The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About200408272004IRP appendix c.pdfProviding a foundation for a bright future. DEMAND-SIDE MANAGEMENT ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE 2004 INTEGRATED RESOURCE PLAN DEMAND-SIDE MANAGEMENT ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE 2004 INTEGRATED RESOURCE PLAN July 2004 TABLE OF CONTENTS DEMAND-SIDE MANAGEMENT OVERVIEW .....................................................1 DEMAND-SIDE MANAGEMENT TERMS ............................................................3 CUSTOMER PROGRAMS ...................................................................................4 DEMAND RESPONSE PROGRAMS................................................................................................4 A. Programs for Residential Customers .................................................................................. 4 ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROGRAMS...............................................................................................6 A. Programs for Residential Customers .................................................................................. 6 B. Programs for Commercial Customers............................................................................... 15 C. Programs for Industrial Customers................................................................................... 17 D. Programs for Irrigation Customers ................................................................................... 19 MARKET TRANSFORMATION.....................................................................................................21 A. Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance............................................................................. 21 EDUCATION, SMALL PROJECTS, AND TRAINING PROGRAMS ......................................................23 A. Small Project/Education Funds......................................................................................... 23 B. Northwest Building Operator Training............................................................................. 24 ENERGY EFFICIENCY ADVISORY GROUP ACTIVITIES ................................27 A. Energy Efficiency Advisory Group Recommendations ................................................... 27 LOOKING AHEAD..............................................................................................31 DATA TABLES...................................................................................................32 2003 DSM PROGRAM ACTIVITY ..............................................................................................32 HISTORICAL DSM PROGRAM ACTIVITY ....................................................................................33 DSM FINANCIAL FACTORS ......................................................................................................35 DEMAND-SIDE MANAGEMENT OVERVIEW 2003 was a year of increasing activity and policy development in demand-side management (DSM) at Idaho Power. Four major DSM programs were initiated: Manufactured Home Energy Check-ups, Energy Efficient Manufactured Home Incentives, Industrial Efficiency and Irrigation Efficiency. Idaho Power conducted four pilot programs: Air Conditioner Cycling Demand Response, the window air conditioner rebate program (Trade In, Trade Up to ENERGY STAR®), AirCare Plus and the quick- start phase of the ENERGY STAR Homes Northwest Program. The Energy Efficiency Advisory Group (EEAG) met four times and provided valuable input to the process. Idaho Power completed a 2003-2005 Demand-side Management Plan that outlines for the first time in many years the management philosophy and direction for DSM. A major effort to develop DSM options for the Idaho Power 2004 Integrated Resource Plan began at the end of 2003. Finally, Idaho Power added two new full-time staff and has established accounting and reporting procedures to facilitate the ongoing growth in DSM activity. Idaho Power worked closely with the Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance (Alliance) and will use the research and infrastructure developed by the Alliance in local programs. The ENERGY STAR Homes Northwest Program, the Manufactured Home Energy Check-ups and the Industrial Efficiency Program will rely heavily on the Alliance’s work. The Alliance’s efforts in the Pacific Northwest impact Idaho Power’s customers by providing behind-the-scenes market changes as well as providing leverage to Idaho Power local programs. 2003 is the third year of a five-year agreement between Idaho Power and the Bonneville Power Administration’s Conservation and Renewable Discount Program (BPA C&RD). Idaho Power directs the C&RD funds to programs that serve lower-income residential customers. In 2003, Idaho Power realized savings of 5,912 MWh and 189 kW of summer peak reduction from its energy efficiency and demand response programs. Savings from market transformation efforts are reported by the Alliance and are summarized later in this document. During the course of the year, Idaho Power spent $2,865,112 promoting energy efficiency, including payments of $1,274,936 to the Alliance, $707,379 for programs funded through the Idaho Tariff Rider (Rider), and $310,652 on BPA C&RD programs. The Rider funding in 2003 totaled $2,629,798, while funding from the BPA for C&RD programs totaled $515,180. Table 1 details DSM expenditures by program. 1 2 Table 1. - Expenditures for Energy Efficiency in 2003 Program Category Utility Cost Idaho Tariff Rider ENERGY STAR New Resid. Const. $ 13,597 AC Cycling Pilot 234,252 ENERGY STAR Room AC Pilot 6,687 CFL Lighting Coupon Program 305,683 School Building Operator Training 48,853 Air Care+ Pilot 3,364 Industrial Efficiency Program 1,303 Irrigation Efficiency Program 8,975 DSM Peak Reduction Study 39,321 EEAG Meetings 3,099 Small Project/ Education Funds 5,100 DSM Analysis & Accounting 36,105 Misc. Expenditures 1,041 Total $ 707,380 BPA Conservation & Renewable Discount (C&RD) Manufactured Home Energy Check-Ups $ 183,653 Energy Efficient Manufactured Home Incentive 37,319 Supplemental LIWA 49,895 Other C&RD Administration 39,785 Total $ 310,652 Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance (NEEA) NEEA Idaho $ 1,217,590 NEEA Oregon 57,346 Total $ 1,274,936 Low Income Weatherization Assistance (LIWA) LIWA - Idaho $ 228,834 LIWA - Oregon 22,255 Total $ 251,089 Oregon Programs Oregon Residential Weatherization (Schedule 78) $ - * Oregon Commercial Audits (Schedule 82) 4,000 Total $ 4,000 Other DSM Costs Total $ 317,055 Total DSM Expenditures $ 2,865,113 * Work completed in 2003 will be paid in 2004. DEMAND-SIDE MANAGEMENT TERMS AC―Air Conditioning Alliance―Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance BPA―Bonneville Power Administration C&RD―Conservation and Renewable Discount Program CFL―Compact Fluorescent Lamp DSM―Demand-Side Management EEAG―Energy Efficiency Advisory Group HVAC―Heating Ventilation and Air Conditioning IED―Idaho Energy Division IPUC―Idaho Public Utilities Commission LIWA―Low-Income Weatherization Assistance NWBOA―Northwest Building Operators Association PTCS―Performance Tested Comfort Systems Rider―Idaho Tariff Rider 3 CUSTOMER PROGRAMS DEMAND RESPONSE PROGRAMS A. Programs for Residential Customers Air Conditioning Cycling Pilot Active Dates: March 2003―Ongoing Target Customers: Homes in Boise and Meridian with air conditioning Participants: 204 Utility Costs: Total Actual Pilot Program Costs = $275,645 Savings in kWh: See discussion below Savings in kW: 159 kW DESCRIPTION In March 2003 the Idaho Public Utilities Commission (IPUC) issued Order No. 29207 and approved a request by Idaho Power to conduct a two-year Air Conditioning Cycling Pilot Program. The Program is a voluntary plan for residential customers that enables Idaho Power to directly address summer peaking requirements by reducing some of the air conditioning load which is one of the primary loads contributing to the summer peak. Idaho Power’s primary goal of the AC Pilot Program is to assess the effectiveness of air conditioning control on reducing peak load. Specific objectives include: • Assess effect of control on customer satisfaction and comfort and retention • Develop analysis model for measuring peak load reduction • Gain operating experience in managing program • Test equipment Approximately 200 households were selected from about 750 applications for the first year of the Program. Cycling commenced on June 18, 2003 and continued on a random schedule for 26 events until August 25, 2003. The approximate total cost for the first year of the Program was $275,645 ($234,252 of Rider dollars and $41,393 of Idaho Power labor costs) and the budgeted amount was $389,600. The single greatest factor that impacted the Program was a thermostat firmware malfunction that was not discovered and diagnosed by the manufacturer until two-thirds of all thermostats had been installed in participants’ homes. This equipment malfunction necessitated a thermostat recall and caused a series of issues that delayed installation, inconvenienced participants, and resulted in implementing fewer cycling days than originally planned. 