E-22021 DSM Evaluation Reports
48 passages
Evaluated savings Gross and net energy or peak demand savings calculated by the Evaluator using the parameters (unitary savings values, installation rates, interactive effects, net-to-gross ratio, etc.) validated or measured during the eva...
AI summary The text outlines the evaluation process for energy efficiency programs, including data collection, impact evaluation, net-to-gross ratio, lifetime energy savings, and greenhouse gas emission reductions. It also covers portfolio performance, market evolution, and evaluation research related to market transformation and demand response pilots.
5 EMIS participant was also an SEM participant Project No. 6372 & lt;sup>2 AMH: Participant interviews were completed as part of a participant follow-up phone interview, on-site visits, or desk reviews & lt;sup>3 Custom: Six program manage...
AI summary The text details participant interviews and data collection methods conducted as part of a project involving energy efficiency programs, including Retrofit, New Construction, and Building Optimization. It mentions interviews with program managers, EOne staff, and participants, as well as follow-up interviews and on-site visits.
Small Business Energy Solutions - › Net energy savings were within 1% of targets, while peak demand savings fell short of targets. - › Although participation in the Audit path remained low, participation, as well as gross energy and peak d...
AI summary The Small Business Energy Solutions program achieved net energy savings close to targets, but peak demand savings were below expectations. Participation in the Audit path was low, though overall participation and savings improved in 2021. Free-ridership among DIY participants was estimated at 15%, and there was a 7% discrepancy between the Evaluator's net savings and EOne's tracked savings.
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS Overall savings achieved in 2021 were below target levels, with the residential portfolio coming closer to meeting targets than the BNI portfolio. The Evaluator made a cross-cutting recommendation in the 2020...
AI summary Overall savings in 2021 were below target, with residential programs performing better than BNI. EOne adapted to the pandemic by adjusting incentives and marketing, which helped some programs recover pre-pandemic savings. However, some programs still lagged due to shutdowns and slower customer response. Market evolution work highlighted potential supply issues for certain measures.
APPENDIX I BIBLIOGRAPHY Program Components Bibliographic References NREL, The Uniform Methods Project: Methods for Determining Energy-Efficiency Savings for Specific Measures, Chapter 11: Sample Design Cross-Cutting Protocol, September 201...
AI summary The document provides a list of bibliographic references cited in a regulatory proceeding, including studies, reports, and guidelines related to energy efficiency, cost of service, and strategic energy management. It includes references from organizations such as NREL, Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board, and Emera Inc.
DEFINITIONS Accuracy Reflects the proximity of measurements to the true value. 1.2 Follow-up on Past Evaluation Report Recommendations 1.3 Participation History 2 _ ET EVALUATION APPROACH 3 ET IMPACT EVALUATION • 3.1 Tracking Sheet Audit 3...
AI summary The document outlines an evaluation approach and impact assessment for energy efficiency programs, focusing on metrics such as accuracy, gross savings, net savings, realization rate, and participant perspectives. It includes sections on follow-up on past recommendations, participation history, and key findings.
1 ARET OVERVIEW This section describes the ARet program component, follows up on past evaluation recommendations, and provides an overview of participation history.
AI summary This section provides an overview of the Appliance Retirement (ARET) program, discusses past evaluation recommendations, and outlines participation history.
Instant Savings Appendix IV IS: Participant Online Survey Questionnaire Appendix V IS: Participant Survey Results Appendix VI IS: Interview Guide with Retailer Partners Appendix VII IS: Tracking Sheet Audit Appendix VIII IS: Unitary Saving...
AI summary The document outlines various appendices related to the Instant Savings program, including survey questionnaires, interview guides, audit tracking sheets, savings calculations, free-ridership algorithms, spillover methodologies, and 2021 recommendations.
Table 1: Summary of Existing Residential Program Evaluation Program Evaluation Type Component Impact Process Market Methodology › Tracking sheet audit › Unitary savings review HEA Condensed › Calculations using evaluation results › GHG emi...
