E-22024 DSM Programs Evaluation Reports
129 passages
Table 1: 2024 Portfolio Evaluation Plan PY2024 Program Components Impact Process Market Residential DSM Program Components Appliance Retirement Condensed Instant Savings Comprehensive Affordable Multifamily Housing Comprehensive X Affordab...
AI summary Table 1 outlines the 2024 Portfolio Evaluation Plan for various program components under residential and BNI DSM programs. It details the impact, process, and market aspects of each program, including comprehensive and condensed evaluations for initiatives such as Appliance Retirement, Instant Savings, and Business Energy Rebates.
Unitary Savings Review As part of the update to the 2024-2025 DSM MA that was reviewed in its entirety in 2024, for program components with unitary savings values - namely Appliance Retirement, Instant Savings, Home Energy Assessment, Gree...
AI summary The 2024-2025 DSM MA update reviewed unitary savings values for programs like Appliance Retirement, Home Energy Assessments, and Business Energy Rebates. Parameters were validated and updated, with new measures added, including advanced thermostats and solar PV systems. Review methods included literature reviews, metering studies, and energy models.
2.2 Process and Market Evaluations Process and market evaluations were conducted using a range of activities such as program component documentation as well as secondary data reviews, jurisdictional scans, logic model reviews, as well as p...
AI summary Process and market evaluations were conducted through documentation, data reviews, surveys, and interviews, focusing on Efficient Product Installation, Business Energy Rebates – Instant Rebates, Affordable Multifamily Housing, Affordable Single-family Homes, and Custom New Construction programs.
Table 5: Comparison of 2024 Evaluated and Tracked Energy Savings at the Generator a Tracked Results Evaluated Results Program Component Annual Gross Savings (GWh) Annual Net Savings (GWh) Annual Gross Savings (GWh) NTGR b Annual Net Saving...
AI summary Table 5 compares the 2024 evaluated and tracked energy savings for various programs in Nova Scotia. It highlights discrepancies between gross and net savings, as well as differences in net savings and net realization rates for each program component, including Appliance Retirement, Instant Savings, Affordable Multifamily Housing, and others.
Table 6: Comparison of 2024 Evaluated and Tracked Peak Demand Savings at the Generator a Program Component Tracked Results Evaluated Results Difference DSM Program Annual Gross Savings (MW) Annual Net Savings (MW) Available Capacity (MW) A...
AI summary Table 6 compares the evaluated and tracked peak demand savings at the generator for various programs in 2024. It shows results for residential, BNI, and demand response programs, highlighting differences in net savings and available capacity, along with net realization rates for each component.
Efficient Product Rebates Efficient Product Rebates is comprised of one program component, Business Energy Rebates, which is further comprised of two services, namely Application Rebates and Instant Rebates. In 2024, Business Energy Rebate...
AI summary Efficient Product Rebates includes Business Energy Rebates, which achieved 39.529 GWh in net electrical energy savings and 5.746 MW in net peak demand savings in 2024 through Application and Instant Rebates services.
Business Energy Rebates - › In 2024, Instant Rebates participation decreased by 26% compared to 2023 levels. Application Rebates participation increased by 18% in 2024, while gross electrical energy savings per Application Rebates particip...
AI summary In 2024, Business Energy Rebates (BER) saw a 26% drop in Instant Rebates participation but an 18% rise in Application Rebates. Free-ridership for LED products decreased after algorithm updates, while NTGR improvements increased energy savings. Evaluated savings for Application Rebates matched E1's data, but Instant Rebates showed 4-6% higher savings.
Custom Incentives In 2024, Custom Incentives achieved 44.429 GWh in net electrical energy savings and 5.793 MW in net peak demand savings at the generator through its two components, namely Custom and Strategic Energy Management. Custom co...
AI summary In 2024, the Custom Incentives program achieved 44.429 GWh in net electrical energy savings and 5.793 MW in peak demand savings through its Custom and Strategic Energy Management components. Custom includes Retrofit, Pay-for-Performance, New Construction, and Building Optimization services.
Custom - › Compared to 2023, Custom participation decreased in 2024. While Retrofit and Building Optimization participation levels decreased, New Construction participation significantly increased in 2024. - › Following the project reviews...
AI summary Custom program participation decreased in 2024, with Retrofit and Building Optimization participation declining while New Construction increased. The Evaluator adjusted energy and peak demand savings estimates, noting reduced free-ridership (15% for Retrofit, 28% for New Construction) and no spillover. Evaluated savings were 8% and 5% higher than E1's tracked figures.
3.1.3 Demand Response DSM Programs
AI summary The section outlines Nova Scotia's Demand Response Demand-Side Management (DR DSM) programs, focusing on initiatives to manage energy demand through incentives, rebates, and efficiency measures. Key stakeholders include Efficiency Nova Scotia (ENS) and Nova Scotia Power (NSP), with emphasis on programs like Business Energy Rebates (BER) and the Oil to Heat Pump Program (OHPA).
Table 8: 2024 Evaluated Net Lifetime Electrical Energy Savings at the Generator DSM Program Program Component Annual Net Energy Savings (GWh) Lifetime Net Energy Savings (GWh) Weighted Average EUL (years) Share of Annual Net Energy Savings...
AI summary Table 8 outlines the 2024 evaluated net lifetime electrical energy savings by DSM program and component, highlighting the significant contributions from residential and BNI programs. The Home Energy Assessment program contributes the highest share of both annual and lifetime savings, while the Demand Response program is excluded due to no electrical energy savings.
Table 9: 2024 Evaluated GHG Emission Reductions DSM Program Program Component Gross Annual Avoided GHG Emissions in CO2 eq Tonnes Net Annual Avoided GHG Emissions in CO2 eq Tonnes Residential Efficient Appliance Retirement 1,981 1,117 Prod...
AI summary Table 9 presents evaluated greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reductions for 2024 under various demand-side management (DSM) programs in Nova Scotia. The table includes both gross and net annual avoided emissions in CO2 equivalent tonnes for different program components, such as appliance retirement, product rebates, and energy assessments.
Table 10: 2024 Satisfaction Results DSM Program Program Component Participant Satisfaction Partner Satisfaction Residential Existing Residential Affordable Multifamily Housing 9.7 - Affordable Single-family Home 9.4 (Heat Pump) 8.9 (Modell...
AI summary Table 10 presents 2024 satisfaction results for various DSM programs, including residential and BNI components, with participant and partner satisfaction scores for different program elements such as Affordable Multifamily Housing, Efficient Product Installation, and Business Energy Rebate – Instant Rebates.
Table 11: 2024 Planned Net Savings and Evaluated Results Planned Savings Evaluated Results Variance Program Component and DSM Program Net Energy Savings (GWh) Net Peak Demand Savings (MW) Available DR Capacity (MW) Net Energy Savings (GWh)...
AI summary Table 11 outlines the 2024 planned net savings and evaluated results for various energy efficiency and demand response programs in Nova Scotia. It shows the performance of residential and BNI programs, highlighting variances between planned and evaluated outcomes, such as energy savings and demand reductions.
Table 12: Evaluated Net Electrical Energy Savings at the Generator, 2020-2024 Energy Savings (GWh) Energy Savings (%) DSM Program Program Component 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Residential Residential Appliance Retirem...
AI summary Table 12 presents evaluated net electrical energy savings from various DSM programs in Nova Scotia from 2020 to 2024, highlighting contributions from residential, BNI, and overall portfolio programs, with significant energy savings percentages and GWh values reported for each category and year.