4 RESULTS • Based on the results of the first year’s data, the Program does produce a substantive and measurable effect of approximately 0.78 kW reduction per participant in AC load during cycling periods, with a larger increase of 1.07 kW reduction per participant during cycling when the outside temperature is 100° or greater. This reduction in AC load during cycling results in participants shifting AC usage to non-cycling periods. In year one of the Program this resulted in a small net increase in kWh usage of 0.4 kWh per participant during a cycling day. These values may change when combined with year two results. • The participants in year one tended to be older, conservation-conscious, and lived mainly in 4 zip codes in Boise and Meridian. As a group they average less energy consumption in the summer than the average Idaho Power customer with air conditioning. • About 74% of participants experienced little or no discomfort from cycling, and overall average home temperature increase was 1-2 degrees over the four-hour cycling period. • Customer surveys taken before and after the cycling season indicate high levels of customer satisfaction on measures including information provided, installation process, customer service and overall program management. NEXT STEPS Work is proceeding on participant recruitment, product manufacturing, customer service training, and installation for year two of the Program, which will add an additional 300 participants in 2004. The Program schedule provides for installation to be complete by early May to allow additional time prior to cycling for troubleshooting and final testing. 5 ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROGRAMS A. Programs for Residential Customers CFL Lighting Coupon Program Active Dates: Through June 2003 Target Customer: Residential and small commercial customers Participants: 12,663 Utility Costs: $314,641 Savings in kWh: 3,596,150 kWh Savings in kW: 411 kW DESCRIPTION In early 2003, Idaho Power initiated a second phase of the Compact Fluorescent Lamp (CFL) Lighting Coupon Program that followed a successful retail-based coupon program conducted in 2002. This second phase leveraged an opportunity to work with a large retailer, Costco, who had not participated in the first phase of the Program. Both the Boise and Twin Falls Costco stores were part of this Program. The contractor for this Program, Ecos Consulting, worked with Costco to make sure a wide range of ENERGY STAR CFL product was available. They arranged an automatic price reduction promotion – in effect, a form of “paperless” coupon. Rebates per bulb ranged from $1 to $2 per bulb depending upon the kind of bulb sold. The Program kick-off was held during Earth Day weekend. The Program contractors developed a consumer educational brochure that was available to Costco customers during the promotion. Costco marketed the promotion through its own venues, and Idaho Power issued a press release announcing the Program. RESULTS In 2003, as part of the second phase of the CFL Lighting Coupon Program, over 48,000 CFLs were sold with incentives through the Costco promotion. This phase of the Program proved to be very cost-effective because a high volume of bulbs was sold with a low coupon value and very little promotion. Idaho Power also completed a component of the Program that provided CFLs free of charge to Community Action Agencies for distribution to low-income customers. 2,000 bulbs were distributed in this manner. NEXT STEPS Idaho Power completed the CFL Lighting Coupon Program by late spring 2003. Ecos Consulting presented its final report August 1, 2003. Idaho Power will continue to provide information to our customers periodically in bill stuffers and on the web encouraging the purchase and appropriate placement of ENERGY STAR CFL bulbs. 6 ENERGY STAR Homes Northwest “Quick Start” Active Dates: September 2003―Ongoing Target Customers: New homebuyers and residential builders Participants: N/A Utility Costs: $13,597 Savings in kWh: N/A Savings in kW: N/A DESCRIPTION The ENERGY STAR Homes Northwest Program is a new, regionally coordinated initiative supported by the Alliance, electric and gas utilities, state energy organizations, builders, trade allies and other related organizations to build and sell energy efficient homes in Oregon, Washington, Idaho and Montana. Leading with the nationally recognized brand of ENERGY STAR, the Program provides significant assistance to builders with increased marketing, ally training, awards, and cash incentives to support the construction of homes that are 30% more energy efficient than current Idaho building codes and standards. Idaho Power is partnering with the Idaho Energy Division (IED) and Alliance to provide consumer marketing, builder incentives, and subcontractor training to expand the existing ENERGY STAR Program. Idaho Power’s primary objective with this Program is to reduce future peak summer demand caused by inefficient residential building envelope construction practices and AC usage, especially in capacity-constrained high-growth service territory in the Treasure Valley. As this is a new program, a number of issues must be resolved and processes and procedures developed to begin enrolling builders, educating consumers, training subcontractors, and ultimately building new homes. These issues include: Final determination of the exact specification in Idaho for r-values, HVAC equipment and installation procedures for ENERGY STAR certification. Transition from existing ENERGY STAR specification. The IED currently operates a statewide energy efficient homebuilding program whose specification is different from the Northwest specification included in this regional program. When and how this specification changes for the builders is still under negotiation. Verification and quality assurance. The IED contracts with local individuals (Home Performance Specialists) who currently provide technical assistance and independent verification of energy efficient materials and installation methods to builders. How their role will change and how verification will be performed is under discussion among all the partners. 7 Amount of dollar incentive to be paid to builders. Idaho Power has contracted with Ecotope to determine the demand savings that can be cost-effectively reimbursed to builders. Idaho Power has been actively working with IED, the Alliance, local builders and Home Performance Specialists to discuss these issues, propose alternatives and solutions, and move the process forward. NEXT STEPS The “Fast Track” timetable anticipates these issues will be resolved over the winter 2004 and a consumer marketing campaign will begin in the spring to coincide with the Ada County Parade of Homes consumer event in April and May. Energy Efficient Manufactured Home Incentives Active Dates: January 2003―Ongoing Target Customers: New manufactured homebuyers Participants: 73 Utility Costs: $37,319 Savings in kWh: 227,434 kWh Savings in kW: Not measured in C&RD Programs DESCRIPTION In 2003, Idaho Power launched a program to encourage manufactured home buyers to purchase energy-efficient Super Good Cents homes. The BPA’s C&RD Program funds this effort. The goal of the Program is to help buyers purchase Super Good Cents homes and to encourage salespeople to discuss energy efficiency. Customers who purchase a Super Good Cents home and site it in Idaho Power’s service territory are eligible for a $300 rebate. In addition, the salesperson receives a $75 incentive. Given that the BPA funds this Program, the EEAG has received updates but has not offered recommendations. To date, there have been no customer or industry concerns about the Program. Idaho Power has partnered with the Northwest Energy Efficiency Manufactured Homes Program and the IED to generate interest in the Program and confirm Super Good Cents certification of each home. NEXT STEPS Interest in the Program has been steady. In 2004, Idaho Power will develop a marketing plan for the Program to increase participation. In addition, an extra incentive for an ENERGY STAR-qualified home (using either a heat pump or a heat recovery system) will be introduced. The amount of the incentive to be paid is currently being evaluated. 