AI summary The document presents a summary of the evaluation of existing residential programs, including methods such as participant surveys, tracking sheet audits, on-site visits, and GHG emission reduction calculations. It outlines different evaluation types, such as condensed and comprehensive, and includes specific programs like HEA, Green Heat, Efficient Product Installation, MHEEP, and AMH.
1 HEA OVERVIEW This section describes Home Energy Assessment (HEA), follows up on past evaluation recommendations, and provides an overview of participation history.
AI summary This section provides an overview of the Home Energy Assessment (HEA), follows up on past evaluation recommendations, and outlines participation history.
Table 28: 2021 Green Heat Evaluation Approach Evaluation Objectives Research Questions Methodology Collect information on participant perspectives › How did participants become aware of Green Heat? › Why did participants want to participat...
AI summary This table outlines the 2021 Green Heat Evaluation Approach, which includes collecting participant perspectives, calculating gross and net results, and analyzing the market evolution of MSHPs. The evaluation uses surveys, tracking sheet audits, and interviews to assess program effectiveness and energy savings.
7 GREEN HEAT PARTICIPANT PERSPECTIVES Awareness about Green Heat was driven largely by contractors, retailers, or distributors (34%) through word-of-mouth (19%) or online (14%). Sources of awareness are generally consistent with the previo...
AI summary The Green Heat program has high participant satisfaction, with households rating it 9.0 out of 10. Awareness was driven by contractors and online sources, and the main motivations for participation were saving on energy costs and receiving rebates. Participants were concerned with equipment reliability and selection, and some expressed dissatisfaction with rebate amounts.
[Table](#page-199-2) 60 compares the energy and peak demand savings established through this evaluation to those tracked in the 2021 tracking sheet. The realization rate, representing the ratio of evaluated net savings to tracked net savin...
AI summary Table 60 compares energy and peak demand savings from this evaluation to those in the 2021 tracking sheet, showing a realization rate of 103% for both energy and peak demand savings.
24 AMH KEY FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS As mentioned previously, the main objectives of the 2021 AMH evaluation were as follows: - › Collect information on AMH participant perspectives - › Calculate gross and net AMH results, namely electr...
AI summary The 2021 AMH evaluation found that net electrical energy and peak demand savings fell short of targets, with energy savings decreasing by 41% compared to 2020. Despite this, participation increased, driven by prescriptive projects. Adjustments to savings calculations were made, leading to discrepancies between Evaluator and EOne tracked savings. Participant satisfaction with AMH remained extremely high.
Table 5: Overview of Data Collection Activity Descriptor This Instrument Instrument Type Participant Survey Estimated Time to Complete 15 minutes Target Audience Participants who purchased a solar systems or home heating equipment Expected...
AI summary Table 5 outlines a participant survey aimed at collecting data from individuals who purchased solar systems or home heating equipment. The survey is expected to be completed by 140 participants and will be fielded by Narrative Research between October and November. Table 6 lists the research objectives, including verification, awareness, free-ridership, cross-influence, satisfaction, barriers, and recommendations for program improvements.
F1. Before participating in the Efficient Product Installation Service in [MONTH/YEAR], had you at any time in the past participated in any Efficiency Nova Scotia program or Service? Prior Participation in ENS Program or Service 2021 Sampl...
AI summary The text discusses survey results from participants in the Efficient Product Installation Service, focusing on prior participation in Efficiency Nova Scotia programs and their influence on decisions to install energy-efficient products. Most respondents had not previously participated in ENS programs, but those who had found them a major factor in their decision to install energy-efficient products.
BER Mail-in In 2021, 301 Mail-in projects were implemented by 187 unique participants. 2 [Figure](#page-32-2) 6 below illustrates how Mail-in participation has evolved since 2015. The number of participating businesses increased in 2021, w...
AI summary In 2021, the Business Energy Rebates (BER) Mail-in program saw 301 projects implemented by 187 participants. Participation increased by 18% compared to 2020 but remained below pre-pandemic levels. Gross savings per participant decreased to 87.518 MWh. Lighting and motor/VFD measures accounted for the majority of savings, though lighting's share declined due to smaller project sizes. The pandemic and delayed recovery are cited as key factors.