In 2024, the residential sector accounted for 45% of net electrical energy savings and the BNI sector accounted for 55% of net electrical energy savings. Compared to 2023, while the share of lighting in residential programs increased from...
AI summary In 2024, residential and BNI sectors contributed significantly to energy savings, with lighting shares changing slightly. The residential sector led in peak demand savings, and the Demand Reduction program contributed 8.091 MW in demand response capacity.
› Incentive calculations can cause confusion among participants. Participants do not always realize that they must pay tax on overall project expenditures and that the program component only covers up to 80% of pre-tax costs. E1 provides v...
AI summary Participants face confusion regarding tax obligations on project expenditures and rebate calculations, as program coverage is limited to 80% of pre-tax costs. E1 provides explanations but struggles to clarify rebate determinations, while some participants mistakenly assume preapproval estimates are final rebate amounts.
National Energy Code of Canada for Buildings [NECB] 2020 Part 9 buildings); such an approach could be considered by E1 if the program wishes to capture a higher proportion of projects outside the HRM. › Participants are satisfied with the...
AI summary Participants report high satisfaction with E1's responsiveness but moderate satisfaction with program value due to costs and ROI uncertainty. Decarbonization motivates participation, yet financial barriers (higher costs, modelling expenses) and low modeller engagement hinder adoption. Insufficient modelling cost coverage is a key concern.
Business Energy Rebates – Instant Rebates: BNI Lighting To analyze the evolution of the BNI lighting market, the Evaluator completed a market characterization study to assess the state of the lighting market and review whether updates to a...
AI summary The market for BNI lighting under BER-IR has shifted almost entirely to LED technology, with distributors reporting 100% LED stock for most fixtures. This validates the use of a 'replace-on-burnout' baseline and suggests imminent updates to program baselines. Non-LED options remain limited, and retrofit opportunities persist in sectors with capital constraints.
1.3 Participation History Since 2012, ARet has retired or replaced a total of 77,696 old and inefficient appliances from homes and schools. These were recycled so that they could not be refurbished, sold second hand, or left plugged in. In...
AI summary Since 2012, ARet has retired over 77,696 appliances, with 5,941 retired in 2024, a 39% increase from 2023. Energy and peak demand savings rose by 39% in 2024. Incentives for refrigerators and freezers were increased in 2021 to boost participation.
AMH Findings and Recommendations This subsection presents the key findings and recommendations from the 2024 AMH evaluation. 2024 AMH-Finding: AMH generated high levels of satisfaction overall. Interviewed participants were highly satisfie...
AI summary The 2024 AMH evaluation found high participant satisfaction but noted confusion over incentive tax calculations and a need for project management support. Recommendations include case studies for clarity, technical guides, and audit template improvements. EAs expressed dissatisfaction with audit reporting templates, prompting suggestions for streamlining.
Ensure that DAs/contractors provide a leave-behind so that participants know who to contact in case of questions or difficulties or to better understand how to operate and maintain their heat pump. 2024 ASFH-Finding: Having to use two plat...
AI summary The 2024 ASFH program achieved significant energy savings but faces administrative challenges due to fragmented reporting platforms and outdated training materials. Recommendations include streamlining processes and updating DA/contractor training. Participation increased 5x YoY, though average savings per participant declined 48% due to adjustment ratio changes.
1.1 AMH Description AMH provides affordable housing owners and non-profit organizations, such as rehabilitation or transition houses, with incentives for building-wide energy retrofit projects with the intent of reducing electrical and non...
AI summary AMH provides incentives for energy retrofits in affordable multifamily housing and non-profits, requiring energy audits unless using a prescriptive path. Funding comes from electricity ratepayers and the Province of Nova Scotia, with incentive amounts adjusted over time. The program targets 1.900 GWh in electrical savings and 1.581 MW in peak demand reduction by 2024.
3.2.2 Reasons for Initial Interest Among Dropped-out Participants and Non-participants As seen above among participants, when it comes to why dropped-out participants and non-participants were initially interested in AMH, cost-related fact...
AI summary Dropped-out participants and non-participants in AMH were primarily motivated by rebates/financial support, followed by energy efficiency and cost savings. Expectations were vague, with most anticipating financial incentives but unclear on specifics. Negative past rebate experiences tempered some expectations.
3.2.3 Barriers to Participation and Program Completion For the dropped-out participants who started but did not complete the program component, financial barriers were cited most often as reasons for dropping out of AMH. Dropped-out partic...
AI summary The analysis identifies financial barriers, low incentives, lengthy payback periods, and affordability covenant issues as key reasons for AMH program dropout. Participants cited insufficient budgets, unexpected costs, and dissatisfaction with rental rates. Program ineligibility and external factors like property sales or illness also contributed. E1 staff and EAs highlighted ongoing challenges with affordability and upfront costs.
Rebate, Calculations, and Financial Concerns For EAs, the AMH rebate is considered one of AMH's greatest strengths, as confirmed by participant satisfaction levels (see [Figure](#page-17-0) 8 above), along with the energy cost savings resu...
AI summary The AMH rebate program faces challenges with participant confusion over rebate calculations, tax obligations, and fluctuating incentive amounts due to supply chain costs. E1 staff report efforts to clarify incentives but note ongoing misunderstandings. Financial barriers include upfront capital needs and limited audit recognition for additional funding.
AMH Strengths: - › Financial support for affordable housing - › Provides a comprehensive list of upgrades that can be implemented over time - › 50% incentive received before project end - › Potential energy cost savings - › High overall sa...
AI summary The AMH program offers financial support, 50% upfront incentives, energy cost savings, and high participant and EA satisfaction. It features clear forms, a 100 NPS, and no concerns about agreement terms, highlighting its effectiveness and user-friendliness in multifamily housing upgrades.
2024 AMH-Finding: Incentive calculations can cause confusion among participants. Participants do not always realize that they must pay tax on overall project expenditures and that the program component only covers up to 80% of pre-tax cost...
AI summary Participants in AMH programs are confused about tax obligations on project costs and the 80% pre-tax incentive coverage. E1 provides explanations but participants still struggle with rebate calculations. Preapproval estimates are often mistaken as final, despite potential changes based on installed equipment.
2024 AMH-Finding: Costs and lack of budget are barriers to participation. Financial barriers constitute the main reasons most interviewed dropped-out participants withdrew from the program component. The majority had no budget available fo...
AI summary Financial barriers and lack of budget are primary reasons for withdrawal from the AMH program, with participants citing insufficient funds for maintenance and efficiency upgrades. Half of dropped-out participants also faced low rental rates in operating agreements. Co-funding and low-interest financing are recommended as critical support tools.
Satisfaction Overall, most interviewed DAs are satisfied with the program (7.5 on average), as illustrated in the figure below. The participation levels (9.8) as well as the quality (9.3) of the upgrades are the program elements with the h...
AI summary Most Delivery Agents (DAs) report satisfaction with the ASFH program (7.5 average), particularly its participation levels and upgrade quality. However, dissatisfaction arises from cumbersome data/reporting processes, non-user-friendly software (CIS/SharePoint), and lack of marketing tools. DAs criticize repetitive data entry, platform incompatibility, and poor communication from E1.
Installation of Upgrades Once a project is approved, the DA informs the modelled participant and organizes and completes the approved upgrade installations. This step mostly occurs without any major hitches. As illustrated in [Figure](#pag...
AI summary Installation of upgrades generally proceeds smoothly with high participant satisfaction, but challenges include disruptions during large projects, rescheduling delays, cost-sharing frustrations, and occasional participant dissatisfaction leading to discontinuation. DAs report good collaboration with E1 but note challenges in managing expectations and administrative issues.
