased sales and installations of energy-efficient products.
1-1: Power Down CFLs Logic Model NMR Evaluation of 2010 Power Down Program Page 1 1.2 F&C: Program Description The Light Fixtures and Controls (F&C) portions of the 2010 Nova Scotia Power Down (PD) program began on October 1st 2010 and ran...
AI summary The 2010 Power Down (PD) program's Light Fixtures and Controls (F&C) portion aimed to achieve annual energy savings through the promotion of energy-efficient products. The program exceeded its projections, with significant rebate sales for various energy-efficient items.
1.2.1 F&C: Program Theory The program logic model and program theory for the PD program was revised for 2010. The program theory and logic model for the F&C components are included below. Program Background The F&C component of the PD prog...
AI summary The F&C component of the PD program aims to install energy-efficient fixtures and controls in every home in Nova Scotia. The program works with retailers to provide discounts and educational materials to promote energy efficiency. Incentives are offered at the point of sale to reduce the cost of purchasing energy-efficient products.
rs throughout Nova Scotia. Buying down the cost of fixtures and controls at POS has the advantage of making it easier for customers to receive their incentives and reduces the amount of processing required since retailers can provide one i...
AI summary The document discusses the Power Down (PD) program in Nova Scotia, highlighting how buying down the cost of fixtures and controls at the point of sale (POS) simplifies the process for customers to receive incentives and reduces administrative workload for retailers. The PD program provides coupons for stores where discounts cannot be automatically applied at the cash register.
1.3 APP: Program Description The Appliance Rebate portion (APP) of the 2010 Nova Scotia Power Down (PD) program began on October 1st 2010 and ran through the end of December 2010. The program was administered by the implementation contract...
AI summary The Appliance Rebate Program (APP) of the 2010 Nova Scotia Power Down (PD) program aimed to achieve energy savings through rebates for ENERGY STAR appliances. Initially targeting chain retailers, it was expanded to include independent retailers after protests. The program exceeded its targets, with over 2,000 refrigerators and washers sold, partly due to the extension into December.
e that even if the program had not been thus expanded and extended, it would have comfortably exceeded program targets based only on the sales of clothes washers at R11 alone during any single month of the program period. 1.3.1 APP: Progra...
AI summary The 2010 Power Down program's Appliance Rebate Program (APP) aimed to install energy-efficient appliances in Nova Scotia homes. It utilized retailer partnerships to offer rebates on ENERGY STAR refrigerators and clothes washers, with program activities focusing on retail support and education.
ve strategy and projections for uptake are based on retailers having sufficient ENERGY STAR refrigerators and clothes washers available for the Nova Scotia market. Program Barriers Awareness. While it is not necessary that customers are...
AI summary The document discusses the challenges and strategies for the Power Down Program, including the need for retailers to stock ENERGY STAR appliances, awareness as a potential driver for participation, customer purchase readiness, and the role of retailers in program success. It also mentions short-term outcomes such as discounted appliances and retailer outreach.
er Authority (OPA) report titled ―2010 Prescriptive Measures and Assumptions‖.17 This is reasonable as the OPA report offers savings estimates for each of the products rebated through the PD program. 3.1 ENERGY STAR Qualified Indoor Light...
AI summary The Nova Scotia Utility Board (NMR) evaluated the savings assumptions for ENERGY STAR qualified indoor light fixtures in the Power Down program by reviewing multiple studies, including a 2010 report from the Ontario Power Authority and other relevant research.
October-November 2010 than in October-November 2009 do you attribute to the Power Down program promotion and rebates? You just indicated that the percentage sales of [MEASURE CATEGORY] that qualified for the Power Down rebate was higher af...
AI summary The text consists of a series of questions directed at retailers regarding the impact of the Power Down program on the sales of specific energy efficiency measures. It explores the extent to which the program's rebates influenced sales, the duration of any follow-on effects, and the importance of rebates in customer purchasing decisions.
225.7 1,071 NMR Evaluation of 2010 Power Down Program Page 33 4 Impact Evaluation: Appliance Rebates The Power Down program (PD) Appliance Rebate (APP) component ran from October 1st, 2010 through the end of December 2010. The program prov...
AI summary The evaluation of the 2010 Power Down Program's Appliance Rebate component assessed savings assumptions using databases like CALMAC and CEE. Savings estimates were based on the Ontario Power Authority's 2010 report, which provided product-specific savings estimates for rebated appliances.
+9.8% Non-participant survey 260,023 70 +9.8% Overall residential survey 376,845 140 +6.9% 5.2 Program Goals and Design The lighting component of the PD program was designed to achieve energy savings of 2,330.27 MWh through sales of CFLs a...
AI summary The lighting component of the PD program aimed to achieve energy savings through the sale of CFLs and light fixtures. The 2010 Power Down program modified its approach by removing restrictions based on pack size and bulb type, and shifted from in-store events to markdowns and coupons. Communication between the DSM Administrator and implementation contractor was deemed satisfactory.
cotia Radio and newspaper advertisement Inclusion of rebates and featured products in retailer flyers In-store signage Customer engagement events at selected retailers 5.5 Rebate Processing and Verification In the in-depth intervie...
AI summary The document outlines methods used for promoting rebates, including radio and newspaper advertisements, in-store signage, and customer engagement events. It also describes the rebate processing procedures, including how retailers applied rebates at the point of sale, with some using coupons due to the lack of a centralized system.
5.5.2 Rebate Processing and Verification The rebate processing and verification procedures accordingly varied by type of retailer and method of application of rebate. Chain retailers o Retailers submitted summary of sales data (reconcile...
AI summary The text outlines rebate processing and verification procedures for chain retailers, independent retailers, and one specific retailer, detailing how sales data, receipts, and audits are used to ensure accurate rebate payments.
26 8 10 9σ 1Ω σ 2 16 or more 26 3 6 19 6Ω 7 Out of the 483 CFLs purchased by participants during the program period, 327 (67%) were qualifying CFL bulbs and were, therefore, counted as having been purchased through the program. Over the co...
AI summary The document evaluates the 2010 Power Down Program, noting that 67% of the 483 CFLs purchased by participants were qualifying bulbs. Participants in 2010 averaged significantly fewer qualifying CFL purchases (4.7) compared to 2008 (10.8) and 2009 (6.5). Qualifying bulbs were those purchased from participating retailers, including multipacks or specialty CFLs.
0 0 5σ∑ 3 0 'Extremely 5 8 7 3 12σ 8 unlikely' NMR Evaluation of 2010 Power Down Program Page 61 Respondents who were unlikely to purchase CFLs in the next year (rated likelihood of five or less) were asked what would encourage them to pur...
AI summary The 2010 Power Down Program evaluation found that respondents unlikely to purchase CFLs in the next year cited more rebates or promotions as the most frequent motivation to encourage CFL purchases.
NMR Evaluation of 2010 Power Down Program Page 72 6 Process Evaluation: Fixtures and Controls 6.1 Program Description The Light Fixtures and Controls (F&C) portion of the 2010 Nova Scotia Power Down (PD) program began on October 1st 2010 a...
AI summary The 2010 Nova Scotia Power Down Program's Light Fixtures and Controls portion exceeded energy savings projections, with significant rebate distributions for various energy-efficient products. A process evaluation involved a telephone survey of 47 chain store managers to assess program effectiveness.
ovember 2010. The lowest average increase was a 10% increase for outdoor timers from 60% to 66%; the highest average increase was a 78% increase for power bars with timers from 36% to 64%. (Table 6-5) Table 6-5: Average Percent of Rebated...
AI summary The text presents data on the average percent of rebated product sales for various products under the 2010 Power Down Program, showing increases in sales percentages from January–September 2010 to October–November 2010, with the lowest and highest increases noted for outdoor timers and power bars with timers, respectively.
nd November. Although the program was expanded to include independent retailers and extended to December, the program targets remained the same. In the in-depth interview, the program manager at the NMR Evaluation of 2010 Power Down Progra...
AI summary The 2010 Power Down Program was expanded to include independent retailers and extended until December, but its targets remained unchanged. The program's budget was adjusted to accommodate these changes. The evaluation highlights that even without the expansion, the program was likely to exceed its targets based on sales data from one retailer. The document also discusses rebate processing and retailer participation, with most store managers being familiar with stocking patterns and sales trends of rebated items.
that were rebated through the program in 2010. Some respondents had not worked at the store or in the department in 2009 and would not venture an estimate, which accounts for the smaller sample sizes. Table 7-3: Average Percent Rebated Pro...
AI summary The text discusses the Power Down Program in 2010, focusing on the average percent of rebated product sales for ENERGY STAR refrigerators and clothes washers across chain and independent retailers. Data is presented for different time periods, including January–September/October 2010, October–December 2010, January 2011, and October–December 2009.
60% NMR Evaluation of 2010 Power Down Program Page 85 Retailers who reported an increase in sales of qualifying models during the program period as compared with the time period before the program were asked the percentage of that increase...
AI summary The evaluation of the 2010 Power Down Program shows that retailers attributed a significant portion of increased sales of ENERGY STAR appliances to the program. Chain retailers attributed 86% of the increase to the program, while independent retailers attributed 67%.
100% 1 100% 2 100% 2010 Increase from Oct/Nov-Dec 2 50% 2 50% 2009 The respondents were asked if, in the absence of the rebates from the Power Down program, the sales of the rebated equipment would have been lower, the same, or higher. If...
AI summary The analysis examines the impact of the Power Down program on the sales of ENERGY STAR refrigerators and clothes washers. Most chain retailers believe the program significantly increased sales, while independent retailers are more divided, with some believing sales would have been the same.