Mail-in Participants There was a high level of satisfaction with Mail-in, with an average rating of 9.1 on a 10-point scale (where 1 indicates "Not at all satisfied" and 10 indicates "Completely satisfied"). As illustrated in [Figure](#pag...
AI summary The Mail-in program received high satisfaction ratings, with an average of 9.1 on a 10-point scale. Respondents praised interactions with ENS staff and the application process but noted issues with product rebates, website navigation, and rebate amounts. Suggestions for improvement included better marketing, expanding rebates, and increasing information availability.
8 BER KEY FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The main objectives of the 2021 BER evaluation were as follows: - › Collect information on BER participant and partner perspectives - › Calculate gross and net BER results (for both Mail-in and Instan...
AI summary The 2021 BER evaluation found that net electrical energy and peak demand savings fell short of targets. Participation in both Mail-in and Instant Rebates increased, leading to higher gross energy and peak demand savings. Overall satisfaction with BER among participants and distributors was high.
Table 1: Overview of Data Collection Activity Descriptor This Instrument Instrument Type Participant Survey Estimated Time to Complete 15 minutes Target Audience Participants who received a mail-in rebate Expected Number of Completions 70...
AI summary This document outlines the data collection activity for a participant survey targeting individuals who received a mail-in rebate. The survey aims to assess awareness, satisfaction, and potential improvements for the BER Mail-in program, with research questions divided into sections and a timeline of October to November.
Already Made Decision to Implement Energy Efficient Measures Prior to Program Component Participation 2017 2018 2019 2021 Sample Size 70 70 70 42 Yes 46% 56% 49% 71% No 50% 43% 50% 26% Don't know 4% 1% 1% 2%
AI summary The table presents data on the percentage of participants who had already decided to implement energy-efficient measures before participating in program components from 2017 to 2021. The data shows an increasing trend in the percentage of 'Yes' responses over the years.
Previous Participation in Another ENS Program Component 2017 2018 2019 2021 Sample Size 70 70 70 42 Yes (Total) 47% 49% 51% 33% Yes, in Business Energy Rebates - - - 5% Yes, in another program(s) - - - 5% Yes, in both Business Energy Rebat...
AI summary This table presents participation rates in ENS program components from 2017 to 2021. It shows a decline in participation, particularly in 2021, with a notable increase in respondents who participated in both Business Energy Rebates and other programs.
D2. Your company's previous participation in an Efficiency Nova Scotia program was a major factor in the decision to implement energy-efficient [MEASURE CATEGORY] measures.\ Previous Participation in Another ENS Program Component Was a Maj...
AI summary The text discusses how participation in Efficiency Nova Scotia (ENS) programs influenced companies' decisions to implement energy-efficient measures, examine energy options, and assess cost-effectiveness. Survey data from 2017 to 2021 shows high agreement rates among respondents regarding these impacts.
- b. If less than 8, please explain the reason(s) for your score. Aspects of the program Score Reason 1. The overall program 2. The program support and communications provided by ENS 3. The rebate processing, tracking and reporting What, i...
AI summary The text presents a table with aspects of a program and asks for scoring and feedback on its success and challenges. It includes open-ended questions for respondents to provide their insights.
Table 1: Verification of 2021 Mail-in Data Field Completeness and Accuracy Data Fields Complete (Y/N/ Partial) Consistent with Previous Evaluation If Incomplete or Inconsistent, Action Taken by the Evaluator Data for Each Project or Partic...
AI summary The document verifies the completeness and accuracy of 2021 mail-in data fields, identifying partial completeness in some fields and actions taken to correct inconsistencies, such as recalculating peak demand savings and adjusting line loss factors and effective useful life values.
Table 1: Summary of Custom Incentives Program Evaluation Program Evaluation Type Component Impact Process Market Methodology Custom Comprehensive X - NC › Participant phone interviews (New Construction) or participant follow-up interview d...