ASFH Challenges: - › The software tools used to manage/deliver the program require more training, communications, and efficiencies to reduce administrative burden (DAs and contractors) - › Existence of scams leads to participant mistrust o...
AI summary Challenges in the Affordable Single-family Homes (ASFH) program include software training needs, scams causing mistrust, confusion with OHPA, information gaps, long E1 processing times, and communication delays between E1 and heat pump contractors.
2024 ASFH-Finding: Participants would like more information to be provided about the program steps. Limited participant knowledge about ASFH can cause participant confusion and frustration during the initial DA/contractor visit, particular...
AI summary Participants expressed confusion about ASFH program steps, particularly when considering multiple programs like OHPA. Recommendations include improving communication about eligible measures, clarifying application processes, and reinforcing the role of Energy Solution Advisors to enhance participant understanding and reduce frustration.
21.1 HEA Description HEA is a home energy evaluation-based program component that encourages homeowners to improve the energy efficiency and comfort of their homes by providing them with related information and financial incentives in the...
AI summary The Home Energy Assessment (HEA) program evaluates homes for energy efficiency, offering rebates and guidance for improvements. Administered with Natural Resources Canada (NRCan), it includes pre- and post-retrofit assessments, with eligibility for rebates and the Moderate Income Rebate (MIR). The Canada Greener Homes (CGH) Grant, co-delivered via HEA, closed in 2024, removing certain measures. HEA aimed for 19.012 GWh energy savings and 4.799 MW peak demand reduction in 2024.
Reporting Requirements HEA incentives originate from three sources of funding: Nova Scotia Power ratepayers for DSM, the Province of Nova Scotia, and the Government of Canada (CGH Grant). The incorporation of the CGH Grant, as a cofunder o...
AI summary HEA incentives are funded by Nova Scotia Power ratepayers, the Province of Nova Scotia, and the Canadian government (CGH Grant). Savings are reported to NSUARB and the Province via separate evaluations, focusing on electrical savings (DSM) and participation/GHG reductions (government). Equations prevent double-counting, and solar PV savings are included in DSM reports regardless of heating source.
A. Verification - A1. Our records indicate that you received a rebate from Efficiency Nova Scotia for installing upgrades. Is this correct? - 1. Yes [CONTINUE] - 2. No [PROBE: Are you sure? According to our records, you would have received...
AI summary The verification process confirms rebate receipt for Energy Efficiency upgrades and classifies building types at specified addresses. It checks participation in the Affordable Multifamily Housing program and building categories for accurate program eligibility assessment.
[0-10 SCALE WITH END POINT LABELS– RECORD NUMBER] - 98. Don't Know - 99. Refused - C3. [IF [D<](#page-13-1)8] What is the main reason you are not more satisfied with the program overall? Are there other reasons? [PROBE FOR SPECIFIC REASON....
AI summary The text outlines a survey assessing customer satisfaction with Nova Scotia's Affordable Multifamily Housing program, focusing on aspects like application processes, rebate satisfaction, and form usability. It includes 0-10 scales, open-ended responses, and specific probes for dissatisfaction reasons.
E. Recommendations for Program Improvements - E1. Do you have any (other) recommendations for improving the Affordable Multifamily Housing program? [PROBE] Anything else? [DO NOT READ. ACCEPT MULTIPLE KEEPING CODE 97, 98 AND 99 EXCLUSIVE]...
AI summary The section seeks recommendations to improve the Affordable Multifamily Housing program, focusing on rebate adjustments, program simplification, and communication methods. It includes options for increasing rebates, improving online portals, and enhancing participant support tools.
[Financial Reasons] - 26. I hadn't realised how much the upgrades would cost - 27. The available budget didn't stretch far enough - 28. The payback period was too long - 29. The incentives were too low - 30. Split incentives (tenants pay t...
AI summary Participants cite financial barriers to energy efficiency upgrades, including high costs, insufficient budgets, long payback periods, low incentives, and split incentives where tenants bear energy costs. These factors hinder program participation and effectiveness.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report presents the 2024 demand-side management (DSM) results of the Efficient Product Rebates program administered by EfficiencyOne (E1). This program is comprised of the Business Energy Rebates (BER) program compon...
AI summary The report details the 2024 demand-side management (DSM) results for EfficiencyOne's Efficient Product Rebates program, which includes the Business Energy Rebates (BER) program. BER offers prescriptive rebates and financing through Application Rebates (BER-AR) and Instant Rebates (BER-IR) to business, non-profit, and institutional (BNI) participants to reduce electricity consumption and demand.
BER Findings and Recommendations This subsection presents the key findings and recommendations from the 2024 BER evaluation. 2024 BER-Finding: BER net electrical energy savings almost reached the target of 39.747 GWh, falling short by less...
AI summary The 2024 BER evaluation found energy savings nearly met targets, with Instant Rebates participation dropping 26% due to LED market saturation, while Application Rebates grew by 18%. Satisfaction with Instant Rebates remained high, free-ridership decreased, and LED fixtures now dominate the market with near-total adoption.
Table 4: Types of Evaluations Conducted for Each Program Component, 2024 2023 Program Program Component Process Market Impact Efficient Product Rebates BER X X Comprehensive (IR) Condensed (AR) For each program, the Evaluator prepared a DS...
AI summary Table 4 outlines the types of evaluations conducted for the Efficient Product Rebates program component in 2023, including comprehensive and condensed evaluations. The Evaluator prepared a DSM evaluation report detailing energy savings, peak demand savings, and GHG emissions avoided.
1 BER Overview This section describes Business Energy Rebates (BER) program component, follows up on past evaluation recommendations, and presents participation history.
AI summary This section outlines the Business Energy Rebates (BER) program, addresses past evaluation recommendations, and provides an overview of participation history within the program.
1.1 BER Description BER provides financial incentives in the form of prescriptive rebates or financing to business, non-profit, and institutional (BNI) participants to foster reductions in electricity consumption and peak demand. All busin...
AI summary BER offers prescriptive rebates and financing to BNI participants in Nova Scotia to reduce electricity consumption and peak demand. The program includes Application Rebates (AR) and Instant Rebates (IR) services, with AR providing detailed project tracking and IR offering broader accessibility. Eligible measures must meet efficiency standards like ENERGY STAR®. In 2024, rebate amounts for lighting were increased to boost participation, aiming for 39.747 GWh energy savings and 5.107 MW peak demand reduction.
1.2 Follow-up on Past Evaluation Report Recommendations No recommendations were made for BER in 2023.
AI summary No recommendations were made for Business Energy Rebates (BER) in 2023, as noted in the follow-up on past evaluation report recommendations.
BER Application Rebates In 2024, 15,644 units were rebated through 262 projects that were implemented by 199 unique participant[s](#page-39-2) 2 under Application Rebates. [Figure](#page-40-0) 2 below illustrates how Application Rebates pa...
AI summary In 2024, 15,644 units were rebated through 262 projects under BER Application Rebates, with 18% more businesses participating than 2023. Lighting and motors accounted for 82% of energy savings, driven by a large project yielding 2.998 GWh. Energy savings per participant rose 16%.
BER Overall As presented in [Figure](#page-43-0) 7 below, BER generated a total of 46.852 GWh in gross electrical energy savings at generator in 2024, which represents a 2% decrease compared to 2023 results. In 2024, gross peak demand savi...
AI summary In 2024, BER achieved 46.852 GWh in gross electrical energy savings, a 2% decline from 2023, with peak demand savings dropping 9% due to reduced Instant Rebates from LED lighting. This reflects challenges in maintaining savings momentum from prior years.