23% 23% NMR Evaluation of 2010 Power Down Program Page 86 The majority of chain retailers indicated that, concurrently with the program rebates, other rebates or promotions had also been offered on ENERGY STAR refrigerators (6 out of 8) an...
AI summary The text discusses the 2010 Power Down Program, highlighting that most chain retailers offered additional rebates or promotions alongside the program's rebates for ENERGY STAR refrigerators and clothes washers. The value of these additional rebates varied significantly among retailers.
e the other valued them at between $100 and $299. For clothes washers, one independent retailer valued the rebates at between $3 and $15 while the other valued them at between $50 and $99. (Table 7-6) Table 7-6: Whether Other Rebates were...
AI summary The document evaluates the 2010 Power Down Program, highlighting discrepancies in rebate valuations for ENERGY STAR appliances between chain retailers and independent retailers. For refrigerators, chain retailers valued rebates between $100 and $299, while independent retailers valued them between $3 and $15. Similar discrepancies were noted for clothes washers.
0 1 NMR Evaluation of 2010 Power Down Program Page 87 When asked to rate the importance of the program rebate to the customer purchase decision, the majority of chain retailers rated rebate as either important or extremely important for bo...
AI summary The evaluation of the 2010 Power Down Program indicates that chain retailers found rebates important for ENERGY STAR appliance purchases, while independent retailers had mixed views, with some considering rebates unimportant for refrigerators and others finding them important for clothes washers.
gram. Respondents indicated a variety of sources: Nova Scotia Power, advertising at a chain store, notification from the head office, a call to the store manager, and a newspaper article. (Table 7-10) Table 7-10: Source of First Awareness...
AI summary Respondents learned about the program through various sources, including Nova Scotia Power and advertising. Initial reactions were mixed, with some retailers seeing it as an opportunity to boost sales, while others were disappointed about not being included.
ocking practices, while two of the seven had made changes to the placement or location of the rebated appliances, and two of the seven had changed advertising or promotions for the rebated appliances. Table 7-15: Whether Changes Were Made...
AI summary The text discusses changes made by retailers in response to program participation, including adjustments to stocking practices, placement of rebated appliances, and advertising. It also highlights how independent retailers marketed the Power Down rebate to customers, with varying approaches in presenting rebate information.
1 NMR Evaluation of 2010 Power Down Program Page 93 Independent retailers joined the Power Down program in November though the program had actually started in October for chain retailers. Therefore, independent retailers were allowed to re...
AI summary The Power Down program allowed independent retailers to retroactively apply for rebates on ENERGY STAR appliance sales from October, though only two out of five retailers did so. Reasons for not applying included the effort required and a decision not to apply. Both retailers who applied contacted customers who had made purchases in October.
le size 2 Decided not to 1 Too much work 1 The independent retailers were asked about their procedures for tracking the rebates. One-half of the independent retailers (3 out of 6) reported that they had tracked the rebates by hand; the rem...
AI summary The document discusses how independent retailers track rebates, with half using manual methods and the other half using computer systems or internal SKU numbers. It also mentions that most respondents were satisfied with the Power Down program.
ed to the fact that most retailers indicated having had no interaction with DSM Administrator staff. (Table 7-24) Table 7-24: Satisfaction with Specific Aspects of Program – Independent Retailers Independent Retailers Sample size 5 Interac...
AI summary The text discusses the satisfaction levels of independent retailers with aspects of the Power Down program, including interaction with the DSM Administrator, NSP staff, rebate processing, and tracking and reporting of rebates. The sample sizes and satisfaction ratings are provided in Table 7-24.
Environmentally friendly 2 NSP added credibility 1 Table 7-26 shows respondents‘ recommendations for improving the Power Down program. Almost one- half of the chain retailers (3 out of 7) suggested expanding the program to include more ite...
AI summary Respondents recommended expanding the Power Down program to include more ENERGY STAR items and increasing rebate values. Some suggested offering higher rebates for purchasing multiple appliances together, while others proposed including independent retailers and adjusting the program timing.
r. One chain retailer remarked that since the program had been run around Christmas time, people had been focused on spending their money on gift items as opposed to refrigerators and clothes washers. Table 7-26: Recommendations for Power...
AI summary A chain retailer noted that the Power Down Program, run around Christmas, may have been less effective as consumers focused on gift spending rather than purchasing refrigerators and clothes washers. Table 7-26 outlines recommendations for the program, including higher rebates, including more ENERGY STAR items, and running the program at a different time of year.
35 years 19 years NMR Evaluation of 2010 NSPI Power Down Program Page A1 Appendix A – Displaced Wattage Validation Calculations For the 2010 program year, several retailers provided specific sales information including, in some cases, mode...
AI summary The document evaluates the 2010 NSPI Power Down Program by analyzing displaced wattage from CFL sales. NMR used ENERGY STAR equivalency tables to estimate displaced wattage for 66% of CFLs sold, calculating a weighted average of 47.87 displaced watts. The calculation assumes participants follow ENERGY STAR guidelines and does not account for missing or out-of-range wattage data.
[CHECK: PB2B2a >= PB2B1a] Purchases by pack size January-December 2010: PB2b2a1. Number of single CFL bulb packs PB2b2a2. Number of two-pack CFLs PB2b2a3. Number of three-pack CFLs PB2b2a4. Number of four-pack CFLs PB2b2a5. Number of five-...
AI summary The text includes a series of questions related to the purchase of compact fluorescent light (CFL) bulbs under the 2010 Nova Scotia Power Down Program. It asks respondents to report the number of bulbs purchased in various pack sizes and the number of ENERGY STAR-qualified CFLs purchased in 2010.
3 L. Any other stores I did not mention? a. SPECIFY1 b. SPECIFY2 c. SPECIFY3 d. SPECIFY4 [IF PB4L = 2 or 3 SKIP PB5][REPEAT FOR EACH OTHER SPECIFIED IN PB4L] NMR Evaluation of 2010 NSPI Power Down Program Page B10 PB5. What type of store i...
AI summary The text includes survey questions related to store types and energy-efficient bulb purchases, referencing the 2010 NSPI Power Down Program. It asks respondents about their purchasing behavior, including reasons for higher ENERGY STAR™-qualified CFL bulb purchases during specific months.
2. Not familiar 3. Neither familiar nor unfamiliar 4. Somewhat familiar -[SKIP TO Q1] 5. Very familiar - [SKIP TO Q1] 9. Don‘t know / Refused I4. Is there someone else at this store who would be familiar with the stocking patterns or sales...
AI summary The text contains survey questions and response options related to product sales and rebate participation in the Nova Scotia Power Power Down program, which ran from October to November 2010. It also includes a list of products that were eligible for rebates under the program.
ASK THEM FOR THEIR BEST GUESS. IF THEY CANNOT PROVIDE A SINGLE BEST GUESS, ASK THEM FOR AN APPROXIMATE RANGE. TRY, AS FAR AS REASONABLY POSSIBLE, TO AVOID A DON‘T KNOW RESPONSE] A. B. C. D. LIGHT FIXTURES Jan-Sept. 2010 Oct-Nov Dec 2010 Oc...
AI summary The text provides a table structure for light fixture rebate percentages across different time periods, indicating a focus on appliance rebate programs and their performance over time.
Dec 2010 Oct-Nov 2009 2010 Percent Rebated % % % % Q4. [RECORD PERCENTAGE _%; 998 Refused; 999 Don't know/Not sure/Can‘t remember] A. [IF % SALES OF REBATED FIXTURES ARE HIGHER IN OCT-NOV 2010 (COL. B) THAN IN JAN-SEPT. 2010 (COL A)]: You...
AI summary The text discusses the evaluation of the 2010 NSPI Power Down Program, focusing on the percentage of sales of rebated fixtures during different time periods and the impact of the program on those sales. It includes questions about the attribution of increased sales to the program's promotion and rebates.
wer Down program period in December 2010 NMR Evaluation of 2010 NSPI Power Down Program Page B28 than they were before Power Down program period, between January and September 2010. What percentage of that increase in sales do you attribut...
AI summary The text discusses the evaluation of the 2010 NSPI Power Down Program, focusing on its impact on sales of ENERGY STAR light fixtures. It includes questions about the program's influence on sales, the expected duration of its follow-on effects, and the estimated impact of the $15 rebate on store sales.
rogram discounts, you would have only sold [100 - (% FROM Q5B 100)] ENERGY STAR light fixtures that week without the program discounts? IF RESPONSE IS ≠ YES THEN CLARIFY RESPONSE TO Q5B Q6A. During the October-November promotion period, be...
AI summary The text includes survey questions about the impact of the Power Down program on the sale of ENERGY STAR light fixtures, including inquiries about other rebates and the importance of the program to customer purchasing decisions.
Oct-Nov Dec 2010 Oct-Nov 2009 2010 Percent Rebated % % % % Q9. [RECORD PERCENTAGE _%; 998=Refused; 999=Don't know/Not sure/Can‘t remember] A. [IF % SALES OF REBATED DIMMER SWITCHES ARE HIGHER IN OCT-NOV 2010 (COL. B) THAN IN JAN-SEPT. 2010...
AI summary The text discusses the evaluation of the 2010 NSPI Power Down Program, focusing on the percentage of dimmer switch sales attributed to the rebate program during specific time periods, such as October-November 2010 compared to earlier periods.
dicated that the percentage sales of dimmer NMR Evaluation of 2010 NSPI Power Down Program Page B31 switches that qualified for the Power Down rebate was higher after the Power Down program period in December 2010 than they were before Pow...