8 Trade In, Trade Up to ENERGY STAR Pilot Active Dates: July 2003 Target Customers: Residential customers with room air conditioners Participants: 113/99 Utility Costs: $6,687 (additional costs paid by the Alliance) Savings in kWh: 14,454 kWh Savings in kW: 11.67 kW DESCRIPTION The Trade In, Trade Up to ENERGY STAR promotion was offered to Idaho Power by ENERGY STAR Home Products Program as a pilot funded by the Alliance. The pilot program was held on July 12, 2003 at two retailers in the Treasure Valley. Customers were encouraged to bring in their old, inefficient room air conditioner and replace it with an efficient ENERGY STAR unit. As an incentive, customers who both traded-in an old unit and traded-up to an ENERGY STAR unit were eligible for a $30 mail-in rebate from Idaho Power and an in-store $30 discount, $10 of which was underwritten by Idaho Power. Idaho Power set the following goals for the project: Test methods for attracting retailers and reaching customers Evaluate cost-effectiveness of promotion Reduce summer peak During the pilot, all of these goals were met. Findings from each area are discussed below. After developing projections for an event held throughout the service territory, a full program was rejected because it cannot be designed in a cost-effective manner. RESULTS The ENERGY STAR Home Products Program recruited Nampa Appliance & TV and RC Willey for this project. Other retailers showed considerable interest but were unable to commit due to limited stock on hand, local promotional restrictions or limited advance notice of the promotion. It was clear that retailers are interested in programs of this type. Newspaper and radio advertisements along with a direct mail piece were used to generate customer interest. Publicity included radio interviews and announcements, television and newspaper coverage and information on Idaho Power’s web site. Retailers were supplied with a variety of promotional material to display prior to the event as well. In total, Idaho Power estimated that more than 13,000,000 customer impressions were generated during the course of the promotion. In a survey completed by participating customers, about half of the customers sited a paid advertisement as the way they learned about the promotion. The promotion generated 113 trade-in units and 99 ENERGY STAR unit purchases. Less than 70% of eligible rebates were requested. Idaho Power issued 67 customer 9 rebates and 62 retailer rebates. These rates are surprisingly low given that customers and retailers received a reminder call prior to the deadline for submitting rebates. Idaho Power’s expenses were limited because of the Alliance’s financial commitment to the promotion. Idaho Power’s budget for the project was $15,000. Actual costs were $6,687, including $2,630 for incentives and $3,706 for program management staff. Cost- effectiveness must be based on projected costs of a full program rather than actual costs affiliated with a pilot. A budget for a full program projected a $108 - $135 per unit cost, depending on the number of participating retailers and customers. This per unit cost was then measured against the savings numbers and showed that a future promotion would not be cost-effective. Savings numbers are based on conservative estimates that assumed a measure life of 15 years, 990 annual operating hours, a coincident factor of 0.8 and lifetime measure impacts rather than only first-year impacts. The following savings were calculated for the pilot: Energy savings Annual savings per unit – 146 kWh Total Program savings (over 15 years) – 216,633 kWh Summer peak savings Annual savings per unit – .12 kW Program peak reduction – 11.67 kW Given that new ENERGY STAR units are only 10% more efficient than their non- qualifying counterparts, it is difficult to expect significant savings from this promotion. These limited savings compared to the high per unit cost discussed above render this project not cost-effective. NEXT STEPS The pilot promotion results were presented to Idaho Power management and the EEAG. It was agreed that, while a promotion of this nature is appealing for many reasons, it should not be undertaken. Cost-effectiveness is one of the top evaluation criteria and renders this project undesirable at this time. Other learnings from the project, including marketing techniques, partnership opportunities and program evaluation methods can be used in other energy efficiency programs. 10 Manufactured Home Energy Checkups Active Dates: October 2002―December 2003 Target Customers: Manufactured and mobile home residents Participants: 420 homes Utility Costs: $183,653 Savings in kWh: 602,723 kWh Savings in kW: Not measured in C&RD Programs DESCRIPTION Idaho Power launched a pilot program in October 2002 to provide duct sealing and additional efficiency services to customers living in manufactured homes. The services were free to customers and included the following: Duct testing and sealing according to Performance Tested Comfort System (PTCS) specifications endorsed by the BPA 2 CFL bulbs 2 furnace filters along with replacement instructions Hot water temperature test Energy efficiency materials. The Program was managed under contract by Climate Crafters, an Alliance supported non-profit in northern Idaho. Climate Crafters relied on local HVAC dealers in Payette and Pocatello to market and perform the services. Upon completion of the pilot in May 2003, Idaho Power authorized Climate Crafters to continue work in Payette and Pocatello through the end of 2003. The goal of the pilot was to test the viability of providing duct sealing and energy efficiency services to our customers using an outside contractor. Key elements to evaluate included: Customer interest in and satisfaction with the Program Contractor acceptance PTCS standards and affiliated technology Need for duct sealing in manufactured homes Ability to reach customers in a cost-effective manner The pilot was successful in meeting these goals, laying the foundation for a full rollout of the Program. The goal for the remainder of 2003 was to serve customers in the pilot areas in a professional and efficient manner while developing a program for the entire service area. RESULTS Customer interest in the Program was high once the services offered were understood. Customers found it hard to believe it was free with no future obligation. Customer satisfaction with the Program was extremely high. Voluntary survey responses indicated an overwhelming agreement that the services were well performed and appreciated. 11 Contractor acceptance of the PTCS standard proved challenging. Only one of the three contractors wanted to continue working in the Program after the pilot. Duct sealing of this nature proved difficult to make profitable for traditional HVAC businesses that rely heavily on the sales and installation of equipment rather than just the servicing of that equipment. An alternate approach, using insulation and weatherization contractors, will be used in the future. The need for duct sealing is apparent. In the homes tested and sealed to PTCS standards, an average of 65% reduction of air leakage was achieved. Of all homes tested, less than 10% met PTCS standards without sealing. Reaching customers in manufactured home parks was not difficult. The challenge was effectively reaching other eligible customers and scheduling the work in a cost- effective manner. 2003 Homes Served 420 Test + Seal Homes 331 CFLs 822 Furnace Filters 766 Costs $183,653 C&RD Credits $229,183 Annual kWh Savings 602,753 NEXT STEPS Approval to expand the Program to the entire service area was received in 2003 and a request for proposal was sent out to prospective program managers. Ecos Consulting, in partnership with Delta-T and Energy Solutions, was selected to run the project. Program expansion is underway and Idaho Power expects to serve an additional 1,500 homes in 2004 and early 2005. 