AI summary The document presents a summary of the Custom Incentives Program Evaluation, including the evaluation type, impact, process, market, and methodology for various programs. It outlines methods such as participant interviews, desk reviews, tracking sheet audits, and GHG emission reduction calculations.
Retrofit Key Findings and Recommendations 2021 Retrofit-Finding: The pay-for-performance projects reviewed by the Evaluator included an excellent client-led M&V approach that required almost no adjustments, had a free-ridership level of ze...
AI summary The 2021 Retrofit evaluation found that a structured pay-for-performance approach in Retrofit, Building Optimization, and Operational Demand Savings programs led to minimal adjustments, zero free-ridership, and high customer satisfaction. It also noted that solar PV and compressed air leak repair projects used a quasi-prescriptive M&V approach, which is suitable for these project types but requires clear distinctions from traditional custom projects to avoid confusion and ensure accurate evaluation.
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 provides an overview of the Custom Incentives program, outlines the Custom component, addresses past evaluation recommendations, and discusses participation history.
m projects over multiple years since certain phases or measures can be fully operational before the entire project is completed. The four types of projects for which savings were tracked in 2021 were: - › Projects not completed in 2021. Fo...
AI summary The document outlines four types of energy efficiency projects tracked in 2021, including partially completed projects, completed projects, multiyear projects, and Pay-for-Performance (P4P) projects. Each type has specific rules for claiming savings and applying adjustment and net-to-gross ratios.
Table 9: 2021 Custom Evaluation Approach Evaluation Objectives Research Questions Methodology Collect information on participant perspectives › How satisfied are participants with Custom? › What challenges or barriers, if any, have partici...
AI summary The text outlines a 2021 Custom Evaluation Approach focused on collecting participant perspectives and evaluating the OEM Operational Demand Savings Pilot. It includes research questions about participant satisfaction, challenges, and impacts on operations, as well as methodologies such as phone interviews with participants and EOne staff.
Project File Reviews and Participant Follow-up Phone Interviews In the fall of 2021 and January 2022, Econoler and its subcontractor CDM Energy Solutions carried out a full technical review of project documentation for 26 Retrofit projects...
AI summary In 2021 and early 2022, Econoler and CDM Energy Solutions reviewed 26 Retrofit and 6 Building Optimization projects, conducting follow-up interviews with participants and OEMs to finalize reviews and gather data on free-ridership, spillover, and project performance. Protocols from Appendices V to VIII were used for these evaluations.
7.3 Key Findings and Recommended Approach for Future Data Collection The Evaluator tested the new approach during the fall of 2021 with five projects in which participants had recently signed the CPA. The Evaluator had planned to interview...
AI summary The Evaluator tested a new data collection approach for the Custom Project Agreement (CPA) in 2021 with five projects. The new methodology and data-collection instruments were found to be effective, though reaching builders for interviews proved challenging. The Evaluator recommends interviewing participants shortly after signing the CPA and using a third party to conduct interviews and safeguard responses.
2021 Building Optimization Participant Perspective Highlights - › Overall satisfaction with Building Optimization was high among interviewed participants who provided an average rating of 8.5 on a 10-point scale. - › Most respondents did n...
AI summary Participants in the 2021 Building Optimization program reported high satisfaction with an average rating of 8.5 out of 10. Most did not face challenges in their participation, and the main area for improvement identified was reducing processing times for application and incentive approvals.
Table 31: Evaluated 2021 Building Optimization NTGR Projects Fully Claimed in 2021 Energy Savings Free-ridership Level 9% Participant Spillover Level 0% NTGR 0.91
AI summary Table 31 presents the 2021 Building Optimization NTGR with a free-ridership level of 9% and a participant spillover level of 0%, indicating that the program's energy savings were primarily achieved by participants without significant spillover effects.
13 CUSTOM KEY FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The main objectives of the 2021 Custom evaluation were as follows: - › Collect information on participant perspectives - › Collect information on the New Construction participation decision-making...