AI summary The text discusses the evaluation of the 2010 NSPI Power Down Program, specifically focusing on the impact of rebates on dimmer switch sales. It asks respondents to estimate the percentage of increased sales attributed to the program and how long the follow-on effects are expected to last.
after the Power Down program period in NMR Evaluation of 2010 NSPI Power Down Program Page B34 December 2010 than they were before Power Down program period, between January and September 2010. What percentage of that increase in sales do...
AI summary The text includes survey questions aimed at evaluating the impact of the Power Down program on sales of power bars with timers. It asks retailers to estimate the percentage of increased sales attributed to the program and how long the follow-on effects may last.
portant and 5 is extremely important. NMR Evaluation of 2010 NSPI Power Down Program Page B36 IF Q2B1=4 INDOOR LIGHT TIMERS Q18. I now have a few questions about your sales of indoor light timers. A. Roughly what percent of ALL the indoor...
AI summary The text outlines a series of questions regarding the sales and rebate rates of indoor light timers before, during, and after the Power Down program promotion in 2010. The questions aim to evaluate the program's impact on sales and rebate participation.
that the percentage sales of indoor NMR Evaluation of 2010 NSPI Power Down Program Page B37 light timers that qualified for the Power Down rebate was higher after the Power Down program period in December 2010 than they were before Power D...
AI summary The text evaluates the impact of the Power Down program on the sales of indoor light timers, asking retailers to estimate the percentage increase in sales attributed to the program and how long the follow-on effects are expected to last. It also inquires about the effect of the $3 rebate on sales during the October-November promotion.
n program rebate had not been available? RECORD PERCENTAGE _%; [998 Refused; 999 Don't know/Not sure/Can‘t remember] C. I want to make sure I understand you correctly when you say your store‘s sales of indoor light timers would be [% FROM...
AI summary The text discusses customer responses to the Power Down program rebate for indoor light timers, including the impact of the rebate on sales and customer purchasing decisions. It includes questions about the rebate's importance and whether other rebates were offered during the same period.
ASK THEM FOR THEIR BEST GUESS. IF THEY CANNOT PROVIDE A SINGLE BEST GUESS, ASK THEM FOR AN APPROXIMATE RANGE. TRY, AS FAR AS REASONABLY POSSIBLE, TO AVOID A DON‘T KNOW RESPONSE] A. B. C. D. HEAVY DUTY POOL OR Jan-Sept. 2010 Oct-Nov Dec 201...
AI summary The text discusses the evaluation of the 2010 NSPI Power Down Program, focusing on the percentage of sales of rebated pool and outdoor timers during different time periods, and asks respondents to estimate the impact of the program on these sales.
am promotion and rebates? % NMR Evaluation of 2010 NSPI Power Down Program Page B40 C. [IF % SALES OF REBATED POOL OR OUTDOOR TIMERS ARE HIGHER IN DEC. 2010 (COL. C) THAN IN JAN-SEPT. 2010 (COL A)]: You just indicated that the percentage s...
AI summary The text discusses the evaluation of the 2010 NSPI Power Down Program, focusing on the impact of rebates on sales of pool and outdoor timers. It asks retailers to estimate the percentage of increased sales attributed to the program and how long the follow-on effect might last.
r during the October-November promotion period if the $15 Power Down program rebate had not been available? RECORD PERCENTAGE _%; [998 Refused; 999 Don't know/Not sure/Can‘t remember] C. I want to make sure I understand you correctly when...
AI summary The text discusses the impact of the Power Down program rebate on the sales of heavy duty pool or outdoor timers during the October-November promotion period. It asks respondents to estimate the percentage decrease in sales if the rebate had not been available and inquires about other rebates offered on these products during the same period.
6. Provincial Government $ 7. City/Town/Municipality $ 8. Other $ 98. Refused 99. Don‘t know Q27. During the October-November program promotion period, how important would you say the rebate from the Power Down Program was to customers‘ de...
AI summary The text includes survey questions about the importance of rebates from the Power Down Program to customer decisions and asks retailers about the percentage of electronic baseboard thermostats sold before, during, and after the program promotion period that were rebated.
Dec 2010 Oct-Nov 2009 THERMOSTATS 2010 2010 Percent Rebated % % % % Q29. [RECORD PERCENTAGE _%; 998 Refused; 999 Don't know/Not sure/Can‘t remember] A. [IF % SALES OF REBATED ELECTRONIC BASEBOARD THERMOSTATS ARE HIGHER IN OCT-NOV 2010 (COL...
AI summary The text discusses the evaluation of the 2010 NSPI Power Down Program, focusing on the impact of rebates on the sales of electronic baseboard thermostats during different time periods, specifically comparing October-November 2010 with January-September 2010 and October-November 2009.
er during the October-November promotion period if the $5 Power Down program rebate had not been available? RECORD PERCENTAGE _%; [998 Refused; 999 Don't know/Not sure/Can‘t remember] C. I want to make sure I understand you correctly when...
AI summary This section of the document evaluates the impact of the Power Down program rebate on the sales of electronic baseboard thermostats during the October-November promotion period, asking respondents to estimate sales without the rebate and whether other rebates were offered.
during the October-November promotion period if the $XXX Power Down program rebate had not been available? RECORD PERCENTAGE _%; [998=Refused; 999=Don't know/Not sure/Can‘t remember] C. I want to make sure I understand you correctly when y...
AI summary This text discusses customer responses to the Power Down program rebate, including the impact of the rebate on sales of ENERGY STAR refrigerators and the importance customers placed on the rebate during the October-November promotion period. It also asks about other rebates offered on refrigerators during the same period.
E TIME TO RESPOND TO THIS SURVEY.] NMR Evaluation of 2010 NSPI Power Down Program Page B54 INDEPENDENT RETAIL STORE MANAGER QUESTIONNAIRE NSPI RETAIL MARKDOWN PROGRAM: APPLIANCE REBATES Final: January 6, 2011 Hello may I please speak with...
AI summary This document is a questionnaire from the NMR Group evaluating the 2010 NSPI Power Down Program, specifically focusing on appliance rebates. It aims to gather information from retail store managers about their participation and knowledge of the program's impact on appliance stocking and sales trends.
9. Don‘t know / Refused NMR Evaluation of 2010 NSPI Power Down Program Page B55 I4. Is there someone else at this store who would be familiar with the stocking patterns or sales trends for the appliances that you sell? BACKGROUND 1. What i...
AI summary The document is a questionnaire aimed at evaluating the 2010 NSPI Power Down Program. It asks retailers about their participation, product sales, and awareness of the program. The focus is on understanding appliance sales trends and rebate application during the program period.
her? 4. Same [SKIP TO Q36A] 5. Lower 6. Higher [SKIP TO Q36A] 8. Refused [SKIP TO Q36A] 9. Don‘t know [SKIP TO Q36A] E. [IF Q35A 2 lower ]: By what percentage do you estimate your store‘s sales of these ENERGY STAR refrigerators would have...
AI summary This text includes survey questions and responses related to the impact of the Power Down program rebate on the sales of ENERGY STAR refrigerators during the November-December promotion period. It also asks if there were any other rebates provided on refrigerators during that time.
promotion period, besides the Power Down program rebates, were there any other rebates provided on refrigerators? 3. Yes 4. No 8. Refused 9. Don‘t know Q36B. [IF Q36A=YES]: Who offered the rebates and what was the value of the rebates? 9....
AI summary The text includes survey questions about rebate programs for refrigerators during the Power Down Program promotion period, specifically asking about the importance of rebates in influencing customer purchases of ENERGY STAR refrigerators. The questions are part of an evaluation of the 2010 NSPI Power Down Program.
romotion and rebates? % G. NMR Evaluation of 2010 NSPI Power Down Program Page B60 Q40. D. During the November-December promotion, the Power Down program provided a rebate of $50 for each ENERGY STAR clothes washer sold in your store. If t...
AI summary The document presents a survey question regarding the impact of the Power Down program's $50 rebate on ENERGY STAR clothes washer sales during the November-December promotion period. It asks respondents to estimate the percentage decrease in sales if the rebate had not been available.
ARR-R6. The single most influential factor influencing customers‘ decision Any future program design should consider reducing to participate in the program was the removal and recycling the incentive amounts offered for appliances. The ser...
AI summary The removal and recycling services provided for free significantly influenced customer participation in the program. Incentives had less impact. Program contractors questioned the cost-effectiveness of picking up smaller appliances like dehumidifiers. Most respondents found spare refrigerators unnecessary after disposal, while freezers were seen as more necessary.
341 1,405 706 706 Annual energy 1,437 1,001 1,106 1,005 consumption (kWh/year) Based on the consumption estimates and number of units listed in Table 3-2, the tracking database reported program savings of 4,841 MWh at the meter and 5,416 M...
AI summary The text presents data on energy savings from an appliance retirement program, including meter and generator-level savings. It also outlines participant categories for refrigerators and freezers, with a focus on secondary appliances. NMR Group evaluated program impacts based on participant surveys and secondary research.
ts for the secondary replaced refrigerator UEC is shown below: Similar calculations were applied to the other UECs. Table 3-10 shows the adjusted gross savings using each of the NMR methodologies. Table 3-10: Adjusted Gross Savings per Uni...