12 Low-Income Weatherization Assistance (LIWA) Table 2. Low-Income Weatherization Assistance in 2003 Agency Weatherization Jobs Utility Cost Canyon County Organization on Aging, Inc. 71 68,501 Eastern Idaho Special Services Agency, Inc. 4 3,187 El-Ada Community Action Agency, Inc. 91 129,449 South Central Community Action Agency, Inc. 64 45,530 Southeastern Idaho Community Action Agency 35 31,362 Idaho Subtotal 265 $278,029 Malheur Council on Aging (Oregon) 29 22,255 Total 294 $300,284 DESCRIPTION Since 1989, Low-Income Weatherization Assistance has been a public-purpose program to make energy services more affordable to low-income customers. Idaho Power provides grants to local non-profit agencies participating in state-run weatherization programs in Idaho and Oregon to supplement federal funding of weatherization projects. The agencies recruit candidates and qualify households for the Program using the state’s eligibility requirements. The state programs are administered in Idaho by the Department of Health and Welfare, Bureau of Benefit Program Operations, and in Oregon by the Department of Human Resources, State Housing & Community Services Department. For all weatherization jobs in Oregon and those in Idaho funded by the C&RD, the dwellings must be electrically heated and all measures must provide cost-effective electricity savings. For the remaining jobs in Idaho, the Program is fuel-blind and allows some health and safety measures. Idaho Power typically pays 50% of the cost of qualifying measures plus a $75 administration fee per dwelling. RESULTS LIWA activity by agency and state is shown in Table 2. Included in the 265 jobs completed in Idaho, 57 electrically heated homes were weatherized using $49,895 provided through the C&RD from the BPA. The 57 jobs funded through the C&RD save an estimated 230,850 kWh per year. The remaining 208 jobs resulted in an estimated 842,400 kWh savings per year. 29 weatherization jobs were completed in Oregon in 2003 and saved an estimated 117,450 kWh per year. The Program also funds weatherization of buildings occupied by tax-exempt groups. In 2003, LIWA provided $15,225 to help three nonprofit organizations in Idaho: the Idaho City Senior Center, the Christian Retirement Center in Boise, and the Pregnancy Crisis Center in Twin Falls. 13 Oregon Residential Weatherization (Schedule 78) DESCRIPTION This statutory program requires the annual notification of all residential customers in Oregon to inform them how to obtain energy audits and financing for energy conservation measures. To qualify for an Idaho Power audit or financing, customers must have electric space heat. The Program offers loans at 6.5% interest or cash payments of 25% of the cost-effective portion of recommended measures. Loans for measures that are not cost-effective are also available at a higher interest rate, but the maximum total loan amount is $5,000 per dwelling, and loans are subject to credit approval. The maximum cash payment is the installed cost of the measures excluding labor by the owner, up to $1,000 per dwelling. RESULTS In 2003, there were 28 inquiries regarding residential audits, and 16 audits were performed. In addition, 4 cash rebates totaling $1,057 were paid in 2004 for work completed in 2003. The total cost of energy conservation measures completed in 2003 was $4,765 and associated annual savings amounted to 31,875 kWh. The Idaho Power also received cash payments totaling $943 on uncollectible accounts. Idaho Power does not record kWh savings from a project until payment is made. All audits were for single-family homes, and none of the participants were identified as being low-income customers. Idaho Power does not estimate the energy savings resulting from the audits. This year, the company will again notify all residential customers of this Program and honor all requests for audits and financing from qualified customers. 14 B. Programs for Commercial Customers AirCare Plus Pilot Active Dates: May 2003―October 2003 Target Customers: Small commercial customers with rooftop units Participants: 31 units Utility Costs: $3,364 Savings in kWh: 33,976 kWh Savings in kW: NA DESCRIPTION Idaho Power joined with the Alliance and its contractor, Portland Energy Conservation, Inc, to operate a pilot designed to save energy and peak through a premium operation and maintenance service of HVAC rooftop units for commercial customers. The AirCare Plus Pilot Program provided operation and maintenance servicing of rooftop heating and cooling units targeting units with economizers. Idaho Power participated in this pilot in order to determine whether this kind of program would help reduce summer peak and provide a desirable service to small and medium commercial customers. A goal of the Program was to determine if the economizers in the rooftop units were functioning properly and were being serviced routinely. There has been a lack of diagnostic tools and testing equipment in the service industry for the testing and performance of the economizer. Normally, if economizers are setup at all it is by the factory or the original installer and the settings are never checked. The AirCare Plus tool also offers a comprehensive comparison for the customer to decide on further unit servicing, retrofitting economizers and unit replacement along with a detailed inventory of their rooftop units. RESULTS Three HVAC vendors were trained, two in Boise and one in Twin Falls. A total of 31 HVAC rooftop units were serviced; 25 in Boise and 6 in Twin Falls. The total cost of the Program for 2003 amounted to $5,764, $3,364 was paid with Rider dollars and $2,400 were Idaho Power labor costs. Energy consumption for past billing periods on select units that were monitored for several weeks before and after the servicing were provided by Idaho Power with the customers’ consent. A typical service would cost approximately three hundred dollars and took about three hours to perform. Idaho Power provided a $100 incentive per unit. 15 Customer acceptance was varied. Existing service contracts, low energy costs, high replacement and repair costs and extreme temperatures during program months were just some of the issues incurred. In order to insure that summer peak reduction potential was measured, Idaho Power offered to pay for additional units to be monitored as part of the Alliance’s evaluation plan. Stellar Processes was hired by the Alliance to do the on-site monitoring of participating units before and after units were serviced. Some units that were not serviced were also monitored. In Idaho Power’s service territory, 11 units were monitored. Stellar Processes reported actual savings of an average of 1096 kWh/unit, which was consistent with estimated savings of 998 kWh/unit. Peak savings data was inconclusive. However, there was a wide variation of savings that rendered predictable savings unreliable at this time. NEXT STEPS There may be regional efforts to look at what can be further concluded from this research. Because of the high number of rooftop HVAC units in the Idaho Power service territory and the large impact they have on the summer peak, Idaho Power will monitor developments and may participate with further research in this area. Oregon Commercial Audit (Schedule 82) DESCRIPTION This statutory program requires that all commercial customers in Oregon be notified every year that information about energy saving operations and maintenance measures for commercial buildings is available and that commercial energy audit services can be provided, normally at no charge. Customers using more than 4,000 kWh per month may receive a more detailed audit but may be required to pay a portion of the costs. RESULTS In 2003, there were 30 inquiries about commercial audits, and 21 audits were performed. Employees conducted 11 audits, and contractors performed 10 audits on behalf of the company at a cost of $4,000. The Idaho Power does not monitor which audit recommendations are implemented and does not estimate energy savings for this Program. This year, the company will again notify all commercial customers of this Program and provide audit services to qualified customers who request them. 16 C. Programs for Industrial Customers Industrial Efficiency Program Active Dates: October 2003―Ongoing Target Customers: Customers with a Basic Load Capacity over 500 kW Participants: None Utility Costs: $1,303 Savings in kWh: NA Savings in kW: NA DESCRIPTION The primary purpose of this Program is to acquire peak kW and kWh savings from projects at industrial customer sites and assist industrial customers to reduce energy costs. The Program was marketed to 280 qualifying customers. Customers are required to identify a project applicable to their own facilities, provide sufficient information to Idaho Power to establish a basis for a viable conservation project and complete an application. The customer also must allow for on-site power monitoring where practical and enter into an incentive