2 BER Evaluation Approach The 2024 BER-AR evaluation included a condensed impact evaluation, while the BER-IR evaluation included a comprehensive impact evaluation as well as a process evaluation and market evaluation. The main objectives...
AI summary The 2024 BER evaluation aimed to collect participant and distributor perspectives, calculate gross and net BER results, and analyze the evolution of the BNI lighting market. It included both condensed and comprehensive impact evaluations, as well as process and market evaluations.
Tracking Sheet Audit Prior to performing the savings calculation review, the Evaluator performed an audit of the final 2024 tracking sheets to ensure they were complete and the entered data were consistent. The detailed protocols used for...
AI summary The Evaluator conducted an audit of the 2024 tracking sheets to ensure completeness and data consistency. Detailed protocols and results for Application Rebates and Instant Rebates audits are outlined in Appendices IV and V.
Unitary Savings Review As part of the 2024-2025 DSM MA activities and based on the results of both a literature review and a tracking sheet data review, the Evaluator reviewed the equations, parameters, and assumptions used to establish sa...
AI summary The Evaluator reviewed equations and assumptions for ten BER measures, establishing unitary savings values for new VFD non-HVAC applications under Application Rebates. The 2024-2025 DSM MA was updated accordingly based on literature review and tracking sheet data analysis.
Market Characterization Study The Evaluator completed a market evaluation in 2024 to assess the state of the lighting market and review whether any baselines for BNI lighting products should be recommended for update. The analysis and reco...
AI summary The 2024 market evaluation assessed BNI lighting product baselines for BER-IR, BER-AR, and SBES programs. BER-IR uses a standard baseline tied to distributor stocking practices, while BER-AR/SBES calculate baselines based on technology performance differences. Confidence levels in the study exclude nonsampling errors.
Instant Rebates Participants Participants were asked about their level of satisfaction with different service elements on a ten-point scale where 1 means "Not at all satisfied" and a 10 means "Completely satisfied". Overall, Instant Rebate...
AI summary Participants in Nova Scotia's Instant Rebates program reported high satisfaction (9.1/10), with 94% highly satisfied. Most praised rebate amounts and distributor communication, though 8% found rebates too low. Suggestions included increasing rebates, simplifying paperwork, and expanding eligibility. Only 2% were unsatisfied, citing poor communication or low rebate values.
2024 BER Participant and Distributor Perspective Highlights - › The majority of Instant Rebate survey participants purchased energy efficient products for their own organization, while fewer purchased the products for a customer/project ou...
AI summary Participants in the 2024 BER Instant Rebate program primarily purchased energy-efficient products for their own organizations, driven by energy efficiency and cost savings. Satisfaction with the service was high (9.1), though distributors suggested expanding eligibility and improving rebate processes. Distributors used E1 rebates to promote LEDs but faced challenges with administrative burdens and product adoption perceptions.
4.2 Gross Savings Gross savings refer to changes in energy consumption resulting from actions taken by participants regardless of their reasons for participating.[6](#page-52-5) For each Application Rebates project, E1 tracks annual gross...
AI summary Gross savings are defined as energy consumption changes from participant actions, measured annually by E1 using the BER CIRx Screening Tool (version 1.6) for Application Rebates projects. The tool incorporates project-specific savings methodologies and equipment parameters.
4.2.2 Interactive Effects Interactive effects occur when the implementation of energy efficiency measures has an impact on the energy consumption of other elements such as heating and cooling; these are considered in the gross savings stan...
AI summary Interactive effects in energy efficiency programs, particularly for indoor lighting under BER, are evaluated using the BER CIRx Screening Tool. Adjustments are made based on site observations and 2024 DSM MA factors, with evaluators ensuring accuracy. Lighting adjustments are reflected in the 2024 adjustment ratio.
6 Overall BER Results As outlined in [Figure](#page-71-2) 11, BER nearly reached the planned net electrical energy savings, falling short by less than 1%, and exceeded the peak demand savings target by 13% Figure 11: 2024 BER Targets and E...
AI summary The 2024 Business Energy Rebates (BER) program nearly met its planned net electrical energy savings target, falling short by less than 1%, and exceeded the peak demand savings target by 13%. Table 26 compares savings tracked by E1 to evaluated savings and realization rates.
Table 26: Comparison of 2024 BER Tracked and Evaluated Savings at the Generator NTGR Net Savings Value Unit Value Unit Realization Rate 47.777 GWh 0.81 38.557 GWh 46.852 GWh 0.84 39.529 GWh 103% 6.752 MW 0.81 5.479 MW 6.756 MW 0.85 5.746 M...
AI summary Table 26 compares the 2024 Business Energy Rebates (BER) tracked and evaluated savings at the generator level, showing net savings, gross savings, and realization rates for different rebate types. The table highlights metrics such as Net Total Generation Reduction (NTGR) and realization rates for Application Rebates and Instant Rebates.
7 BER Market Evolution E1 has been active in the LED market of the BNI sector through BER since 2010. Market evolution assessments were completed as part of the 2017, 2018, 2019, and 2021 evaluations, the results of which served to analyze...
AI summary E1 has been involved in the BNI sector's LED market through BER since 2010, conducting market evolution assessments from 2017 to 2021. This section updates data on LED adoption trends and emphasizes monitoring barriers to ensure BER's adaptability to market changes.
7.1.2 BER-IR LED Purchasing Decisions The Evaluator conducted a participant survey, including both contractors and end users, to understand the LED purchasing decisions of participants. Most participants (78%) reported that they had purcha...
AI summary The Evaluator surveyed participants (contractors and end users) on LED purchasing decisions under BER-IR. 78% replaced existing fixtures (34% end-of-life, 22% broken), 20% used for new construction. 86% would have needed new lamps without the service, highlighting program impact on replacement decisions.
7.2 Evolution of LED Versus Non-LED Lighting Products To understand the availability of LED versus non-LED products in Nova Scotia, the Evaluator asked BER-IR distributors what proportion of their 2024 lighting stock was LED versus non-LED...
AI summary The Evaluator surveyed BER-IR distributors in Nova Scotia, finding that 96% of their 2024 lighting stock was LED, with 100% for linear and high-bay fixtures. Distributors expect LED dominance to grow further by 2026, up from 92% in 2021. This reflects rapid market adoption of LED technology over non-LED alternatives.
7.2.1 DesignLights Consortium (DLC) Certified Fixtures Distributors were asked about the breakdown of the LED fixtures between DLC Standard Certified, DLC Premium, and non-certified products. Of the six distributors that were asked those q...
AI summary The text discusses distributor reports on the distribution of DLC-certified LED fixtures (Standard, Premium) versus non-certified products, noting that most distributors carry DLC Premium (80%+), with some non-certified stock. Distributors believe DLC certification remains stable even without rebates, citing performance and industry standards. Rebates make DLC-certified prices competitive with non-certified products.
7.3 Average Pricing for LED Lamps and Fixtures in BER-IR
AI summary This section analyzes the average pricing for LED lamps and fixtures within the Business Energy Rebates – Instant Rebates (BER-IR) program, focusing on cost structures and potential implications for business participants.
8 BER Key Findings and Recommendations The main objectives of the 2024 BER evaluation were as follows: - › Collect information on participant and distributor perspectives - › Calculate gross and net BER results (for both AR and IR), namely...
AI summary The 2024 BER evaluation found BER nearly met its net electrical energy savings target (39.529 GWh vs. 39.747 GWh), exceeded peak demand savings by 13% (5.746 MW vs. 5.107 MW), and saw a 26% drop in Instant Rebates participation but 18% growth in Application Rebates. Satisfaction with Instant Rebates remained high despite lower participation.