AI summary The document evaluates the 2010 Appliance Retirement & Replacement Programs by calculating adjusted gross savings for refrigerators and freezers using NMR methodologies. Total program savings were estimated at 1,949 MWh for refrigerators and 887 MWh for freezers, representing a 42% and 37% decrease, respectively, compared to tracking database estimates.
ated this program aspect as extremely influential. Within the dehumidifier group, 93% of respondents said the removal/recycling services had been extremely influential to their participation decision. Table 4-11: Influence of Free Removal/...
AI summary The evaluation of the 2010 Appliance Retirement & Replacement Programs highlights that free removal/recycling services were highly influential in encouraging participation, with over 80% of respondents considering them extremely influential. In contrast, the $35 and $10 incentives received lower ratings, with less than half of respondents considering them extremely influential.
Y. IF RESPONSE INDICATES WOULD HAVE GOTTEN RID OF UNIT, GO BACK TO FFR3 AND CLARIFY RESPONSE, ASKING FFR4 THROUGH FFR7 IF NECESSARY] 98. (Don‘t know) 99. (Refused) DHR9. Nova Scotia Power paid for the dehumidifier to be removed from your h...
AI summary The text discusses a survey question regarding the influence of financial incentives and program information on participation in Nova Scotia Power's appliance retirement program, specifically focusing on the removal of a dehumidifier.
Program Marketing and Outreach Findings Recommendations EEH-F7. EEH-R7. NRCan‘s announced withdrawal of federal rebates in March 2010 A new program would have to work hard to build awareness and coincided closely with the announcement of t...
AI summary The withdrawal of federal rebates in 2010 and the transition of DSM program administration led to customer confusion and reduced marketing efforts. Word-of-mouth was a primary source of awareness, but new programs would need stronger marketing strategies to build credibility.
Program Performance and Savings Findings Recommendations EEH-F14. EEH-R14. NMR found that the program was double counting savings for a The new program should remove the potential for double counting number of measures. Any of the five hea...
AI summary The document highlights issues with double counting savings in the EEH program, particularly for heat pump measures, solar hot water heaters, and water heater tank insulation. It recommends removing double counting by using prescriptive savings only for measures that do not impact EnerGuide ratings. It also suggests coordination between the new program and any new houses program.
of optional upgrades. The data is also uploaded to NRCan for review and validation. Retrofit Activities After the pre-retrofit evaluation, homeowners have 18 months to complete any suggested upgrades and schedule a post-retrofit evaluation...
AI summary The 2010 Existing Houses Program involves homeowners completing retrofit upgrades within 18 months of a pre-retrofit evaluation. NRCan validates data and supports the program administratively, while HOT2000 software calculates savings and assigns EnerGuide ratings. Homeowners are eligible for federal and provincial rebates after post-retrofit evaluations.
funding the provincial government‘s rebates for houses that have electric heating, the DSM Administrator‘s contribution to the EnerGuide for Existing Houses program covers the following DSM measures:
AI summary The DSM Administrator contributes to the EnerGuide for Existing Houses program by funding provincial government rebates for houses with electric heating, covering specific DSM measures.
Table 1-1: EnerGuide Existing Houses Electric Incentives 2009 2010 Measure Incentive Incentive Houses with Electric Heating Systems High efficiency ductless air to air heat pumps with electric NA $750 backup High efficiency central (―ducte...
AI summary Table 1-1 outlines electric incentives for EnerGuide Existing Houses for the years 2009 and 2010, including incentives for various heating systems and thermal storage units, with some measures showing increased incentives in 2010.
$15 each Houses with Electric Hot Water Heating Drain water heat recovery (42% efficiency or greater) $130 $130 Drain water heat recovery (30% efficiency to 41.9% $75 $75 efficiency) Solar domestic water heating system $1,250 $1,250 Electr...
AI summary The document outlines rebate amounts for various energy efficiency measures in houses with electric hot water heating, including drain water heat recovery and solar domestic water heating systems. It also defines a small MURB as a building with three stories or less and no more than 20 residences.
ter systems. Energy Evaluators input pre-retrofit information into HOT2000 software and upload the data to NRCan. The Energy Evaluators prepare a pre-retrofit report that includes an initial EnerGuide rating and recommendations for energy...
AI summary The 2010 Existing Houses Program involves pre- and post-retrofit evaluations using HOT2000 software, with Energy Evaluators submitting data to NRCan. Homeowners receive rebates after retrofit activities, and the program assumes sufficient marketing and availability of evaluators.
vings reduce the need for new generation. NMR Evaluation of 2010 Existing Houses Program Page 6 1.2 Logic Model Figure 1-1: EnerGuide Existing Houses Program Logic Model NMR Evaluation of 2010 Existing Houses Program Page 7 2 Impact Evalua...
AI summary The evaluation of the 2010 Existing Houses Program assesses energy savings by comparing pre- and post-audit data from 87 homes. The study calculates savings per EnerGuide point and applies these values to the program's tracking database. The program reported 1,516 participants with 9.72 GWh of meter savings and 10.88 GWh of generator savings in 2010.
ETS central hydronic system 45 ETS room unit 10 The prescriptive savings were added to the EnerGuide point savings. The equation below gives an example of how savings would have been calculated for a project that had a D pre-audit EnerGuid...
AI summary The document discusses the calculation of energy savings from the EEH program using EnerGuide ratings and prescriptive measures such as programmable thermostats and ETS room units. It also provides average pre- and post-audit EnerGuide ratings and the frequency of installed measures.
70 +9.6% NMR Evaluation of 2010 EnerGuide for Existing Houses Program Page 20 3.2 Program Goals and Design The 2010 EEH program had a target of 4,930 MWh of energy savings and 1,410 kW of demand savings. The 2010 EEH program was jointly sp...
AI summary The 2010 EEH program aimed for 4,930 MWh of energy savings and 1,410 kW of demand savings. It was jointly sponsored by the DSM Administrator, CNS, and NRCan, but NRCan ended rebate support in March 2010, earlier than planned. The program's continuation past March 31, 2011, is uncertain, and no replacement program has been confirmed.
am may take its place if EEH does not continue. In 2010, the program contracted with six competitively-selected service providers, termed ―Delivery Agents,‖ to provide services throughout Nova Scotia. 3.2.1 Exit of NRCan NRCan suddenly end...
AI summary The Energy Efficient Homes (EEH) program faced significant challenges after NRCan abruptly ended their rebate support in 2010, leading to a 60% drop in participation and operational difficulties for Delivery Agents. The program is expected to end in 2011, and Delivery Agents believe federal funding was crucial for the program's continuation, while many remain unaware of the provincial initiative.
g and articles in publications. NMR Evaluation of 2010 EnerGuide for Existing Houses Program Page 21 3.3.2 Contractor Training and Contractual Relationships The Delivery Agents have contracts with the Province of Nova Scotia (via CNS) to o...
AI summary The EEH program in Nova Scotia relies on Delivery Agents who have contracts with the Province via CNS and NRCan. Customer responsibility for selecting contractors is highlighted as a potential gap, and Delivery Agents report increased burdens due to quality assurance requirements and reduced participation.
he measures rebated by the program. NMR Evaluation of 2010 EnerGuide for Existing Houses Program Page 22 3.5 Program Tracking and Reporting Delivery Agents were responsible for using the HOT2000 software from NRCan to create audit reports...
AI summary The document discusses the tracking and reporting processes for the 2010 EnerGuide for Existing Houses program, highlighting issues with information sharing between NRCan, CNS, and the DSM Administrator. It also notes that consolidation under the new Efficiency Nova Scotia Corporation (ENSC) may help resolve these issues.
6% NMR Evaluation of 2010 EnerGuide for Existing Houses Program Page 27 Table 3-8 shows measure uptake (installations as a percentage of recommendations), estimated annual energy savings, EEH program incentive amount, and cost per kWh of a...
AI summary The document evaluates the 2010 EnerGuide for Existing Houses Program, analyzing measure uptake, energy savings, and program incentives. It introduces a Measure Effectiveness Index, which identifies electronic thermostats, heat pumps, and insulation as particularly effective measures.
Table 3-8: Effectiveness of Measures Per Unit Cost Annual per Energy Per Unit kWh of Measure Measure Savings EEH annual Effectiveness Uptake (kWh/yr) Incentive savings Index High efficiency air to air heat pump with 70% 7,208 $1,200 $0.17...
AI summary This table evaluates the effectiveness of various energy efficiency measures, including high-efficiency heat pumps, thermostats, and insulation, based on annual energy savings, incentives, and cost per kWh. The data highlights the performance of these measures in the context of the Energy Efficient Homes (EEH) program.
isfied 9 13 Dissatisfied 5 5 Don‘t know 5 10 In an on-site visit where NMR accompanied the Energy Advisor to an ―E‖ audit, the customer remarked that they had observed an immediate and substantial difference in their electric bill as a res...
AI summary The evaluation of the 2010 EnerGuide for Existing Houses Program found that 41% of participants believed the EEH program should offer rebates for additional upgrades, ranging from renewable power to energy-efficient appliances.
homes (10 from each service territory) were inspected by one of two third-party contractors. Other program changes implemented in 2010 included requiring Delivery Agents to supply CNS with photographs of participants‘ homes prior to instal...
AI summary The REAP program implemented a new protocol for replacing refrigerators and freezers based on appliance age rather than energy consumption data. This change was made to address issues with unreliable data from metering. A guidebook was created to help determine appliance manufacture dates, and the change did not significantly impact delivery processes as photography requirements were already in place.
Adequate availability of Energy Evaluators. NRCan is able to train a sufficient number of Delivery Agents/Energy Evaluators to model the house plans and audit the completed house. Skills and equipment. Delivery Agents/Energy Evaluators...