AI summary The 2021 Custom evaluation aimed to collect participant perspectives, understand decision-making processes, gather free-ridership data, and calculate energy savings and GHG emissions. The findings and recommendations are presented, with some applying broadly and others specific to certain Custom services.
Table 1: Free-ridership Algorithm for Retrofit and Building Optimization Question Response Score Satisfaction B1. Using a scale from 1 to 10 where 1 is "not at all satisfied" and 10 is "completely satisfied" how would you rate your satisfa...
AI summary This table outlines a survey designed to assess participant satisfaction and perspectives regarding the Custom Retrofit or Building Optimization program. It includes questions about satisfaction levels, factors influencing participation, challenges faced, and suggestions for improvement.
Table 1: Participant Interview Questionnaire and Free-ridership Algorithm Question (From the Custom New Construction Participant Interview Guide) Response Score A3. [IF A1=YES] Were there other key decision makers that played a role in the...
AI summary This table outlines a questionnaire used to identify key decision-makers involved in building better-than-code buildings, including their names, roles, and contact information. If participants cannot identify these individuals, evaluators may consult EOne.
COVID Did Covid had an impact on the implemented measures? Are the savings calculations impacted by Covid? Were any adjusments made by the SP regarding Covid? Are the reported savings based on a typical year? IMPACT EVALUATION NOTES Projec...
AI summary The document discusses impact evaluation and savings adjustments, focusing on the measurement and verification (M&V) approach for energy efficiency measures. It includes questions about the impact of COVID-19 on savings calculations, baseline and reporting periods, regression equations, and adjustments made by the service provider (SP). It also covers evaluation methods and documentation of energy savings.
SBES Findings and Recommendations This subsection presents the key findings from the SBES evaluation. The Evaluator has no specific recommendation for SBES in 2021. 2021 SBES-Finding: Net energy savings were within 1% of target, while peak...
AI summary In 2021, the SBES program achieved energy and peak demand savings close to its targets, with a 77% increase in participation. However, peak demand savings fell short of targets, and free-ridership among DIY participants increased to 15%. The Evaluator's findings showed a 7% discrepancy in net savings compared to EOne's tracking.
Table 5: 2021 SBES Evaluation Approach Evaluation Objectives Research Questions Methodology Collect information on participant perspectives › How do participants become aware of SBES? › What is the level of satisfaction with SBES among par...
AI summary Table 5 outlines the 2021 SBES Evaluation Approach, focusing on collecting participant perspectives, calculating gross and net results, and evaluating the effectiveness of the SBES program. The methodology includes participant surveys, tracking sheet audits, peak demand savings reviews, and GHG emission reduction calculations.
5 SBES KEY FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The objectives of the 2021 SBES evaluation were to calculate gross and net SBES results, namely electrical first-year and lifetime energy savings, peak demand savings, as well as avoided GHG emission...
AI summary The 2021 SBES evaluation found that net energy savings were close to targets, but peak demand savings fell short. Participation increased significantly, driven by higher incentives and the CDI pilot. Satisfaction among participants was high, but free-ridership for DIY participants rose to 15%. Evaluated net savings were 7% lower than EOne's tracked values due to higher free-ridership.
Small Business Energy Solutions Appendix I SBES: Participant Survey Questionnaire Appendix II SBES: Participant Survey Results Appendix III SBES: Tracking Sheet Audit Appendix Iv SBES: Commercial Direct Install Pilot - Gross Savings Parame...
AI summary The document outlines various appendices related to the Small Business Energy Solutions (SBES) initiative, including survey questionnaires, results, tracking sheets, savings parameters, free-ridership calculation algorithms, and 2021 recommendations. These materials support the evaluation and implementation of energy efficiency programs for small businesses.
G. Barriers - G1. To what extent do you consider the following as barriers preventing your business from installing energy efficiency upgrades? Use a scale of 1 to 10, where 1 means 'not at all a barrier' and 10 means 'a major barrier'. [R...
AI summary The section asks respondents to rate, on a scale of 1 to 10, the extent to which various barriers prevent their business from installing energy efficiency upgrades, including financial challenges, time constraints, lack of knowledge, and difficulty in initiating the process.
