Topic:"Forecasting Methodology" in M08888

Q1: Are all the non-energy benefits assessed by this study participantrelated? Are any non-energy benefits utility-related? A1: All benefits are participant related. Utility-related non-energy benefits are included in Massachusetts for low...

AI summary All non-energy benefits (NEBs) are participant-related, with utility-related NEBs only in Massachusetts for low-income programs. Methodology uses averaged heating/cooling degree days to assess thermal comfort. Duplicate rows in Appendix B stem from market segment differences in initial modeling. TRC formula in Nova Scotia is materially similar to Massachusetts, with NEBs treated as additional benefits.

Section 3.0 Methodology of NEBs Application and Adaptation VEIC was commissioned by EfficiencyOne to conduct an analysis of a full suite of non-energy benefits to be quantified for Efficiency Nova Scotia's portfolio of measures. VEIC condu...

AI summary VEIC analyzed non-energy benefits (NEBs) for Efficiency Nova Scotia's programs, using Massachusetts' research as the primary resource. Deliverables include a report, presentation to the DSM Advisory Group, and an Excel tool for future use. Massachusetts' MA TRM provides adaptable measure-level NEB values for Nova Scotia's measures.

3. Discount Rate The National Action Plan for Energy Efficiency 14 establishes a standard methodology for the determination of an appropriate discount rate for an energy efficiency program. The Plan provides a brief review of discount rate...

AI summary The document discusses methodologies for determining discount rates in energy efficiency programs, emphasizing the use of social discount rates (e.g., California's 3% real rate) and VEIC's recommendation to use a 12-month average of 30-year Treasury yields. It highlights administrative efficiency and the need for universal discount rate application across screening tools, citing Massachusetts and Efficiency Vermont practices.

NON-CONFIDENTIAL Request IR-08: Does the CE testing methodology proposed by EfficiencyOne put any limitation on how much NEBs (as a percentage of energy benefits) can be considered in the cost-effectiveness testing? Response IR-08: Efficie...

AI summary EfficiencyOne's proposed CE testing methodology uses specific NEB values from Massachusetts research rather than a direct methodology, implying a limitation on NEB percentages. Future changes would involve consultation with the DSM Advisory Group or NSUARB, as outlined in the Application.

Energy, Demand, Expenditures, and Participants The calculations used in this document use the general term "savings". The same calculations are applied to energy savings, peak demand savings, program expenditures, and in most cases, partic...

AI summary The document explains that calculations use the term 'savings' to represent various metrics including energy savings, peak demand savings, program expenditures, and participation numbers, with the same methodology applied by substituting the term as needed.

Assumption Low income Nova Scotians are assumed to be 10 per cent as likely to participate as the general population (as estimated by a local low-income expert).

AI summary The analysis assumes low-income Nova Scotians have a 10% participation rate relative to the general population, based on estimates from a local low-income expert. This assumption underpins calculations related to program engagement and resource allocation in regulatory proceedings.

Calculation Low income savings = (total savings) x (OP) x (10%)

AI summary The calculation formula for low-income savings is derived by multiplying total savings by Overall Prevalence (OP) and a 10% factor. This method is part of a regulatory proceeding in Nova Scotia, likely related to energy efficiency or utility programs.

Assumption No low income participation.

AI summary The proceeding assumes no participation from low-income groups, which may affect the consideration of their needs in the regulatory decisions.

Assumption No low income participation.

AI summary The proceeding assumes no participation from low-income groups, which may affect the consideration of their needs in the regulatory decisions.

5.1.1 Extra-Large Industrial Projects ELI customers completed efficiency projects in 2009 and 2010. The resulting energy and demand savings contribute to the IRP targets and are reported in this filing because they are incremental to custo...

AI summary ELI customers completed efficiency projects in 2009-2010, contributing 80 GWh and 12 MW in energy/demand savings to IRP targets. These conservative estimates, based on third-party investigations for ENSC, will be evaluated in 2011, with variances reported in the 2013 DSM Plan.

3.5.5 Cost Effectiveness Screening [99] Although the Board has not approved the Quantum Agreement, Section 7 contains a provision which states as follows: Through collaboration within the DSM Advisory Group the parties agree to work to ach...

AI summary The Board has not approved the Quantum Agreement but allows collaboration within the DSM Advisory Group to develop a consensus on methodology for future DSM research plans. The existing TRC methodology remains in place unless a compelling case is made to abandon it.

t it just – you just deal with an event and then the event stops and then you get on with business as normal. There's a period of catch-up before the business gets back to where it would have been. … I don't think it's appropriate to stop...

AI summary The Province challenges the Board's acceptance of PwC's methodology for calculating loss periods, arguing that the loss period should extend beyond the Market Street store's opening. The Board acknowledged PwC's analysis of vendor discounts and distribution centre impacts, while the Province seeks to replace PwC's findings with Mr. Wintrip's opinion.

3. Discount Rate A significant input to the cost-effectiveness screening process is the discount rate assumption. Given that each cost-effectiveness test reflects a specific stakeholder perspective in comparing the net present value of the...

AI summary The discount rate assumption is a critical factor in the cost-effectiveness screening process for energy efficiency programs. The EmPOWER Maryland programs currently use the utility's weighted average cost of capital (WACC) as the discount rate for the TRC test. However, some stakeholders, including MEA and Efficiency First, advocate for a lower societal discount rate of 4.7% for the SCT. The staff recommends using the average WACC for all cost-effectiveness tests except the SCT, while the decision supports the use of the 4.7% rate for the SCT and retains the WACC for the TRC test.

Request IR-4: - 9 Lines 4-8 on page 2 of 15 lists four shortcomings of the TRC, as it is currently applied in NS. Please - 10 comment on how each of these four is addressed by the inclusion of NEB's in the TRC calculation. - 11 If any of t...

AI summary The text requests comments on how the inclusion of NEB's in the TRC calculation addresses four identified shortcomings of the TRC in Nova Scotia. It also asks whether further modifications or work are needed if any shortcomings remain unaddressed and if similar efforts are underway elsewhere.