agreement. Idaho Power will then review submittals to determine kWh and kW savings and whether the proposal meets other program requirements. It may take up to two years for an industrial customer to select a project, budget for it, assemble the project information, allow Idaho Power to analyze it, execute an agreement and implement the project. Idaho Power provides engineering analysis of their project, financial assistance, energy audit assistance, demonstration programs, workshops, newsletters and expert advice. RESULTS There were six projects submitted in 2003 that are in various stages of processing. Two projects were determined to be viable by the end of the year and formal agreement signing is in progress. One project is estimated to save 184,000 kWh annually and 40 peak kW with a financial incentive of $17,519. The other project is expected to save 832,187 kWh annually and 90 peak kW with a financial incentive of $74,703. Once the Program is at full capacity, the goals are to obtain approximately 5,625,000 kWh and 640 peak kW savings per year at a cost of $565,000 per year through the participation with a broad cross-section of industrial and large commercial customers. Customers have indicated wide acceptance of the program design and are working toward providing the necessary information to have a viable project. 17 Distribution Efficiency Initiative Pilot DESCRIPTION The Distribution Efficiency Initiative encourages the operation of the distribution system at a lower average voltage, when possible, to reduce consumption of various end-use loads. This research project, developed by the Alliance, involves multiple utilities and technologies to evaluate the cost effectiveness of different approaches. This project will also assess the potential effects of this effort by quantifying the achievable energy savings and demand reduction. This approach also has a direct demand response component. Beginning in 2004, Idaho Power will assist Alliance in the research and development phase of this pilot. The research and development phase will consist of an extensive load research and benefit study. Idaho Power’s contribution to this phase will include: • Assisting in developing customer selections and making customer contacts. • Installation of Home Voltage Regulator units. • Installation of meters. The Alliance plans to collect meter data for 12 months. At the end of the data collection period the Alliance will evaluate the data as well as conduct a participant survey. The second phase of this pilot involves the implementation of demonstration projects. Idaho Power’s role in this second phase will include: • Installation of meters. • Setting voltage regulation line drop compensation settings. • Procuring and installing capacitors and voltage regulators. • Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) installations and improvements (optional) Through this pilot, the Alliance and Idaho Power expect to determine the energy savings and demand reduction potential through improved voltage regulation providing lower average voltages while maintaining or improving service quality. 18 D. Programs for Irrigation Customers Irrigation Efficiency Program Active Dates: September 2003―Ongoing Target Customers: New systems and existing systems being modified Participants: 2 Utility Costs: $11,190 Savings in kWh: 36,792 kWh Savings in kW: 18 kW DESCRIPTION The Irrigation Efficiency Program is an incentive program for agricultural irrigation customers to install more efficient irrigation systems. The Program is available to both existing and new customers. Modified systems are reviewed by Idaho Power Agriculture Representatives to determine savings. The amount of the incentive to the customer is calculated by multiplying the kWh savings by $.10 or the kW reduced by $200, whichever is greater. The total incentive is limited to a cap of $5,000 or no more than 25% of the total costs for existing systems and $3,000 or no more than 10% of the total costs for a new system. The Program will provide customers with information and education through annual workshops across our service territory. Idaho Power works with University of Idaho Extension System, the Natural Resource Conservation Service and the IED to provide these workshops to customers. Idaho Power Agriculture Representatives provide analysis, energy audits and expert advice to our irrigation customers. To be a direct participant in this Program the customer must identify a project on their system, provide sufficient information to Idaho Power to establish a basis for a viable conservation project and complete an application. The customer also needs to enter into an incentive agreement with Idaho Power. This Program was promoted to customers through a direct mailer to irrigation customers. Also, Idaho Power Agriculture Representatives met with all agricultural irrigation equipment dealers and described the Program to them and left them with program brochures. The cost of the brochure and mailing was $3,883. The Program has generated a lot of customer interest. Each of Idaho Powers Agriculture Representatives has spent a great deal of time talking to customers about projects they are thinking of doing. RESULTS Two payments were made prior to the end of 2003. An additional nine contracts were signed but not paid by the end of 2003. Total expenditures for the Program in 2003 is $11,190 including $8,975 from Rider funding and $2,215 from Idaho Power labor. 19 This is an energy efficiency program for irrigation customers, therefore the savings from this Program will occur during the summer. Most projects that will make an irrigation system more efficient will also reduce the demand of the irrigation system. Idaho Power calculates energy savings for this Program by looking at each project specifically. The systems can range from very big to very small. Savings are calculated at each metered service point. 20 MARKET TRANSFORMATION A. Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance Idaho Power accomplishes market transformation programs in its service territory by being a member of the Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance (Alliance) and working to coordinate Alliance activities in Idaho. The Alliance is a regional group whose mission is to catalyze the Northwest marketplace to embrace energy-efficient products and services. In 2003, after six years of existence, the Alliance initiated a retrospective evaluation to determine whether it had transformed enough markets to justify the costs of the Alliance. An ad hoc committee, that included members both internal and external to the organization, led the retrospective. Two primary finding of the study were that the Alliance has been successful at transforming, or contributing to the transformation of markets and that the benefits of the Alliance have exceeded costs. The study concluded that the regional approach of the Alliance is an asset and even greater leverage in program implementation can be gained in the future. In 2003, Idaho Power paid $1,274,936 to the Alliance on a system basis. Idaho’s share of the payments was $1,217,590 (95.5%) and Oregon’s was $57,346 (4.5%). These amounts do not include other costs to participate in the Alliance, such as employees’ time and travel that were absorbed by the company in its general operating expenses. In Idaho, funding for the Idaho Power’s participation in the Alliance was authorized through 2004 by Order No. 28333 in Case No. IPC-E-99-13. The Oregon Public Utility Commission has also approved the company’s expenditures for the Alliance for 2003. Preliminary estimates reported by the Alliance indicate that Idaho Power’s share of regional market transformation kWh savings for 2003 is between 1.9 and 2.5 MWa. Idaho Power relies on the Alliance to report the energy savings and other benefits of the Alliance's regional portfolio of initiatives. Highlights of the Alliance’s activities in Idaho in 2003 include: The Alliance partnered with Idaho Power for the Trade In, Trade Up to ENERGY STAR Pilot Program where more than 100 Idaho Power customers turned in their old room air conditioners. The Alliance conducted the AirCare Plus pilot with assistance from Idaho Power where 31 commercial HVAC rooftop units were provided a premium operating and maintenance service in order to determine savings and marketability of the service. The Alliance’s ENERGY STAR Residential Lighting Program provided the backbone for Idaho Power’s CFL Lighting Coupon Program. The BetterBricks day lighting advisors worked with the design team of Albertson’s and succeeded convincing their to include energy savings features in all future stores. 