Previous ENS Program Component Participation Impacted Asking Contractor/Distributor About Different Energy Efficiency Options Before Participating in SBES 2021 Sample Size 3 (#) Agree 2 Disagree 1 Base: Respondents who previously participa...
AI summary The text presents survey results regarding the impact of previous participation in Efficiency Nova Scotia (ENS) programs on the decision-making process of small businesses when considering energy efficiency upgrades. It highlights that a majority of respondents took into account the cost-effectiveness of upgrades and had previously seen ENS promotional materials.
F1. Using a scale from 1 to 10 where 1 is 'not at all satisfied' and 10 is 'completely satisfied', how would you rate your satisfaction with the program overall? Overall Satisfaction with SBES 2017 2019 2021 Sample Size 70 50 50 Mean 8.8 9...
AI summary The SBES program has seen high levels of satisfaction over the years, with mean scores of 8.8 in 2017, 9.2 in 2019, and 9.1 in 2021. However, some dissatisfaction was reported, with common reasons including delays in the process, lower-than-expected incentives, poor communication, and issues with contractor performance.
Table 1: Verification of 2021 SBES Data Field Completeness and Accuracy Data Fields Complete (Y/N/Partial) Consistent with Previous Evaluation If Incomplete or Inconsistent, Action Taken by the Evaluator Data for Each Project or Participan...
AI summary Table 1 verifies the completeness and accuracy of 2021 SBES data fields. Issues identified include negative energy savings without justification, zero demand savings with no explanation, and missing rate codes. The evaluator made assumptions to address these gaps.
Free-ridership – Audit Path C3/C4. If your business had not received the rebate or financing from ENS as well as the free audit, would you have paid for the full cost of the energy-efficient upgrades you installed? (Scale 0 to 10) C3orC4 =...
AI summary The text discusses a survey question related to free-ridership in energy efficiency programs, asking businesses if they would have paid for energy-efficient upgrades without receiving rebates or financing from Efficiency Nova Scotia (ENS), and whether ENS's programs and promotions influenced their decisions.
Installation Rates Table 152 lists the installation rate for SBES faucet aerators.
AI summary The document mentions Table 152, which lists the installation rate for SBES faucet aerators. This information is presented under the 'Installation Rates' section.
E-30E1 Compliance Filing 2023-2025 with Appendix A-D FINAL
11 passages
Existing Residential, Efficient Product Rebates (BNI), and Direct Installation. 2025 Investment a Lifetime Benefits b First-Year Energy Savings Lifetime Energy Savings Peak EE Demand Savings Available DR Capacity (MW) Test ( ource Cost (TR...
AI summary The document presents a detailed table of energy efficiency and demand response programs, including investment, benefits, energy savings, and costs. It outlines various programs such as efficient product rebates, appliance retirement, and direct installation, along with their associated metrics and costs. The data includes both residential and business/non-profit programs and highlights the total benefits and costs across different initiatives.
9.2 QUARTERLY REPORTS - E1 will file quarterly reports with the NSUARB for quarters one through three of each year[43](#page-167-4) . The reports - will provide quarterly status updates and service highlights and communicate course adjustm...
AI summary E1 is required to submit quarterly reports to the NSUARB, detailing program performance, mid-course adjustments, and updates on initiatives such as residential behavioral programs and demand response. Reports must align with filing dates and include metrics like energy savings, investment by rate class, and sector highlights.
-2025 Investment a Lifetime Benefits b First-Year Energy Savings Lifetime Energy Savings Peak EE Demand Savings Available DR Capacity Test ( Total Resource Cost Test (TRC) c \nincl. excl. Program Administrator Cost Test (PAC) d \nexcl.
AI summary The text presents a table titled '2023-2025 Settlement Plan Investment and Savings, by Program Component,' which outlines investment, benefits, energy savings, and other metrics for various program components. The table includes terms such as 'Total Resource Cost Test (TRC)' and 'Program Administrator Cost Test (PAC).'