Business Energy Rebates Appendix I BER: Instant Rebates Participant Survey Questionnaire Appendix II BER: Instant Rebates Participant Survey Results Appendix III BER: Instant Rebates Interview Guide with Distributors Appendix IV BER: Appli...
AI summary The document outlines appendices for Nova Scotia's Business Energy Rebates (BER) program, including surveys, audit tracking sheets, free-ridership algorithms, and 2024 recommendations. EfficiencyOne is identified as the organization involved in the program's implementation.
A. INTRODUCTION A – Business with a contact name Could I speak with ? - 1. Yes [CONTINUE] - 2. No [SAY "PERHAPS YOU CAN HELP ME ANYWAY." GO TO INTRODUCTION B] Hello, I am with Narrative Research, and we are conducting an evaluation of ener...
AI summary A survey script from Narrative Research evaluating Efficiency Nova Scotia's Business Energy Rebates Program, targeting participants who purchased efficient products. The script seeks to identify the most knowledgeable individual about the purchase and determine organizational context (own use vs. third-party projects).
B. INTRODUCTION B – Business with no contact name Hello, I am with Narrative Research, and we are conducting an evaluation of energy efficiency services provided by Efficiency Nova Scotia. We have a few questions about your recent experien...
AI summary Narrative Research evaluates Efficiency Nova Scotia's Business Energy Rebates Program, seeking details on a recent purchase of an efficient product, including quantity, brand, distributor, and rebate amount. They aim to identify the most knowledgeable individual involved in the purchase decision.
D. Free-Ridership - D1. [ASK ALL] Were you aware that you received a rebate when purchasing these ? [SINGLE RESPONSE] - 1. Yes - 2. No - 98. (Don't know) - D2. [ASK IF [D1=](#page-95-0)2 OR 98] Have I understood correctly that you were not...
AI summary The text outlines survey questions to assess awareness of rebates for efficient products, channels of awareness, and purchase decisions influenced by rebate availability. It focuses on Efficiency Nova Scotia's Business Energy Rebates Program and evaluates potential free-ridership by asking respondents about pre-rebate purchase intentions.
[ASK [D8](#page-96-0) TO [D11](#page-97-0) IF AWARE OF REBATE [(D1=](#page-95-0)1 or [D2=](#page-95-1)2), RANDOMIZE [D8](#page-96-0) TO [D11]](#page-97-0) - D8. Without the BER rebate, what is the likelihood that you would have purchased t...
AI summary The text presents a series of questions regarding the impact of the Business Energy Rebates (BER) program on customer purchasing behavior, specifically focusing on the likelihood of purchasing efficient lighting products without the rebate.
ASK ALL - READ AND ROTATE (E1 + E2-E4) AND (E5 + E6-E8) SEQUENCES - E1. Before participating in the Business Energy Rebates program in , had your company/organization at any time in the past already participated in the Business Energy Reba...
AI summary The text outlines a series of questions for participants in the Business Energy Rebates program, inquiring about prior participation in Efficiency Nova Scotia programs and the influence of past experiences on current decisions regarding energy efficiency. It includes branching logic based on responses.
G. Satisfaction - G1. [ASK ALL] On a scale of 1 to 10, where 1 is 'not at all satisfied' and 10 is 'completely satisfied,' how was your organization's experience with each of the following aspects of the Business Energy Rebates Program? If...
AI summary The document outlines a survey assessing satisfaction with the Business Energy Rebates Program and its Instant Rebates component, focusing on interaction with distributors, rebate amounts, eligible products, and program improvements. Respondents highlight issues like poor communication, low rebate amounts, and limited product eligibility.
A3. Did you purchase these products for your own organization, or are you a company purchasing products for a customer or project outside of your organization? Purchase for Contractor or End User 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2024 Sample Size 5...
AI summary The text presents data on the purchase of energy efficiency products, showing the percentage of purchases made for the organization versus for clients or projects outside the organization across multiple years. It also details the decision-makers and the main activities of the organizations involved.
D2. Have I understood correctly that you were not aware that a rebate would be given on the product's total cost when you purchased these items? \ Aware of Product Rebate Prior to Purchase 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2024 Sample Size 50 60 51...
AI summary The text presents survey data on customer awareness of rebates from Efficiency Nova Scotia's Business Energy Rebates Program. It shows that awareness of rebates and their source has varied over the years, with a significant portion of respondents becoming aware through their distributor.
Don't know/Refused excluded from calculations E1. Before participating in the Business Energy Rebates program in , had your company/organization at any time in the past already participated in the Business Energy Rebates program or any oth...
AI summary The text asks if a company or organization had previously participated in the Business Energy Rebates program or any other Efficiency Nova Scotia programs before participating in the program in the month of purchase.
\ Wording change in 2024 \ Wording change in 2024 E5. Before participating in the Business Energy Rebates program, had you at any time in the past already seen Efficiency Nova Scotia promotional materials or communications advertising the...
AI summary The text asks whether the respondent had previously seen Efficiency Nova Scotia promotional materials or communications advertising the benefits of energy efficiency before participating in the Business Energy Rebates program.
G4. What was the most important reason you were not more satisfied with the program overall? Any other reasons? Most Important Reason Not More Satisfied with BER Overall 2019 2020 2021 2022 2024 Sample Size 7 (#) 12 (#) 5 (#) 7 (#) 2 (#) D...
AI summary The document presents survey results from participants in the Business Energy Retrofit (BER) program, highlighting reasons for dissatisfaction and suggestions for improvement. Key issues include rebate size, program consistency, paperwork, and communication, while suggestions focus on increasing rebates, simplifying processes, and improving marketing.
BUSINESS ENERGY REBATES
AI summary The document outlines the Business Energy Rebates (BER) program in Nova Scotia, focusing on incentives for businesses to adopt energy-efficient measures. It references related initiatives like Demand-Side Management (DSM) and efficiency programs, highlighting regulatory oversight and stakeholder engagement.
Table 1: Instant Rebates Distributor Influence Level Algorithm 2022 Algorithm 2024 Algorithm
AI summary The text presents a table titled 'Instant Rebates Distributor Influence Level Algorithm,' comparing algorithms from 2022 and 2024. It appears to outline changes or improvements in how distributor influence levels are calculated for instant rebate programs, though no specific details or arguments are provided in the text.
Table 2: Instant Rebates Participant and Overall Free-ridership Algorithm 2022 Algorithm 2024 J Algorithm D6 98/99) Don't know/Refused 0% PRODUCT> before knowing that these efficient products were rebated? 98/99) Don't know/Refused 0% Plan...
AI summary Table 2 presents an algorithm used to calculate free-ridership in the Instant Rebates program, comparing participant responses between 2022 and 2024. The algorithm includes questions about purchase likelihood without rebates and measures responses such as 'exactly the same quantity,' 'some, but not all,' or 'none.'
CUSTOM INCENTIVES PROGRAM Final Report 2024 DSM EVALUATION March 25, 2025
AI summary The document presents the Final Report of the 2024 Demand-Side Management (DSM) Evaluation for Nova Scotia's Custom Incentives Program, dated March 25, 2025. It includes visual elements but no substantive textual analysis or findings.
amiliar with New Construction service, including those that work on non-MURB projects. 2024 New Construction-Finding: Decarbonization is a motivator for participating in New Construction service. 2024 New Construction-Finding: Financial fa...