21 The Alliance co-funded a study with University of Idaho, Idaho Potato Growers Association and Cascade Engineering to study the effect of using variable speed drives on potato storage facilities. Preliminary results show energy savings and reduced potato mass loss. The breadth of the Alliance portfolio can be found at www.nwalliance.org. 22 EDUCATION, SMALL PROJECTS, AND TRAINING PROGRAMS A. Small Project/Education Funds In order to be able to respond to research requests, educational opportunities and worthy small projects that are not eligible under other programs, Idaho Power, with support of the EEAG, set aside two funds: the Small Project Fund and the Education Fund. Each was initially funded with 2% of the Rider funding which results in approximately $54,000 available for each fund. In 2003, $2,400 was spent from the Small Project fund and $2,700 from the Education Fund. There are several projects that were obligated but not funded. Small Project Fund―Projects paid in 2003 Envinta, One-2-five Energy Diagnostic, joint assessment with the Alliance As part of industrial market research, Alliance offered to partially fund 20 Envinta audits in the Pacific Northwest. Idaho Power agreed to co-fund audits on two of their customers. Findings of all 20 audits will be used by Alliance to structure their final Industrial Sector Strategy. The two companies who agreed to participate were Swift & Company in Nampa and Tyson Foods in Boise. Both companies have been audited and final reports have been returned. Total Cost: $2,400 ($1,200 per audit) Sector: Industrial Small Project Fund―Projects obligated but not paid in 2003 Solar for Schools, Castleford School District Idaho Power agreed to contribute money from this fund to upgrade the energy efficiency of the Castleford School so that it could qualify to participate in the Solar for Schools project. The two measures identified were upgrading lighting in the cafeteria and installing vending misers in campus vending machines. Idaho Power agreed to pay $1,106 for these measures. Total Cost: $1,106 Sector: Commercial Foothills Environmental Education Center Idaho Power has agreed to contribute money to the Foothills Environmental Education Facility for the installation of day lighting building features and other energy efficiency measures. Idaho Power agreed to contribute $5,000 toward this project. In addition, Idaho Power has provided approximately $10,000 worth of photovoltaic panels to be used at the site. Total Cost: $5,000 Sector: Commercial 23 New Head Start Building Idaho Power agreed to pay $2,698 for the installation of a high-efficient, SEER 13 air conditioner at the new Heat Start building in Garden City. Total Cost: $2,698 Sector: Commercial Education Fund―Projects paid in 2003 Integrated Design Workshop Idaho Power sponsored with the Alliance an Integrated Design Workshop held in Boise on September 22, 2003. This workshop focused on strategies for high performance buildings and featured Tom Paladino and Mark Frankel. Idaho Power provided a $50 scholarship to any Idaho Power customer who wished to attend. There were 54 attendees. Total Cost: $2,700 Sector: Commercial Education Fund―Projects obligated but not paid in 2003 Pump System Assessment Workshop Idaho Power sponsored with Alliance a Pump System Assessment Workshop held in Twin Falls on September 30, 2003. This workshop focused on improving the efficiency of pumping systems both on the farm and in industrial settings. Idaho Power provided a $70 scholarship to any Idaho Power customer who wished to attend. There were 30 attendees. Total Cost: $2,240 Sector: Agricultural and Industrial Scholarship for Energy Management Certification at Northwest Energy Education Institute Idaho Power offered to provide two $500 scholarships to any Idaho Power customer seeking an Energy Management Certification from the Northwest Energy Education Institute, University of Oregon. The Energy Management Certification is an advanced certification program that requires the student to implement an energy saving project and measure the results. This offer was for the class session held in the summer of 2003. There was no one interested in this training. B. Northwest Building Operator Training DESCRIPTION For the second year in a row, Idaho Power has teamed up with IED and the Northwest Building Operators Association (NWBOA) to provide energy efficiency training for building operators from public and private schools, universities, and colleges within Idaho Power's service territory. In 2002, Idaho Power sponsored Level I training for 26 Idaho school building operators. 24 The 2002 NWBOA Training was determined to be very successful based on the School Building Operator Training Survey Results prepared by McFain & Associates Research, Inc. in May 2003. The survey revealed several very positive responses. 100% of the participants reported that they were satisfied with the course. 83% of respondents indicated that they would likely attend additional training. 83% reported that their schools are now more energy efficient than they were one year ago. 66% reported their schools are more comfortable in terms of heating and cooling than they were one year ago. Annual energy savings resulting from the 2002 training were conservatively estimated to be 750 MWh based on billing data and regional savings data reported by the Alliance. Estimated savings associated with the training show the effort to be cost effective. Members of the EEAG recommended that Idaho Power attempt to more accurately quantify the energy savings that results from the 2003 NWBOA Training. RESULTS In 2003 Idaho Power again sponsored the Level I training and based on the response from 2002 attendees, added a Level II training option. Building operators must hold a Level I certification, or take a challenge test, in order to enroll in the Level II certification course. The Level I Training covers energy conservation techniques, HVAC and Air Systems, introduces automatic controls fundamentals, and covers energy efficient lighting fundamentals. Level II training covers energy efficient operation of HVAC systems at an advanced level as well as energy management strategies and conservation methods. Idaho Power paid training registration fees ($400 for Level I and $550 for Level II) as well as lodging and meals for Level I and Level II training using Rider funds. The total cost of the 2003 training is expected to be $50,250, with $11,768.66 paid in 2003 and the remaining balance of the 2003 training costs will be paid in 2004. The participating school districts were required to cover any other costs associated with attending the training. Both levels of training were held at the Red Lion Hotel Downtowner in Boise. Level I training was conducted November 12,13,14 and 18, 19. Thirty students registered for the Level I training and twenty-eight actually attended the course. Level II training was held December 10, 11, 12 and 16, 17, 18. Due to the overwhelming interest for the Level II training, the course had to be split into two separate sessions. Twenty-seven building operators registered for Level II training, fifteen operators attended Level II training in December of 2003 and 12 attendees are scheduled to attend training in January of 2004. 25 In response to the EEAG recommendation that Idaho Power more accurately quantify the energy savings, each attendee at the 2003 Level I and II training was asked to fill out a questionnaire. Each attendee was provided a list of all their Idaho Power metered service points and asked to provide square footage estimates, energy fuels used, and months of operation for each associated building that they operate. As a result of this information, it is estimated the average attendee will save approximately 25 MWh annually for a total of 1,075 MWh annual savings for the 2003 attendees. Very few schools districts that were represented at the training hold school year round. As a result, the summer peak reduction resulting from this training is expected to be low relative to the non-summer demand reduction that the training will provide. In addition to the energy savings resulting in bill reductions, the school districts are expected to receive additional benefits from the training in the form of increased comfort in the heating and cooling months. Idaho Power expects that this training will continue to provide a high level of customer satisfaction among this customer segment while providing cost-effective energy savings. 