AI summary The document discusses program enablers and barriers related to energy efficiency initiatives. Enablers include availability of trained evaluators, proper skills and equipment, and availability of materials. Barriers include lack of awareness, reluctance to change practices, and cost-driven construction.
74 Programmable electronic thermostat 643 13 watt CFL compatible fixtures 43 NMR validated the prescriptive savings listed in the tracking spreadsheet through a review of the 2009 Low Income Households (LIH) report and the Ontario Power Au...
AI summary NMR reviewed the prescriptive savings values in the tracking spreadsheet, adjusting the annual savings for programmable thermostats and CFL fixtures based on reports from 2009 and 2010. Adjustments were made to align with more conservative estimates and recommendations from the LIH report.
(Refused) NMR Evaluation—2010 EnerGuide for New Houses Program Page A6 Section 2 – Satisfaction with program 14. Thinking of your OVERALL experience with the EnerGuide for New Houses Program up to this point, including any services receive...
AI summary The text presents survey questions about participant satisfaction with the EnerGuide for New Houses Program, including reasons for dissatisfaction such as delays in rebate processing, insufficient rebate amounts, and excessive paperwork.
ason that they information for identifying other energy efficiency had not pursued additional energy efficiency measures. This may measures they could implement. With the expansion indicate that respondents didn‘t have the time to research...
AI summary The text discusses barriers to implementing energy efficiency measures, such as lack of time and financing. It also mentions the expansion of the SBLS program and the need for financing options in collaboration with local banks.
ing purposes Program Administrators and the NMR Team collapsed some sites to reflect all activity performed at the site in instances where installations at a given location occurred over several days. Table 3-1: Population Summary Quantity...
AI summary The document discusses the installation of energy-efficient products under the Efficient Products Direct Install program, including the use of Model-Based Statistical Sampling (MBSS) to evaluate program impact. It includes a summary table of installations and energy savings across various product types and mentions that the program year had approximately six weeks left at the time of sampling.
There were two sites that required unique methods to estimate their energy savings. One facility operating as a furniture retailer had received 22 – 13 W CFL‘s to replace 60 W incandescent bulbs used in display lamps. It was determined tha...
AI summary The text discusses the estimation of energy savings from two unique sites. One site involved a furniture retailer where some CFLs were sold, and the other was an apartment complex with limited access. Savings were calculated using data from a New England study and stratified ratio estimation techniques.
77% 83% NMR Evaluation of 2010 Efficient Lighting Products Direct Install Program Page 22 3.7 Energy Savings Estimation Table 3-13 presents the net installed annual energy and demand savings for the 2010 Efficient Products Direct Install p...
AI summary The 2010 Efficient Products Direct Install program achieved significant energy and demand savings, exceeding its goals and surpassing the combined savings of previous years. The majority of savings came from CFL installations, with LED Exit Lights contributing a smaller portion. The program showed substantial growth compared to 2008 and 2009.
1 6 5 4 3 Reduce carbon † 4 2 3 11 footprint Reduce σ† 3 10 <1 13 maintenance costs Improve existing 3 9 5 4 lighting conditions Past program 1 participation Part of a green 1 initiative Assistance with 1 changing lighting Offer at our 1 f...
AI summary The text presents a table with various initiatives aimed at reducing carbon footprint, improving lighting conditions, and reducing maintenance costs. It also includes information on past program participation, assistance with changing lighting, and other initiatives. The table includes responses categorized under different headings such as 'Other' and 'Don‘t know'.
ow/Don‘t recall) On a scale of 1 to 5, where 1=‗not at all important‘ and 5=‗very important‘, how important is reducing energy usage to your company / organization? [9 = Don‘t know/Don‘t recall] On a scale of 1 to 5, where 1=‗not at all im...
AI summary The text contains survey questions related to energy usage importance, energy cost management, and the percentage of annual operating budgets attributed to energy costs. It also asks for suggestions to improve the Efficient Lighting Products Program and collects information on business operating hours.
.......................................................................................................................................... 42 TABLE 5-18: RECOMMENDATIONS TO IMPROVE PROGRAM......................................................
AI summary The document presents tables and figures related to program recommendations, building activity, and the evaluation of 2010 prescriptive rebate programs. It includes data on floor space, workers, and company types, as well as logic models for energy rebate programs.
NMR Evaluation of 2010 Prescriptive Rebate Programs Page I Executive Summary This report presents the results of the 2010 process and impact evaluations of the Business Energy Rebate (BER) and Smart Lighting Choices (SLC) programs conducte...
AI summary This report evaluates the 2010 Business Energy Rebate (BER) and Smart Lighting Choices (SLC) programs conducted by NMR Group, Inc. for Nova Scotia Power and Efficiency Nova Scotia Corporation. The evaluation includes site visits and interviews, with a focus on the impact of the SLC program, which is expected to be rendered obsolete by upcoming legislation mandating high-performance T8 lighting.
at someone outside In 2011, the BER program should continue to build their organizations had been responsible for specifying the measures awareness and reach with customers. Contractors and that were installed through the BER program. In a...
AI summary The BER program in 2011 was expected to continue building awareness and reach with customers through contractors and design professionals. Seven out of eleven respondents indicated that contractors or design professionals were responsible for specifying equipment installed through the program.
Findings and Recommendations Finding Recommendation BER-F3. BER-R3. Customers were motivated to participate in the BER program primarily When working with customers and training contractors, because of a financial benefit—nine said energy...
AI summary The BER program was primarily motivated by financial benefits, with energy savings and bill reduction being the main drivers. Nearly all participants found the program easy to use, though one faced a delay in determining eligibility. Recommendations include improving customer support and resource allocation.
r inquiries; and, when appropriate, to elevate customers quickly to the C&I Custom program if their projects appear to be too complex to be quickly approved. BER-F5. BER-R5. The majority of respondents were satisfied with the program. On a...
AI summary Respondents are generally satisfied with the BER program, but express dissatisfaction with rebate amounts. The program is noted as being new, and there is a recognition that incentive levels may need adjustment over time based on participant feedback.
. NMR Evaluation of 2010 Prescriptive Rebate Programs Page IV Findings and Recommendations Finding Recommendation BER-F7. BER-R7. All of the respondents said that managing and reducing energy costs BER participants appear to be a group of...
AI summary The Business Energy Rebate (BER) program, launched in 2010, provides financial incentives for businesses to purchase energy-efficient equipment. Respondents emphasized the importance of managing energy costs, though few had participated in rebate programs prior to BER, and few took additional energy-efficient actions after participating.
se of qualified energy efficient equipment. Eligible product categories include: lighting, motors and drives, HVAC, refrigeration and compressed air equipment. The BER program was modeled closely after successful prescriptive pro...
AI summary The BER program focuses on the use of qualified energy-efficient equipment across several product categories, modeled after Efficiency Vermont's successful prescriptive programs. EVT provided guidance on eligible technologies, eligibility criteria, savings estimates, and approved product lists.
1.1 Program Theory Program Background The BER program was primarily designed to be a Resource Acquisition program with the objective of helping businesses throughout Nova Scotia with the purchase of energy efficient equipment. However, the...
AI summary The BER program aims to help businesses in Nova Scotia acquire energy-efficient equipment through rebates, with a long-term goal of transforming market practices. The process includes outreach, product identification, authorization, installation, and rebate processing.
the equipment to apply for a rebate. NMR Evaluation of 2010 Prescriptive Rebate Programs Page 2
AI summary The document discusses the evaluation of 2010 prescriptive rebate programs, focusing on the process for applying for rebates related to energy-efficient equipment.
oming aware of the program, customers identify and purchase energy efficient equipment. Customers install energy efficient equipment. After purchasing energy efficient equipment, customers install the energy efficient equipment. Mid-Term...
AI summary The document outlines the outcomes of the BER program, including energy savings, bill reductions, increased knowledge about energy efficiency, and long-term benefits such as emission reductions and avoidance of new plant construction. The program encourages the adoption of energy-efficient equipment by businesses.
balance of the incentive to the buyer, in the form of a reduced price. Program Marketing by Distributors. Distributors market the program to electrical contractors and end users. 4 As of October of 2009, eligible products included HP T8F...
AI summary The document outlines a prescriptive rebate program that provides incentives to distributors for selling eligible lighting products. Distributors market the program to electrical contractors and end users, and incentives are offered per lamp and ballast sold.
er ballast sold. NMR Evaluation of 2010 Prescriptive Rebate Programs Page 6
AI summary The document evaluates the 2010 Prescriptive Rebate Programs, focusing on the sale of ballast and other related items. It is associated with the Nova Scotia Utility Board (NMR).
ses for smaller projects. NMR Evaluation of 2010 Prescriptive Rebate Programs Page 7 Short-Term Outcomes All eligible distributors are enrolled into the program. Distributors become more active in the program and continue promoting the...
AI summary The document outlines the short-term, mid-term, and long-term outcomes of the 2010 Prescriptive Rebate Programs, focusing on the increased adoption of high-performance (HP) lighting, improved lighting quality, energy savings, and long-term emission reductions and infrastructure avoidance.
ons. Avoidance of plant construction. NMR Evaluation of 2010 Prescriptive Rebate Programs Page 8 2.2 Program Logic Model Figure 2-1: Smart Lighting Choices Program Logic Model NMR Evaluation of 2010 Prescriptive Rebate Programs Page 9 3...