DATE FILED: 4 October 11 March 2022 - Annual avoided costs of energy and capacity and annual avoided $CO_2e$ were provided by NS Power, from the 2020 IRP using the - 2 Base level of DSM for Scenario 2.0C. Avoided costs of transmission and...
AI summary The text provides data on avoided costs of energy, capacity, and CO2e from NS Power's 2020 IRP, along with details on cost-effectiveness ratios and program participation metrics, including the number of households and projects benefiting from various energy efficiency initiatives.
6 5.1.3.1 PROGRAM DELIVERY - 7 BNI Efficient Product Rebates uses a self-directed approach for both the Instant Rebate and Mail-In - 8 incentive pathways. Through Instant Rebates, point-of-purchase discounts are available on a limited rang...
AI summary The BNI Efficient Product Rebates program offers two incentive pathways—Instant Rebates and Mail-In—for promoting energy-efficient products. Program partners, including electrical and pumping distributors and contractors, are vital to its success, providing product expertise and assistance with applications. These partners are also part of the EPP network, which supports marketing and training.
Table 40: 2023-2025 BNI Efficient Product Rebates Performance Indicators Year Investment 0, Lifetime Energy Savings O Total Resource Cost Test (TRC) a Program Administrator Cost Test (PAC) b Participation (products) c Lifetime Unit Cost ($...
AI summary Table 40 outlines the performance indicators for the 2023-2025 BNI Efficient Product Rebates program, including investment amounts, energy savings, participation metrics, and cost tests such as Total Resource Cost (TRC) and Program Administrator Cost (PAC). The data provides a breakdown of performance across three years and highlights changes in metrics such as energy savings and participation.
- 3 Table 47: 2023-2025 Custom Incentives Performance Indicators Year Investment First-Year Energy Savings Lifetime Energy Savings Peak Demand Savings esource st (TRC)ª gram strator st (PAC) b Participation (projects) c Participation (part...
AI summary Table 47 outlines the performance indicators for custom incentives from 2023 to 2025, including investment, energy savings, peak demand savings, and costs. The data shows a steady increase in investment and energy savings over the three-year period, with consistent unit costs and participation metrics.
9.1 ANNUAL PROGRESS REPORTS - In the first quarter of each calendar year, E1 will file an APR with the NSUARB, which will include the - following information: - a summary of the context, activities and milestones achieved in the prior year...
AI summary E1 is required to file an Annual Progress Report (APR) with the NSUARB each year, detailing prior year achievements, discrepancies, expenditures, and savings. The APR also includes advance notice of significant plan changes such as adding or terminating programs or altering budget and savings targets by more than 25%.
9.2 QUARTERLY REPORTS - E1 will file quarterly reports with the NSUARB for quarters one through three of each year[43](#page-20-2) . The reports - will provide quarterly status updates and service highlights and communicate course adjustme...
AI summary E1 is required to file quarterly reports with the NSUARB, providing updates on program performance, mid-course adjustments, and other metrics. The reports will include savings targets, investment data, sector highlights, and updates on residential behavioral initiatives and collaborations with NS Power.
Performance Indicators consist of: - Annual incremental energy savings (reported by program and rate class); - Cumulative annual energy savings (reported by program and rate class); - Annual lifetime energy savings (reported by program and...
AI summary The document outlines performance indicators for energy efficiency and demand response programs, including metrics such as annual and cumulative energy savings, demand response capacity, and customer satisfaction. These indicators are to be reported by program and rate class, with specific timing for claiming demand response capacity after the winter peak period.
55 57 SCHEDULE C 58 59 Performance Requirements 60 I. UARB-APPROVED PERFORMANCE TARGETS, THRESHOLDS, AND 61 INDICATORS 62 63 a) Performance Targets and Thresholds: 64 65 i. Performance Targets are set over the three year contract period, r...
AI summary The document outlines performance requirements and targets set by the UARB for EfficiencyOne over a three-year contract period. It specifies that substantial compliance requires achieving at least 90% of the performance targets, which include energy and demand savings, and outlines various performance indicators for reporting purposes.