26 ENERGY EFFICIENCY ADVISORY GROUP ACTIVITIES In 2003 the Energy Efficiency Advisory Group (EEAG) met January 9, April 2, July 9, and October 22. In the meetings, Idaho Power provided a review of the Rider funding and expenses, provided updates on on-going programs and projects, requested recommendations on new program proposals and provided contextual information to the group on DSM issues. Three new members were added to the group in 2003, these include: an IPUC staff member, an Idaho Power employee from Power Supply department and a regional technical efficiency expert. These new members were added in anticipation of the EEAG providing guidance in integrating DSM in the 2004 Idaho Power Integrated Resource Plan. Meeting minutes and other meeting materials are provided to all EEAG members, including IPUC staff, and are available upon request. A. Energy Efficiency Advisory Group Recommendations Following is a review of the direction provided to Idaho Power by EEAG for major program or research expenditures and general policy or operational issues. General recommendations or those not involving Rider expenditures are covered in the meeting minutes. (Note: January 9, 2003 meeting activities were reported in the January 30, 2003 Annual Demand-Side Management Report and will not be repeated here.) IRRIGATION EFFICIENCY PROGRAM Idaho Power presented a proposal for an Irrigation Efficiency Program to the EEAG during the April 2, 2003 meeting. Idaho Power received the following recommendations: The general consensus of the EEAG was that Idaho Power should implement the Irrigation Efficiency Program. Idaho Power kicked off this Program September 1, 2003 EEAG members generally supported a higher budget in the first year of the Program. In the event that program funding is a limiting factor, Idaho Power will revisit the issue again with the EEAG. The EEAG recommended that Idaho Power proactively market this Program. Idaho Power has sent a tailored brochure to all irrigation customers and through it’s Agriculture Field Representatives are proactively working with customers on this Program. The EEAG suggested an independent evaluation be completed on this Program after a couple of years of operation. Idaho Power, when developing it’s overall evaluation plan, will determine an evaluation scheme for this Program. The EEAG was concerned that the Program was available to only agricultural irrigation systems not all irrigation systems. 27 Idaho Power is keeping this agricultural requirement because other types of systems (golf courses, cemetery, etc) are substantially different and may need to be dealt with in a different program. There was a comment not to limit customer size to those who have at least 5 Hp. Idaho Power modified the minimum size requirement in the Program. In order to participate a customer must save at least 200 kWhs. AIRCARE PLUS PILOT PROGRAM Idaho Power presented a proposal for the AirCare Plus Pilot Program to the EEAG during the April 2, 2003 meeting. This pilot was proposed and managed by the Alliance, with Idaho Power being a local utility sponsor. Idaho Power received the following recommendations: The general consensus of the EEAG was that Idaho Power should go forward with the Program. Idaho Power participated in the Program summer and fall of 2003. TRADE IN, TRADE UP TO ENERGY STAR In a May 10, 2003 email to each EEAG member, Idaho Power distributed information about an opportunity to participate with the Alliance in a room air conditioner rebate pilot. The email requested comments on whether the Company should participate in the pilot. A few EEAG members sent responses and they all encouraged Idaho Power to participate in the Program. Idaho Power proceeded with the Program. INDUSTRIAL EFFICIENCY PROGRAM On July 9, 2003, Idaho Power presented to the EEAG a proposal for the Industrial Efficiency Program and received the following recommendations: Allow both new and existing customers in the Program Idaho Power will allow both new and existing customers into the Program. Examine whether to spend more of the budget on education, and to make money available for audits and education. Idaho Power will explore education, audit and incentives available from other agencies, particularly IED’s Industries of the Future and the Alliance Provide a sign-up bonus to customers that could accelerate their projects or provide a bonus to customers whose projects are designed to reduce summer peak Idaho Power does not feel there is an advantage to providing a “quick sign-up” bonus to customers. Given that the Program at this time is on a fast track to be implemented it would be difficult to provide the resources to administer this option. Additionally, it is not felt the customers would respond to the amount of money that would be available for a bonus. Alternatively, Idaho Power will explore ways to incent projects that demonstrate peak reduction A couple of suggestions were made to ensure that Idaho Power spread the money across both large and small customers. Idaho Power, through its marketing of the Program, will be sure that all eligible customers get information about their opportunity to participate in this Program. 28 EEAG members provided mixed a recommendation on whether to not pay an incentive for savings under one year payback. Idaho Power feels that customers should be willing to fund projects under a one- year payback on their own. Lowering that criterion may increase free ridership. Idaho Power will keep the one-year payback criteria. Don’t provide incentives required by Idaho code Idaho Power will explore the current requirements of the new commercial code and how our incentives will work around the code Recommend to go ahead with the Program Idaho Power implemented this Program in the fall of 2003. NWBOA TRAINING SURVEY On July 9, 2003, Idaho Power presented the results of a survey given to participants of last year’s NWBOA training. During the discussion the EEAG provided the following recommendation: The EEAG recommended that Idaho Power consider repeating the NWBOA training in 2003. Idaho Power sponsored a second round of NWBOA training in 2003 that included both Level 1 and Level II training. The EEAG suggested Idaho Power expand the offering of training to include all schools: K-12, colleges and universities. Idaho Power offered this training to building operators of colleges and universities. DISTRIBUTION EFFICIENCY INITIATIVE PROGRAM On October 22, 2003, Idaho Power presented a proposal for both Phase I and Phase II of the Distribution Efficiency Initiative Program. The EEAG made the following recommendations: The EEAG expressed a general consensus for moving forward with Phase I. Idaho Power is working with the Alliance to complete Phase I. The EEAG requested an update of the project status after Phase I was complete before proceeding with Phase II. Although both phases are intertwined, Idaho Power will provide information as it becomes available as to the results of Phase I. AC CYCLING PROGRAM Presentations were made to this group in January, April, July and October 2003 regarding the Program. During the October meeting, Idaho Power made a proposal to include switches as well as thermostats in the program design of the second year of the Program. The EEAG had the following guidance: A preference to review 2003 findings before deciding on 2004 configuration was made. Because of the fast timeline needed for 2004 decisions, 2003 findings will not be complete before the need to make a decision. EEAG expressed a general consensus to move ahead with this Program. 29 Idaho Power is proceeding with implementation of this Program. ENERGY STAR HOMES NORTHWEST The EEAG has received presentations regarding this Program in July and October 2003 and has provided the following recommendations to proceed with the “Fast Track” timetable of activities. It was suggested that the Community Action Partnership Association could help with this Program in the various jurisdictions. Idaho Power will explore this option. It was also suggested that Idaho Power look at the desirability of providing incentives for both a Seasonal Energy Efficiency Rating (SEER) of 12 and 13. As Idaho Power works with the regional partners on this Program this option will be evaluated. EEAG expressed a general consensus to move ahead with this Program. Idaho Power is proceeding with implementation of this option. GENERAL POLICY ISSUES The EEAG indicated that they generally support a “soft goal” of sector equity, meaning that money coming in from a particular sector should mostly be spent on programs in that sector. Idaho Power has generally followed this recommendation in setting goals and budgets for new programs. Idaho Power provides information to the EEAG with this information. 