AI summary Barriers to energy-efficient new construction include financial costs, builder awareness gaps, and insufficient energy modeller participation. Recommendations include increasing modelling incentives, recruiting more modellers through outreach, and collaborating with educational institutions. Builders must adapt to NECB 2020 requirements, which demand higher upfront costs and efficiency technologies.
1 Custom Overview This section describes the Custom component of the Custom Incentives program, follows up on past evaluation recommendations, and provides an overview of participation history.
AI summary This section outlines the Custom component of the Custom Incentives program, addresses past evaluation recommendations, and summarizes participation history within the program.
1.1 Custom Description Custom provides large business, non-profit, and institutional (BNI) participants with technical assistance, financial incentives, and project financing to help reduce their electricity consumption and peak demand. Bu...
AI summary The Custom program offers technical assistance, financial incentives, and project financing to large business, non-profit, and institutional (BNI) participants to reduce electricity consumption and peak demand. Business Development Managers (BDMs) support participants in advancing projects and identifying consultants, as illustrated in Figure 1.
/span> 14 Figure includes projects completed in 2024. It does not include projects for which the service claimed partial savings. Custom Incentives Program 24
AI summary The text references a figure (page 195, Picture 9) that includes projects completed in 2024 under the Custom Incentives Program 24. It explicitly excludes projects where the service claimed partial savings, focusing on fully completed initiatives.
4.2 Awareness and Motivations This section presents the findings from interviews with two newly participating modellers and three nonparticipant modellers to understand their awareness of the program, and perspectives on the motivation of...
AI summary Interviews with modellers reveal varying awareness of the Custom New Construction program, with non-participants showing limited familiarity. Builders are motivated by cost reduction, sustainability goals, and incentives. Modellers note clients prioritize long-term value, operational cost savings, and compliance with energy codes. Some builders aim to meet market demand for green buildings or government mandates.
4.3 Barriers to High-Efficiency Buildings and Program Participation Participating builders, non-participant modellers, and new energy modellers were asked about concerns and barriers related to building high-efficiency buildings. When aske...
AI summary Financial barriers, including measure costs and low incentives, are primary concerns for builders and modellers in adopting high-efficiency buildings. Builders also cite lack of local expertise and limited understanding of energy efficiency value. Modellers note that cost and time constraints discourage energy modelling, while builders may not prioritize exceeding code requirements due to perceived low returns.
4.5 Modeller and Participant Suggestions for Improvements Participants shared a number of suggestions for improving Custom New Construction, including conducting outreach to developers and builders to inform them of available incentives; f...
AI summary Participants and modellers suggested improving the Custom New Construction program through targeted outreach to developers, tiered incentives for complex buildings, simplified processes, increased awareness via platforms like LinkedIn, and reduced barriers to entry. Modellers emphasized training, government engagement, and adjusting incentive levels to boost participation.
NECB 2015. A direct comparison to other jurisdictions is difficult because of the differences in baseline code (Efficiency Manitoba) or in the unit of comparison (BC Hydro has a GHG savings minimum). E1 requires buildings to be larger than...
AI summary The text compares E1's building size requirements and incentive structures with other jurisdictions like BC Hydro, Hydro Québec, and Massachusetts. It highlights differences in size thresholds, maximum modelling incentives, and implementation incentive caps, noting E1's alignment with some regions but disparities in others.
4.8.4 Logic Model Summary To summarize, the evaluator identified four important barriers that the service is working to overcome. These barriers are addressed by and aligned with the program logic model and theory of change to varying degr...
AI summary The evaluator identified four barriers to the program's success: high energy modelling costs, high upfront costs, limited developer awareness, and insufficient modeller participation. While some barriers are addressed in the logic model, others are not. Updates to the model are recommended to align activities with all barriers, including adding high modelling costs and awareness gaps.
2024 Custom NC Process Highlights - › There is a relatively high level of participant satisfaction with Custom New Construction overall. - › The service has been more successful in reaching MURBs than non-MURBs inside the HRM. - › There ar...
AI summary The 2024 Custom NC Process shows high participant satisfaction but faces challenges in reaching non-MURBs due to eligibility rules and municipal codes. Builders cite financial risks and upfront costs as major barriers to decarbonization, with concerns about NECB 2020 compliance timelines. Key barriers include high modelling costs, limited modeller participation, and low developer awareness, though the service addresses some issues outside its logic model.
Figure 10: 2024 SEM Participation Process Summary Eligibility Check, Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), and Kick-off Meeting - Once approved, eligible participants must first sign a MOU that outlines the project scope, participant requirem...
AI summary The 2024 SEM Participation Process involves eligibility checks, MOUs, energy team formation, policy development, energy improvement events, and savings verification. Participants receive performance-based incentives ($0.04-$0.06/kWh) to achieve energy savings targets of 4.222 GWh and 0.470 MW. The process includes M&V, weekly calls, and energy management planning.
Introduction I am with ____ and we are conducting an evaluation of the Custom Retrofit program offered by Efficiency Nova Scotia. This interview could take up to 30 minutes. Is this still a good time for you? We would like to better unders...
AI summary This text outlines an interview conducted by Efficiency Nova Scotia to evaluate the Custom Retrofit program. The interview aims to understand participants' decision-making processes for energy efficiency projects, with confidentiality assurances and aggregate reporting of results.
C. Free-ridership - C1. Had your organization finalized the design and planning of the energy efficiency project BEFORE knowing that you would receive an incentive from Efficiency Nova Scotia? - 1. Yes - 2. No - 98. Don't know - 99. Refuse...
AI summary The document includes survey questions assessing free-ridership in energy efficiency projects, focusing on whether organizations finalized projects before knowing about incentives, confidence in receiving rebates, and the financial impact of incentives on project viability. It seeks to quantify how incentives influence payback periods and project implementation likelihood.
[ASK IF $ ≥0] - C5. As part of its Custom Retrofit program, Efficiency Nova Scotia gave your organization a $ incentive for the [Investigation or Feasibility] study. Without this incentive, what is the likelihood that you would have conduc...
AI summary The text asks respondents about the impact of financial incentives on their likelihood of conducting energy efficiency studies and implementing projects. It focuses on Efficiency Nova Scotia's Custom Retrofit program, evaluating how incentives influence decision-making and project timelines.
APPENDIX II Retrofit Algorithm for Free-Ridership Calculation Question Answer Score 98/99) Don't know/Refused 50% Planning Score C1 Cost Efficiency Nova Scotia gave your organization a rebate of $ for the [Investigation or Feasibility] stu...
AI summary The text discusses the impact of financial incentives on the payback period for energy efficiency projects, including rebate amounts and the likelihood of project implementation without incentives. It includes responses from participants regarding the effectiveness of these incentives.
Validation of the measure Validate the installation and quantities. Do we have pictures (nameplate) in the file? Can we see it during the call? Is there invoices confirming the quantities? Notes before interview. Include specific questions...
AI summary The text outlines procedures for validating installations and quantities through documentation checks (e.g., pictures, invoices) and interview questions. It emphasizes verifying compliance with measure requirements via visual confirmation and financial records during stakeholder interviews.
Introduction – Telephone IDI I am with Narrative, and we are conducting an evaluation of the Efficiency Nova Scotia Custom New Construction program. This interview should take about 15-20 minutes. Is this still a good time for you? The pur...
AI summary Narrative is conducting an evaluation of Efficiency Nova Scotia's Custom New Construction program through telephone interviews. The purpose is to understand motivations for building energy-efficient structures exceeding code requirements, with confidentiality assured and no impact on incentive amounts.
ciency Nova Scotia? - 1. Very confident - 2. Somewhat confident - 3. Not very confident - 4. Not at all confident - 98. I am unsure - 99. I prefer not to say - C4. [SINGLE RESPONSE] Which one of the following best represents the impact of...