AI summary The document evaluates the 2010 Prescriptive Rebate Programs, focusing on the Smart Lighting Choices Program and the Building Efficiency Rebate (BER) program. It discusses program logic models, population data, and energy savings achieved in 2010.
visited, including the project number, type of equipment installed, and tracking connected demand and energy savings. Our on-site sample represented nearly one-third of the total 2010 tracked savings. Table 3-2: 2010 BER Population Trackin...
AI summary The text provides a summary of the 2010 BER Population Tracking Summary (Sample Frame), detailing energy and demand savings from various projects. The sample represents nearly one-third of the total tracked savings, with specific data on each project's category, energy savings in MWh, and connected demand savings in kW.
0.2 K-11 Lighting 132.9 31.6 Total 203.4 47.7 At the conclusion of 2010, the NMR team received the final file of program activity. As noted earlier, there were two more sites that received rebates between when the sample was pulled and the...
AI summary The NMR team evaluated the 2010 Prescriptive Rebate Programs by reviewing documentation and visiting sites to verify savings. Two additional sites were included due to their high savings, and savings were calculated using on-site data and program documentation. The evaluation covered lighting, motors and drives, and HVAC measures.
xture and lamp make and model. NMR Evaluation of 2010 Prescriptive Rebate Programs Page 12 The quantity of lamps or fixtures installed was verified on-site through observation and through discussion with the site contact. The site contacts...
AI summary The document discusses the evaluation of 2010 prescriptive rebate programs, focusing on verifying the quantity of installed lamps and fixtures, estimating annual operating hours, and calculating energy savings, including interactive savings from cooling systems.
priate type and size of the cooling system were applied. The total energy savings for lighting projects was the combination of the connected load energy savings and cooling interactive energy savings. Lighting Results A summary of lighting...
AI summary The evaluation of lighting projects from the 2010 Prescriptive Rebate Programs shows that total energy savings were 514.9 MWh with a realization rate of 104%. Variations in operating hours significantly affected savings estimates, with some sites showing decreases and others increases. Interactive effects also influenced the savings calculations.
uilding, and prescriptive savings were appropriate. For this project, the energy and demand savings used the same methodology as the tracking savings estimates: Energy Savings ESF motor hpCXS Peak Demand Savings DSFmotor hpC...
AI summary The document describes the methodology used to calculate energy and peak demand savings for motor efficiency projects. It outlines formulas involving energy savings factors, motor horsepower, and commissioning savings factors, as well as load profile and hourly bin analysis for projects with unique operating conditions.
nits less than 65 kBTU/hr was 57%. NMR Evaluation of 2010 Prescriptive Rebate Programs Page 18 HVAC Results Two of the four HVAC evaluated savings estimates fell within 15% of one another. One of them (K-01) was around 60% higher. There we...
AI summary The evaluation of the 2010 Prescriptive Rebate Programs found discrepancies between tracked and evaluated HVAC savings estimates. Differences arose from variations in full load hours, SEER ratings, and the inclusion of only heating demand savings for peak demand calculations. Evaluated savings were significantly higher than tracked savings, with a 140.5% realization rate.
8.4 11.8 2.9 12.6 3.1 Total 791.8 871.9 126.1 932.0 134.8 3.4 Spillover NMR surveyed a total of eleven participants, the sample for the survey was drawn from participants who either completed or are in the process of implementing a project...
AI summary The Nova Scotia Utility Board (NMR) conducted a spillover analysis for the Building Efficiency Rebate (BER) program, finding no instances of participant-like or non-like spillover among 2010 program participants. This was attributed to the availability of other rebate programs and the participant's focus on taking advantage of all available incentives.
alled through the program Don‘t know 25% Stated Intent Score = average of FR2a, FR2b, FR2c+ci, and FR2d. Table 3-9: Free-ridership Program Influence Questions Free- Question Question Responses Rider Number Score How influential were the fo...
AI summary The text presents data from Table 3-9, which evaluates the influence of various elements on participation in the BER program. Respondents rated factors such as NSPI incentives, installation contractors, and NSPI representatives on a scale from 1 to 5, with scores indicating the level of influence these factors had on their decision to install energy-efficient equipment.
503.3 72.8 NMR Evaluation of 2010 Prescriptive Rebate Programs Page 25 4 Impact Evaluation: SLC The following impact evaluation of the 2010 SLC program includes an overview of the DSM Administrator-tracked program savings, a description of...
AI summary The 2010 SLC program's impact evaluation includes savings tracked by the DSM Administrator, based on distributor-reported data. In 2010, 378,812 lamps and 115,808 ballasts were rebated, with a significant portion being F28 lamps and two-lamp ballasts. The evaluation excludes savings from the Small Business Lighting Solutions and C&I Custom Program projects.
100% because of rounding. NMR Evaluation of 2010 Prescriptive Rebate Programs Page 26 Table 4-2 shows the savings associated with the 66,140 ballasts and 239,507 lamps sold through the program. To determine the energy savings associated wi...
AI summary The document evaluates energy savings from the 2010 Prescriptive Rebate Programs, focusing on ballasts and lamps sold. The DSM Administrator assumed T8 standard electronic ballasts as the baseline, with adjustments made for retrofit projects. Savings estimates were calculated using lamp proportions, wattage reductions, and annual usage hours.
ate of a 93% installation rate. NMR Evaluation of 2010 Prescriptive Rebate Programs Page 28
AI summary The document discusses the evaluation of 2010 prescriptive rebate programs, with a focus on achieving a 93% installation rate. The Nova Scotia Utility Board (NMR) is involved in the evaluation process.
10 http://www.dpuc.state.ct.us/dockcurr.nsf/8e6fc37a54110e3e852576190052b64d/c530ebcb3a3e701f852577af005d 20e6?OpenDocument 11 http://www.ma-eeac.org/docs/MA%20TRM_2011%20PLAN%20VERSION.PDF NMR Evaluation of 2010 Prescriptive Rebate Progra...
AI summary The document evaluates the 2010 Prescriptive Rebate Programs, focusing on lighting usage in electrically conditioned spaces. Data from site visits for various DSM Administrator programs, including the Smart Lighting Choices, Small Business Lighting Solutions, and Efficient Products - Direct Install programs, were analyzed to calculate weighted averages for lighting in cooled and heated spaces.
ncy of the heating equipment. NMR Evaluation of 2010 Prescriptive Rebate Programs Page 31 4.3 Program Impact Results Table 4-5 presents the final estimates of savings for the SLC program based upon the analyses described above. This table...
AI summary This section presents the final estimates of energy savings from the SLC program in 2010, including both meter and generator-level data. The analysis includes annual energy savings and peak demand reductions, based on survey data and line loss factors.
y the C&I Sales Lead, through a marketing subcontractor, Delivery Agents, and an outbound calling center. In addition, the program was advertised in newspapers and on the DSM Administrator‘s website. 5.4 Measure Installations Respondents t...
AI summary The 2010 Prescriptive Rebate Programs were promoted through various channels including marketing subcontractors, delivery agents, and a calling center, as well as newspaper and website advertisements. Survey responses indicated that participants installed energy-efficient lighting, HVAC equipment, and new motors or variable speed drives, though some respondents could not recall specific installations.
subsequent questions. NMR Evaluation of 2010 Prescriptive Rebate Programs Page 35 Nearly one-half of the respondents (5 out of 11) said that the person most responsible for specifying equipment to install in their business was a contractor...
AI summary Nearly half of the respondents indicated that contractors were most responsible for specifying equipment to install in their businesses under the BER program. Other responsible parties included outside design professionals, utility account managers, manufacturer representatives, and internal company personnel.
2 Manufacturer representative 1 Someone within their company/organization 1 5.5 Program Awareness, Motivation and Barriers When asked how they had first become aware of the BER program, four out of eleven respondents cited sources associat...
AI summary The BER program's awareness sources include NSPI, contractors, trade newsletters, and previous participants. Four out of eleven respondents learned about the program through NSPI, while others cited alternative sources. This aligns with the program's marketing strategies.
1 2 NMR Evaluation of 2010 Prescriptive Rebate Programs Page 39 Respondents were asked four questions about actions they would have taken in the absence of the BER program. (Table 5-9) As the questions were asked separately, respondents we...
AI summary Respondents were asked about their actions without the BER program. Results show that some would have postponed installation, others would not have installed equipment, and some would have installed less efficient equipment.
9 3 6 Installing less energy efficient equipment 9 5 4 Installing the same quantity of equipment 9 3 5 1 Eight out of the nine respondents indicated that their budget could have accommodated the equipment that had been installed in the abs...
AI summary Eight out of nine respondents indicated that their budgets could have accommodated the equipment installed without program rebates, suggesting that the rebates may not have been essential for the installations. The table provides data on budget capabilities for different types of equipment.
8 No Don‘t know 1 1 Respondents rated the influence of various aspects of the BER program on their decision to participate in the program on a scale from one (―not at all influential‖) to five (―very influential‖). Information, services, o...
AI summary Respondents evaluated the influence of various aspects of the BER program on their participation. Information and advice from contractors and NSPI representatives were the most influential, while rebates and program information were only moderately influential.
1 3 1 3 NMR Evaluation of 2010 Prescriptive Rebate Programs Page 40 5.6.2 Spillover When respondents were asked whether they had installed any additional equipment of the type they had installed through the BER program (i.e., additional li...
AI summary The evaluation of the 2010 Prescriptive Rebate Programs found that respondents did not install additional equipment of the same type as those covered by the BER program. However, three respondents reported being influenced to take other energy efficiency actions, such as installing HVAC upgrades and occupancy sensors.