AI summary The text presents survey questions assessing stakeholders' confidence in Efficiency Nova Scotia and the financial impact of its incentives on building projects. Respondents are asked about budget adherence, project viability, and likelihood of hiring energy consultants without incentives.
B. Free-ridership - B1. Why did your organization decide to build a better-than-code building? [DO NOT READ. MULTIPLE RESPONSE] - 1. Lower operation costs - 2. Energy policy in my organization - 3. Environmental reasons/energy efficiency -...
AI summary The section includes survey questions about motivations for building better-than-code structures, pre-incentive design decisions, and confidence in receiving Efficiency Nova Scotia incentives, focusing on free-ridership implications in energy efficiency programs.
D4. [ASK IF D2=1] Why did you decide not to include these technologies? [RECORD VERBATIM RESPONSE] - 1. (Higher cost) - 2. (Lower profits) - 3. (Slower speed of construction) - 4. (Unavailability of the technologies in the marketplace) - 5...
AI summary The response lists 11 reasons for excluding technologies, including higher costs, lower profits, slower construction, unavailability, labor shortages, lack of expertise, complexity, performance issues, and occupant satisfaction concerns. Other unspecified factors and refusals are also noted.
A. Respondent Involvement in the Program A1. [FOR BDM Interviews] To begin, please tell me about your role as a < Business development Manager> as it relates to Custom New Construction program services?
AI summary The text requests a Business Development Manager (BDM) to explain their role in the Custom New Construction program. The focus is on the BDM's involvement in program services, highlighting their responsibilities and contributions to the initiative.
B. Motivation and Barriers - B1. In your experience, what prevents customers from building high-efficiency buildings in the absence of support from E1? - B2. How do you describe the value or benefits of the Custom New Construction Program...
AI summary The section explores barriers to high-efficiency building adoption without E1 support, program benefits, participant motivations, and regional variations in participation barriers. Questions focus on customer perspectives regarding incentives, program value, and challenges in different building types and regions.
ABBREVIATIONS BER Business Energy Rebates BNI Business, non-profit and institutional CDI Commercial Direct Install DC direct current DIY Do-it-yourself DSM Demand-side management E1 EfficiencyOne EER energy efficiency ratio ENS Efficiency...
AI summary This section defines abbreviations used in the regulatory proceeding, including terms related to energy programs, organizations, and technical metrics. Key entities include Nova Scotia Power and Efficiency Nova Scotia, with topics covering energy rebates, demand-side management, and utility regulations.
1.1 SBES Description SBES offers incentives and resources to Nova Scotia small businesses to encourage them to make energy efficient upgrades in their facilities. To be eligible, businesses must annually consume less than 600,000 kW[h](#pa...
AI summary SBES provides energy efficiency incentives and on-bill financing for Nova Scotia small businesses with under 600,000 kWh annual consumption. It offers two participation paths: Audit (with no-cost energy audits) and DIY (self-directed upgrades). Rebates depend on technology factors, and the program aims for 10.592 GWh energy savings and 2.558 MW peak demand reduction in 2024. The Commercial Direct Install pilot remains in testing.
3.3 Past Energy Efficiency Projects Among Small Businesses
AI summary This section reviews past energy efficiency initiatives targeting small businesses in Nova Scotia, highlighting programs like SBES (Small Business Energy Solutions) and BER (Business Energy Rebates) administered by ENS (Efficiency Nova Scotia). It discusses outcomes such as cost savings, GHG reductions, and challenges including participation rates and program evaluation complexities.
A. Awareness, Participation & Barriers [NOTE FOR INTERVIEWER: THERE IS A PROGRAM SIMILAR TO THE SMALL BUSINESS PROGRAM WE ARE COLLECTING FEEDBACK ON THROUGH THIS QUESTIONNAIRE. WHILE WE WILL BE FOCUSING ON SBES, "SMALL BUSINESS ENERGY SOLU...
AI summary The text discusses two rebate programs: Small Business Energy Solutions (SBES) and Business Energy Rebates (BER), highlighting their differences. SBES requires pre-approval and covers up to 80% of costs, while BER offers mail-in rebates without pre-approval and has lower coverage. The section asks about awareness of these programs.
B. Non-Participant Spillover - B1. Have you implemented energy efficiency projects or installed more efficient equipment aimed at generating electricity savings in your establishment in the last five years without receiving financial assis...
AI summary The question asks whether respondents implemented energy efficiency projects without financial assistance from Efficiency Nova Scotia over the past five years, with options to confirm or skip to demographics. It focuses on non-participant actions in energy efficiency initiatives.
B4. [IF B3 = A) Lighting] What type of lighting did you install? Please indicate how many of each category. [READ AS NEEDED, MULTIPLE RESPONSES – COLLECT QUANTITY IN NUMERIC BOX] a. Interior lighting – T5/T8 fluorescents b. Interior lighti...
AI summary The document includes a table and questions related to energy efficiency upgrades, focusing on lighting types, upgrade descriptions, and the reasons for implementing energy efficiency measures. It also asks about financial assistance received for these upgrades.
[ASK IF A4 = 'Yes'] Did you complete your participation in the Small Business Energy Solutions and receive your rebate(s)? OVERALL FULL-TIME WORKERS RENT OWN OR BUSINESS' MAIN ACTIVITY # >5 5-19 20+ O R L R S W M A O SAMPLE SIZE (#) 5 2 2...
AI summary The text asks if participants completed the Small Business Energy Solutions program and received their rebates. It includes a table with sample data on participation and rebate receipt across different business categories.
[ASK IF '2020 THRU 2024' IN B8 OR NOT 'Don't know' IN B9] Thinking about when you decided to install energy efficiency upgrades in your business, please indicate how influential the following factors were using a response of very, somewhat...
AI summary The text asks respondents to evaluate the influence of various factors on their decision to install energy efficiency upgrades in their business, using a scale from 'very' to 'not at all'.
Project Review Findings The most frequent adjustment made by E1 to the available DR capacity calculation was to set the available DR capacity to zero due to non-participation in events. If no obvious load shed was observable for an event w...
AI summary E1 frequently adjusted DR capacity calculations by setting values to zero due to non-participation, incorrect metering data, or operational hour mismatches. The Evaluator agreed with these adjustments but recommended explicitly documenting criteria for zeroing DR capacity and ensuring consistent lookback window adjustments. Overall, E1 project reviews were deemed appropriate.
nt for which the circumstance applies. 2024 BNI DR Recommendation 1: Update the BNI DR Baseline Considerations document to properly address all situations encountered through the project reviews. - › Clearly define how to identify building...
AI summary The document outlines two recommendations for the BNI DR program: updating baseline considerations to address operational hour definitions and data gaps, and continuing project reviews for accurate DR capacity evaluation. Findings indicate a reliable adjustment ratio (0.93) was established, though evaluated DR capacity was 1% lower than tracked values due to project review adjustments.
In-service Rate Based on a study conducted by DNV-GL for the Massachusetts Energy Efficiency Program Administrators,[209](#page-31-0) an in-service rate (ISR) of 85% is applied to LED lamps as part of BER-IR, which corresponds to the propo...
AI summary An in-service rate (ISR) of 85% is applied to LED lamps under the BER-Instant Rebates program, based on a study by DNV-GL for the Massachusetts Energy Efficiency Program Administrators, reflecting the proportion of installed lighting technologies three years post-purchase.