Average Percent 17% NMR Evaluation of 2010 Prescriptive Rebate Programs Page 42
AI summary The document provides an evaluation of the 2010 Prescriptive Rebate Programs, focusing on average participation rates, with a highlighted figure of 17%.
acing equipment in the future NMR Evaluation of 2010 Prescriptive Rebate Programs Page 43 Seven of the eleven respondents gave suggestions for improving the program. Three respondents suggested that the program increase the rebate amounts,...
AI summary Seven of eleven respondents suggested improving the 2010 Prescriptive Rebate Programs by increasing rebate amounts, clarifying eligible products, and improving user-friendliness of forms. One respondent recommended focusing on retrofits, and another suggested more direct customer-program staff communication.
1 More direct contact between customer and program staff 1 None 4 5.9 Firmographics The respondents represented a diverse variety of business types. (Table 5-19) Table 5-19: Principal Building Activity 2010 Sample size (n) 11 Retail (Other...
AI summary The text discusses the diversity of business types represented by respondents in the 2010 Prescriptive Rebate Programs, highlighting a range of principal building activities. It includes a table with sample sizes and categories of businesses.
68 Eight out of eleven respondents reported that their businesses were independent and not part of a larger company. (Table 5-23) Table 5-23: Type of Company 2010 Sample size (n) 11 Independent 8 Part of a larger company 3 Out of the nine...
AI summary The text reports that eight out of eleven respondents operate independent businesses, while three are part of larger companies. Additionally, five respondents have no other facilities in Nova Scotia, and four have between one and five other facilities. This data is from a survey conducted as part of the evaluation of the 2010 Business Energy Rebate and Smart Lighting Choices Programs.
A Interview Guides Participant Survey 2009-10 NSPI Business Energy Rebate Program DRAFT 8-6-10 Could I speak with [INSERT NAME]? 1. Yes [GO TO INTRODUCTION] 2. No [SAY ―Perhaps you can help me anyway.‖ GO TO INTRODUCTION] [INTRODUCTION] He...
AI summary This document is a draft of an interview guide used to evaluate the 2009-10 Nova Scotia Power Business Energy Rebate Program. It includes a participant survey aimed at gathering feedback from businesses that participated in the program to help evaluate and improve it.
1. Outside design professional 2. Contractor 3. Manufacturer representative 4. Utility account manager 5. Someone within your company / organization 98. (Don‘t know) 99. (Refused) [ASK V7/V8 FOR EACH MEASURE CATEGORY VERFIED IN V1 – V5; V1...
AI summary The text outlines a survey methodology used to gather information on factors motivating companies to install energy-efficient equipment across various categories, such as lighting, motors, and HVAC. It includes response options and instructions for data collection, focusing on program incentives, cost savings, and other motivations.
centive from Nova Scotia Power, could your budget have accommodated the full cost of the energy efficient upgrades including the incentive? 1. Yes 2. No 98. (Don‘t know) 99. (Refused) FR4. How influential were the following elements to you...
AI summary The text includes survey questions about participation in the Business Energy Rebate program and the influence of various factors on that decision, including NSPI incentives, information from the program, contractor services, and NSPI representatives.
y represent your responses. No one but NMR staff members will listen to the recording. NMR will keep all recordings in its files. Do I have your permission to record the interview _ Yes _ No Background and interaction with staff 1. Are you...
AI summary This text outlines an interview process conducted by NMR with a representative from a company to gather information about their interaction with Nova Scotia Power's energy efficiency rebate programs, particularly the 2010 Business Energy Rebate Program.
cipate in the NSPI rebate programs? [Probe: Save energy, rebates offered, reduce maintenance costs, protect environment, recommended by utility, concerns with carbon, etc.] 12. Were there any challenges or barriers that you faced in making...
AI summary The text outlines a series of questions aimed at understanding the experiences and challenges of participants in NSPI rebate programs, including barriers to participation, issues encountered, and satisfaction levels with various programs and interactions with NSPI staff.
the program 22. If you had not received the incentive from Nova Scotia Power, could your budget have accommodated the full cost of the energy efficient upgrades including the incentive? 23. How influential were the following elements to yo...
AI summary The text includes questions about the influence of various program elements on participation in the NSPI rebate programs, specifically the 2010 Business Energy Rebate Program. It asks respondents to rate the influence of incentives, information, contractor services, and NSPI representatives on their decision to participate.
2 3 4 5 9 no extremely DK influence influential Spillover Now I‘d like you to think about any energy efficient equipment or upgrades that your company is currently pursuing or has installed in the past two years on its own. These measures...
AI summary The text asks respondents to consider energy-efficient equipment or upgrades their company has installed or is pursuing, and whether these measures are similar to those covered by NSPI rebate programs. It also inquires about the location of installations, whether the upgrades are being implemented through NSPI programs, and the expected electricity savings in 2010.
NMR Evaluation of 2010 C&I Custom Program Page 1 1 Program Description 1.1 Program Description2 The C&I Custom program was first implemented in May of 2008. The program offers financial incentives to large commercial and industrial custome...
AI summary The C&I Custom program, implemented in 2008, provides financial incentives to large commercial and industrial customers for energy audits and efficiency measures. In 2010, it was complemented by the C&I New Construction program, which offers support for new energy-efficient buildings based on the Core Performance Guide.
3.2 Program Goals and Design The C&I Custom program was developed in-house by DSM Administrator staff; some features were modeled after the Manitoba Hydro Performance Optimization Program. The program offers incentives for commercial and i...
AI summary The C&I Custom program, developed by DSM Administrator staff, offers incentives for energy audits and efficiency improvements. It follows a four-stage process, including preliminary audits, feasibility studies, implementation, and verification. Some projects are directed to the BER program, while new construction is handled by the CINC program. The program aims to streamline incentives for custom projects requiring additional study.
(1) NMR Evaluation of 2010 C&I Custom Program Page A14 where, ES L = Direct savings from the lighting retrofit (kWh) n = Number of fixtures W = Fixture wattage i = Lighting group i h = Assumed lighting annual hours of operation 1,000 = Wh...
AI summary The evaluation discusses the energy savings from a lighting retrofit in a commercial and industrial (C&I) custom program. It includes equations for calculating direct savings and interactive cooling savings, noting reduced waste heat and lower cooling costs. Data from loggers and pivot tables were used to verify operating hours and savings claims.
ghting savings [kWh] = Heat gain factor (fraction of the lighting energy assumed to become a load on the space) = Seasonality factor (fraction of the year assumed to require cooling) = Coefficient of performance of the cooling system. A he...
AI summary The document evaluates energy savings from lighting efficiency improvements in commercial and industrial settings. It discusses factors such as heat gain, cooling seasonality, and coefficient of performance, and how they affect cooling and heating loads. It also mentions peak demand savings and the impact of interactive refrigeration and heating effects.
d period. NMR Evaluation of 2010 C&I Custom Program Page A27 Project ID: C-276-166-9 1.0 Facility Overview Changes in refrigeration controls and operation were implemented in 19 convenience stores in this project. These are small individua...
AI summary This document evaluates energy savings from refrigeration control upgrades in 19 convenience stores. New controls regulate evaporator fans and anti-condensate heaters based on temperature and humidity. Outside air dampers were also installed in 10 locations to reduce compressor use. Savings are calculated with a 7.1% scale factor for transmission and distribution losses.
1 1 1 2.5 Condenser Fan 240 2.2 1 1 2 Door Heaters 120 8 1 1 4 Dartmouth Fans or Equipment Volts Amps Phase # of Units Doors/Unit COP Evaporators 120 6 1 2 3 Compressor 240 30.7 1 1 1 2.5 Condenser Fan 240 3 1 1 2 Door Heaters 120 5.53 1 1...
AI summary The document presents technical data on equipment specifications for evaporators, compressors, condenser fans, and door heaters in different locations, including voltage, amperage, and COP. It also notes the installation of evaporator fan and door humidity controls in all four locations and free cooling in Truro and Dartmouth.
50.9 79.7 28.8 NMR Evaluation of 2010 C&I Custom Program Page A33 3.0 Project Overview Table 2 below provides an overview of the fixtures installed, as well as the baseline fixtures that were removed: Table 2: Summary of Installed and Remo...
AI summary This section provides a summary of installed and removed fixtures as part of the 2010 C&I Custom Program evaluation. It includes details on the types and quantities of new fixtures installed and the preexisting fixtures removed.
culate annual run hours. NMR Evaluation of 2010 C&I Custom Program Page A34 Interactive cooling savings were also claimed for space conditioned areas of the facility. Since the new fixtures operate at lower wattages, and thus impart less h...
AI summary The document evaluates energy and demand savings from the 2010 C&I Custom Program, including interactive cooling savings and peak demand savings. Calculations use factors like heat gain, seasonality, and coincidence, while adjusting for prior savings claimed in 2009.
8 188 90 Area 5 FB 6L T5HO 83 351 Area 6 FB 6L T-5HO 61 351 Area 7 1L 4' T-8 6 23 Area 7 2L 4' T-8 77 42 Area 7 2L T-8 HBF 60 76 Area 7 4L 8' T-8 482 90 Total 3,163 98.9 Avg/Fixt NMR Evaluation of 2010 C&I Custom Program Page A45 Table 3:...
AI summary The text presents a table summarizing the removal of fixtures as part of an evaluation of the 2010 C&I Custom Program. It lists various areas, fixture types, quantities removed, and average fixture values, concluding with a total of 3,163 fixtures removed with an average value of 98.9 per fixture.
te visit and those fixtures are not NMR Evaluation of 2010 C&I Custom Program Page A46 included in the lighting summary. Site personnel could not confirm the installation matches tracking estimates at that site. Fixture tables do not inclu...
AI summary The evaluation of the 2010 C&I Custom Program indicates that the installed lighting fixtures do not fully match tracking estimates, with some original baseline fixtures still in use. The majority of the installed fixtures are T8 lamps and ballasts, while T5 equipment accounts for a smaller portion.
es heating costs. Air conditioning loads are reduced resulting in lower cooling costs. The new lighting systems provide additional refrigeration savings for the entire year. The cooling bonus was calculated with the following equation: (2)...
AI summary The text discusses the calculation of energy savings from lighting system upgrades, including interactive effects savings, cooling bonuses, and peak demand savings. It explains the use of factors such as heat gain, seasonality, and coefficient of performance to estimate savings. Adjustments are made for non-representative fixture usage and seasonal variations.
(5) where, = Installed Motor Energy Savings [kWh] = Preexisting Motor Power Draw [kW] = Installed Motor Power Draw [kW] = Annual Operating Hours [h] The operating hours, h, used in Equation 5 were calculated based on the percentage of the...
AI summary The document discusses issues with the methodology used to calculate energy and demand savings from a motor efficiency project. Key problems include incorrect power factor calculations, reliance on a small sample of operating data, and failure to account for variations in motor usage. These issues were later addressed in the evaluation analysis.
tt to kW Conversion Factor [W/kW] NMR Evaluation of 2010 C&I Custom Program Page A76 = Installed Motor Nominal Efficiency = Preexisting Motor Nominal Efficiency = Weekly Operating Hours [h] = Annual Schedule Scale Factor In cases where bot...
AI summary The document discusses the evaluation of a 2010 C&I Custom Program, focusing on the methodology used to calculate motor efficiency savings. It highlights the challenges of comparing pre- and post-installation amperage data due to shifts in motor loads and explains the use of Equation 6 and 7 for calculating savings based on available data.
0 0 0 0 1 1 0 -4 Intersection 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Intersection 10 0 1 1 0 0 0 -1 -1 -1 -1 Intersection 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 In general, the discrepancies were relatively minor and were not all biased in the same direction. However, it...
AI summary The document discusses discrepancies in fixture counts at intersections, noting that while most were minor, seven out of 11 verified intersections had errors. The use of incorrect operating factors in the M&V analysis, particularly regarding protected left turns, affected energy savings calculations.
n‘t know/Don‘t recall NMR Evaluation of 2010 C&I Custom Program Page C10 IMPLEMENTED MEASURES Q21A1. FOR EACH Q21=1 (except scoping, feasibility or technical assessments): Did you implement this energy efficient upgrade through a Nova Scot...
AI summary The document outlines a series of questions related to the implementation of energy-efficient upgrades through Nova Scotia Power programs, including whether the upgrade was implemented through a program, the reason if not, the implementation date, and estimated energy savings in 2010.
OR $ _ (88888=Measure uses fuel other than electricity: What fuel is that? _ IF NON-ELECTRIC FUEL (88888) SKIP TO NEXT MEASURE IN Q21=1.) NMR Evaluation of 2010 C&I Custom Program Page C11 Q21A5. (IF Q21A4 ≠ 88888): And how many kilowatt h...
AI summary The text outlines a questionnaire for evaluating energy efficiency measures, including questions about expected electricity savings and whether energy-efficient upgrades will be implemented through Nova Scotia Power programs. It also asks about the reasons for not participating in such programs and the expected timeline for implementation.
l? b. To what do you trace the difficulties you encountered? How might they be addressed in future programs? 7. Since last year there have been a few changes to the C&I program i. Assignment of an NSPI project owner, who manages projects c...
AI summary The text discusses changes to the Commercial and Industrial (C&I) Custom Program, including the assignment of an NSPI project owner, improved tools for savings calculations, simplified feasibility studies, and increased incentive levels. Questions are posed regarding the rationale behind these changes and their effectiveness.
ound and interaction with staff 1. Are you the person at [company] who is most knowledgeable about your experiences with energy efficient equipment or upgrades rebated by Nova Scotia Power? 2. What is your job title? What roles and respons...
AI summary The text outlines a series of interview questions directed at a representative from a company regarding their experience with Nova Scotia Power's energy efficiency rebate programs, specifically focusing on participation in the 2010 C&I Custom Program and prior programs.
t pose a barrier to participation in the C&I Custom program? [Probes: Assistance, availability, or interaction with program staff; requirements of any of the four-steps;] The BER program was designed to streamline the rebate process for C&...
AI summary The text discusses the Business Energy Rebate (BER) program and its implementation by C&I customers, highlighting the simplicity of the BER compared to the C&I Custom program. It also explores participant experiences, identifying potential barriers and motivations for participation in energy efficiency programs.
cipate in the NSPI rebate programs? [Probe: Save energy, rebates offered, reduce maintenance costs, protect environment, recommended by utility, concerns with carbon, etc.] 12. Were there any challenges or barriers that you faced in making...
AI summary The text outlines a series of questions aimed at evaluating the experience of participants in NSPI rebate programs, focusing on barriers to participation, challenges in implementation, satisfaction levels, and gaps in program coverage. It also asks about the effectiveness of communication, rebate amounts, and measurement and verification processes.
the program 22. If you had not received the incentive from Nova Scotia Power, could your budget have accommodated the full cost of the energy efficient upgrades including the incentive? 23. How influential were the following elements to yo...
AI summary The text includes survey questions about the influence of various factors on participation in NSPI rebate programs, including incentives, information from the program, contractor services, and interactions with NSPI representatives.
5 9 no extremely DK influence influential Spillover Now I‘d like you to think about any energy efficient equipment or upgrades that your company is currently pursuing or has installed in the past two years on its own. These measures could...
AI summary The text asks respondents to consider energy-efficient equipment and upgrades implemented or pursued by their company in the past two years, including whether they were installed independently or through rebate programs, and the expected electricity savings in 2010.
ent measures and processes; or the NMR Evaluation of 2010 C&I Custom Program Page C26 savings could be from PLANNED OR END-OF-LIFE replacements and installations of higher efficiency rather than standard efficiency measures and processes....
AI summary The text discusses energy efficiency measures and their impact on electricity savings, asking participants about the influence of programs like C&I Custom and BER on their decision to implement energy efficiency actions. It also includes questions about the importance of reducing energy usage and managing energy costs to organizations.
sts to your company / organization? [9=Don‘t know/Don‘t recall] 32. What percent of your annual operating budget do energy costs account for? [999=Don‘t know/Don‘t recall] % 33. Do you have any suggestions on how to improve any of the NSPI...
AI summary This document is a final report on the impact and process evaluation of the Small Business Direct Install Program 2010, submitted by NMR Group, Inc. and KEMA, Inc. to Efficiency Nova Scotia Corporation. It includes survey questions and findings related to energy costs and rebate programs.
NMR Evaluation of 2010 Small Business Lighting Solutions Program Page 1 1 Program Description 1.1 Program Description The DSM Administrator‘s 2010 Small Business Lighting Solutions Program (SBLS) was designed to achieve annual energy savin...
AI summary The 2010 Small Business Lighting Solutions Program (SBLS) aimed to achieve energy and demand savings by offering lighting retrofits to small businesses at 20% of installed costs. Initially limited to two regions, the program expanded province-wide in 2010 and included a recycling component that was improved and expanded.
To more fully assess the transferability of the 2008 SBLS results to the 2010 program year, the NMR Team spoke with program implementers to assess differences in program operations between the two program years. The SBLS program was confir...
AI summary The document discusses the transferability of the 2008 SBLS program results to the 2010 program year, noting that program operations are largely unchanged except for expanded availability province-wide. It highlights discrepancies in wattage assumptions between the tracking system and on-site measurements, which affected savings estimates in 2008 and are still used in 2010.
ulate savings were the same as those used in 2008. Given this consistency and the similarity in measure mix installed, we believe the transfer of the 2008 realization rate – which was driven primarily by wattage changes due to spot watts –...
AI summary The 2010 Small Business Lighting Solutions Program's energy and demand savings are evaluated using realization rates from 2008. The results show installed annual energy savings of 12,052 MWh at the meter and 12,944 MWh at the generator, with connected demand savings of 3,712.7 kW and 3,987.5 kW, respectively.
sue lighting improvements prior to talking with anyone about the Small Business Lighting Solutions Program? 1. Yes 2. No 9. (Don‘t know/Don‘t recall) Now I would like to ask you to consider what actions you would have taken in the absence...
AI summary The text asks respondents about their behavior in the absence of the Small Business Lighting Solutions Program, including whether they would have postponed or reduced energy-efficient lighting installations, and how influential the program was in their decision to participate.
b. On-site lighting audit NMR Evaluation of 2010 Small Business Lighting Solutions Program Page B14 c. Preparation of cost and savings analysis d. Presentation of cost and savings analysis to customer e. Obtaining participant authorization...
AI summary The text outlines the process of the Small Business Lighting Solutions (SBLS) program, including on-site lighting audits, cost and savings analysis, customer authorization, and direct installation of energy-efficient lighting. It also asks about participant perceptions, motivations, barriers, and spillover effects of the program.
ranty replacements? d. The agreed list of lighting products? [PROBE: Are there other products that should be on the list? Are there products that should not be on the list?] 11. Are there other incentives or rebates available, not provided...
AI summary The document presents a series of questions related to the Small Business Lighting Solutions (SBLS) program, including inquiries about product lists, other incentives, program impacts on sales, and participant satisfaction with NSPI staff.