5.2.4 Pump Measures
AI summary The section '5.2.4 Pump Measures' outlines regulatory considerations for heat pump technologies, including efficiency standards, rebate programs, and compliance with energy codes like NECB 2020. It addresses implementation challenges, cost recovery, and performance metrics for heat pump adoption in residential and commercial sectors.
5.4.4 Water Heating Measures
AI summary The section outlines water heating measures under energy efficiency programs, including rebates, grants, and technical standards. Key entities involve organizations like NS Power and Efficiency Nova Scotia, with topics centered on residential and commercial energy efficiency initiatives.
5.10.2 Peak Demand Savings Factors For agriculture measures, peak demand savings are determined by multiplying the wattage by a PCF value of 84%, which was established as part of the 2015 evaluation of BER.[308](#page-124-4) 308 Econoler,...
AI summary Peak demand savings for agriculture measures use an 84% Peak Demand Savings Factor (PCF), established in the 2015 evaluation of Business Energy Rebates (BER) by Econoler. This factor is applied to wattage calculations for demand-side management purposes.
5.10.3 Adjustment Ratios The adjustment ratios in [Table](#page-125-0) 270 for were established as part of the 2022 can be extrapolated for all Agricultural measures in BER-AR. No adjustment ratios were calculated for SBES.
AI summary The adjustment ratios in Table 270 were established as part of the 2022 measures and can be extrapolated for all Agricultural measures in BER-AR. No adjustment ratios were calculated for SBES.
5.11.2 Peak Demand Savings Factor For kitchen measures, peak demand savings are determined by multiplying the wattage by a PCF value of 68%, which was established as part of the 2015 evaluation of BER.[336](#page-147-3) Freezers and refrig...
AI summary The Peak Demand Savings Factor (PCF) for kitchen measures is 68%, established during the 2015 evaluation of Business Energy Rebates (BER). Freezers and refrigerators have a PCF of 100%, reflecting their higher impact on peak demand.
5.11.3 Adjustment Ratios For kitchen measures, no adjustment ratios were calculated. 336 Econoler, Business Energy Rebates 2015 DSM Evaluation, Report presented to Efficiency Nova Scotia, 2016. 335 Minnesota Department of Commerce Division...
AI summary The section states no adjustment ratios were calculated for kitchen measures. It cites Econoler's 2016 DSM evaluation report and a Minnesota technical reference manual as sources. The focus is on adjustment ratios and their absence for specific measures.
Table 309: Unitary Peak Demand Savings Values for Freezers/Refrigerators Parameter Symbol BER-AR, SBES Reference Peak Coincidence Factor PCF 1 As per Subsection 5.11.2 Unitary Peak Demand Savings [W] 𝑃𝑒𝑎𝑘 𝐷𝑒𝑚𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑆𝑎𝑣𝑖𝑛𝑔𝑠𝑘𝑊 Calculation based...
AI summary Table 309 presents unitary peak demand savings values for freezers and refrigerators under the Business Energy Rebates program. It includes parameters such as the Peak Coincidence Factor (PCF) and the calculation method for unitary peak demand savings based on specification data for each rebated unit.
5.12.2 Peak Demand Savings Factor For laundry measures, peak demand savings are determined by multiplying the wattage by a PCF value of 34%, which was established as part of the 2015 evaluation of BER.[337](#page-162-0)
AI summary The Peak Demand Savings Factor (PCF) for laundry measures is set at 34%, determined during the 2015 evaluation of Business Energy Rebates (BER). This factor multiplies wattage to calculate peak demand savings.
Table 337: Server-based Power Management Software Measure Summary Parameter BER-AR, SBES Reference Measure Description and Identification Measure Power management utility must be network-based, rebated after installation • Must enable both...
AI summary Table 337 outlines the parameters for the Server-based Power Management Software Measure under the Business Energy Rebates program. It specifies requirements for the power management utility, baseline conditions, installation rates, useful life, and energy savings calculations.
Final Report 288 Table 339: Unitary Peak Demand Savings Values for Server-based Power Management Software Parameter Symbol BER-AR, SBES Reference Demand Savings Factor for a Desktop Computer DSFD 68 Based on ENERGY STAR Computer Power Mana...
AI summary The document presents a table detailing unitary peak demand savings values for server-based power management software, specifically focusing on demand savings factors for desktop and laptop computers under the Business Energy Rebates (BER) program. It includes assumptions and calculations used for determining these values.
Table 340: Server-based Server Virtualization and Decommissioning Measure Summary Parameter BER-AR, SBES Reference Measure Description and Identification Measure Removed servers must be properly disposed of and not be reused in any form, r...
AI summary Table 340 outlines the parameters for the Server-based Server Virtualization and Decommissioning Measure under the Business Energy Rebates program. It specifies that removed servers must be properly disposed of and not reused, with baseline conditions and energy savings calculations based on unit specifications.
Table 344: Electrical Unitary Energy Savings Values for Uninterruptible Power Supply (UPS) Parameter Symbol BER-AR, SBES Reference Energy Use per Rated kVA - 204 CMUA California 2017 TRM UPS Power [kVA] 𝑘𝑉𝐴 Actual Use information in TS Uni...
AI summary Table 344 outlines the electrical unitary energy savings values for Uninterruptible Power Supply (UPS) systems, including parameters such as energy use per rated kVA and UPS power. It references the Business Energy Rebates (BER) program and provides calculation methods for energy savings.
Table 345: EUL Values for BNI LED Lamps and Fixtures Measure Program Component Average Rated Lifetime (hours) Annual HOU (hours/year) Equipment Life 2024 Equivalent EUL LED Linear Fixtures 1 x 4 Luminaires BER-IR, BER-AR, SBES 50,000 4,209...
AI summary Table 345 outlines the Effective Useful Life (EUL) values for various LED lamps and fixtures under the Business Energy Rebates (BER) program. It includes data on average rated lifetime, annual hours of use, equipment life, and the 2024 equivalent EUL for different measures.
The EUL values for non-LED lighting measures were established by conducting a literature review of technical reference manuals (TRMs) and studies from other similar jurisdictions. [Table](#page-177-0) 346 summarizes the EUL values and thei...
AI summary The EUL values for non-LED lighting measures were determined through a literature review of technical reference manuals and studies from similar jurisdictions. Table 346 summarizes these EUL values and their sources for BNI measures.
LED Non-A-type Lamps For LED non-A-type lamps sold through Instant Savings, lifetime energy savings values were established for the different types of lamps replaced, which mostly included reflector (R, BR, GU, PAR, MR) and decorative lamp...
AI summary LED non-A-type lamps sold via Instant Savings will no longer generate energy savings after 2025 due to EISA 2020 regulations increasing baseline wattage to match LED efficiency. This results in an equivalent useful life (EUL) of one year for these lamps, as savings only occur in the year prior to the baseline adjustment.
Incentives Incentives may be considered when it is necessary to maximize very small sample sizes, when response rates are very low, or to compensate for a lengthy interview duration (e.g. 45 minutes or longer). The amount and type of incen...
AI summary Incentives are recommended for maximizing response rates in surveys with small samples, low participation, or lengthy interviews (e.g., 45+ minutes). The type and amount of incentive depend on the target population's characteristics.
Table 373: Instant Rebates Distributor Influence Level Algorithm Current Algorithm Adjusted Algorithm [ASK IF B1=1-6 OR 96 OR B2=2] I'd like to learn more about what influenced your organization's decisions to use these strategies to sell...
AI summary Table 373 outlines an algorithm used to assess the influence level of distributors on the use of instant rebates for efficient products. It includes a current algorithm and an adjusted algorithm, each with questions and scales to evaluate factors like incentives, educational support, product quality, and organizational policies.