30 LOOKING AHEAD 2004 will be another year of increasing DSM activity at Idaho Power. With existing programs and pilots planned, the company estimates MWh savings of 6,155 and summer peak reduction of at least 1.3 MW in 2004. Summer peak reduction continues to be a primary target. The company also anticipates that through DSM design and delivery that customer satisfaction will increase. It is anticipated that this summer will be the second year of the AC Cycling Pilot and the first year of an Irrigation Peak Clipping Pilot Program. Both of these demand response pilots will produce a final report and recommendations at the end of the year. In addition, a major body of work in 2004 will be the evaluation of DSM options in the 2004 Integrated Resource Plan. Idaho Power has established specific action items to accomplish in 2004. These, as outlined in the 2003-2005 DSM Plan, include: Complete Peak Demand Reduction study Estimate summer peak value for all programs Develop evaluation approach Explore the renewal of the Alliance Develop and document policies and procedures Continue to fill staffing needs Explore the calculation of environmental benefits of DSM on Idaho Power’s system Effectively conduct quarterly EEAG meetings. Idaho Power is committed to implementing cost-effective DSM programs as part of its resource portfolio to improve customer efficiency and satisfaction, to pursue stewardship of our natural resources, and to provide balanced value to all stakeholders. Through focused implementation practices, DSM will allow Idaho Power to capture indirect benefits such as improved system utilization and better relationships with our customers and regulators. 31 DATA TABLES 2003 DSM PROGRAM ACTIVITY Costs Savings Nominal Levelized Costs Programs Utility Costs Total Resource Cost Annual Energy Average Demand* Summer Peak Demand**Utility Total Resource State ID Rider BPA C&RD Number of Partici- pants (dollars) (dollars)(kWh)(kWa)(kW) Measure Life (years) ($/kWh)($/kWh)Notes Residential Demand Response Air Conditioning Cycling Pilot ID X 204 275,645 269,680 159.1 10 (a) Residential Efficiency CFL Lighting Coupon Program ID X 12,663 314,641 464,059 3,596,150 410.5 7 0.014 0.021 (b) Energy Efficient Manufactured Home Incentives ID/OR X 73 37,319 79,399 27,434 26.0 45 0.011 0.023 ENERGY STAR Homes Northwest ID X 13,597 13,597 30 (c) Trade In, Trade Up to ENERGY STAR ID X 99 6,687 10,492 14,454 1.7 11.7 12 0.051 0.080 (d) Manufactured Home Energy Checkups ID/OR X 420 183,653 183,653 602,723 68.8 20 0.025 0.025 Oregon Residential Weatherization (Schedule 78) OR 25 (e) Low-Income Low-Income Weatherization Assistance (LIWA) ID 208 228,134 483,369 25 (f) Low-Income Weatherization Assistance (LIWA) OR 29 22,255 42,335 102,643 11.72 25 0.016 0.031 BPA Supplemental LIWA ID/OR X 57 49,895 106,915 223,591 25.52 25 0.017 0.036 Commercial Air Care Plus Pilot ID X 4 5,764 9,061 33,976 3.9 10 0.021 0.033 (g) Industrial Industrial Efficiency Program ID X 1,303 1,303 12 (c) Irrigation Irrigation Efficiency Program ID X 2 11,190 24,710 36,792 4.2 18.4 15 0.029 0.065 Education and Audits Oregon Commercial Audits (Schedule 82) OR 21 4,000 4,000 (h) School Building Operator Training ID X 43 48,853 48,853 1,075,000 122.7 5 0.010 0.010 (I) Small Project/ Education Funds ID X 56 5,100 5,100 (j) Total 9 3 13,879 1,208,036 1,746,527 5,912,763 675.0 189.2 Notes: (a) According to the 2003 Summit Blue Idaho Power A/C Cycling study, the average summer peak reduction was .78 kW/participant and an increase in energy consumption of .4 kWh per cycling event. (b) Ecos Consulting Final Report on Idaho Power Energy Star Residential Lighting Program reported 4 bulbs per participant for a total of 50,650 bulbs. (71 kWh/yr savings per bulb) (c) 2003 expenditures were for program start-up only. No incentives were paid in 2003. (d) Portland Energy Conservation Inc. Final Report on the pilot assumes 990 cooling hours. (e) This Oregon statutory program resulted in 4 jobs totaling $1056.92 that were completed in 2003 and will be paid in 2004. (f) Energy savings is not estimated for the Idaho LIWA program. This program is fuel-blind and allows some health and safety measures. (g) Idaho Power rebates covered approximately 1/2 the total cost to service 31 units. Participant savings is calculated as 1096 kWh/year per unit. ($2500 will be paid in 2004 for work done in 2003) (h) Oregon statutory program. The company does not monitor which audit recommendations are implemented and does not estimate savings for this program. (I) Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance estimates energy savings at .5 kWh/Sq.Ft. of building operation per participant with a cap at 50,000 Sq.Ft. (j) Includes training for 54 participants and 2 audits. 32 HISTORICAL DSM PROGRAM ACTIVITY 2001 - 2003 Costs Savings Nominal Levelized Costs PROGRAMS Utility Costs Total Resource Cost Annual Energy Average Demand* Summer Peak Demand**Utility Total Resource Year Number of Partici- pants (dollars) (dollars)(kWh)(kWa) (kW) Measure Life (years) ($/kWh)($/kWh) End- notes B. Residential Demand Response Air Conditioning Cycling Pilot 2003 204 275,645 269,680 159.1 10 (a) Total 204 275,645 269,680 159.1 10 Residential Efficiency CFL Lighting Coupon Program 2002 11,619 243,054 310,643 3,299,654 376.7 7 0.012 0.015 2003 12,663 314,641 464,059 3,596,150 410.5 7 0.014 0.021 Total 24,281 557,695 774,702 6,895,804 787.2 7 0.013 0.018 (b) Energy Efficiency Packets 2001 7,608 87,175 87,175 405,125 46.2 7 0.035 0.035 2002 2,925 4,910 4,910 155,757 17.8 7 0.005 0.005 Total 10,533 92,085 92,085 560,882 64.0 7 0.027 0.027 Energy Efficient Manufactured Home Incentives 2003 73 37,319 79,399 227,434 26.0 45 0.011 0.023 Total 73 37,319 79,399 227,434 26.0 45 0.011 0.023 ENERGY STAR Homes Northwest 2003 13,597 13,597 30 Total 13,597 13,597 30 (c) Trade In, Trade Up to ENERGY STAR 2003 99 6,687 10,492 14,454 1.7 11.7 12 0.051 0.080 Total 99 6,687 10,492 14,454 1.7 11.7 12 0.051 0.080 (d) Manufactured Home Energy Checkups 2002 17 26,135 26,135 25,989 3.0 20 0.084 0.084 2003 420 183,653 183,653 602,723 68.8 20 0.025 0.025 Total 437 209,788 209,788 628,712 71.8 20 0.028 0.028 Oregon Residential Weatherization (Schedule 78) 2001 27 7,517 6,709 7,073 25 0.081 0.072 2002 24 2,116 23,971 4,580 25 0.035 0.398 2003 25 (e) Total 51 9,633 30,680 11,653 25 0.063 0.200 *Average Demand = Annual Energy / 8760 Annual Hours **Summer Peak Demand is reported for programs that target summer peak reduction. 33 Historical DSM Program Activity 2001 - 2003 Costs Savings Nominal Levelized Costs PROGRAMS Year Number of Partici- pants Utility Costs Total Resource Cost Annual Energy Average Demand* Summer Peak Demand** Measure Life (years) Utility Total Resource End- notes (dollars)(dollars) (kWh)(kWa)(kW)($/kWh)($/kWh) Low-Income Low-Income Weatherization Assistance – Idaho 2001 266 331,126 692,048 25 2002 197 231,352 492,139 25 2003 208 228,134 483,369 25 Total 671 790,612 1,667,557 25 (f) Low-Income Weatherization Assistance – Oregon 2001 21 23,678 44,179 60 412 6.90 25 0.030 0.056 2002 31 24,773 47,221 68 323 7.80 25 0.028 0.053 2003 29 22,255 42,335 102 643 11.72 25 0.016 0.031 Total 81 70,706 133,735 231 378 26.4 25 0.023 0.044 BPA Supplemental LIWA 2002 75 55,966 118,255 311 347 35.54 25 0.014 0.029 2003 57 49,895 106,915 223 591 25.52 25 0.017 0.036 Total 132 105,861 225,170 534 938 61.1 25 0.015 0.032 Commercial Air Care Plus Pilot 2003 4 5,764 9,061 33 976 3.9 10 0.021 0.033 Total 4 5,764 9,061 33 976 3.9 10 0.021 0.033 (g) Industrial Industrial Efficiency Program 2003 1,303 1,303 12 Total 1,303 1,303 12 (c) Irrigation Irrigation Efficiency Program 2003 2 11,190 24,710 36 792 4.2 18.4 15 0.029 0.065 Total 2 11,190 24,710 36 792 4.2 18.4 15 0.029 0.065 Education and Audits Oregon Commercial Audits (Schedule 82) 2001 (h) 2002 24 5,200 5,200 2003 21 4,000 4,000 Total 45 9,200 9,200 (i) *Average Demand = Annual Energy / 8760 Annual Hours **Summer Peak Demand is reported for programs that target summer peak. reduction. 34 Historical DSM Program Activity 2001 - 2003 Costs Savings Nominal Levelized Costs PROGRAMS Year Number of Partici- pants Utility Costs Total Resource Cost Annual Energy Average Demand* Summer Peak Demand** Measure Life (years)Utility Total Resource End- notes (dollars)(dollars) (kWh)(kWa)(kW)($/kWh ($/kWh) School Building Operator Training 2002 28 36,084 36,084 750,000 85.6 5 0.010 0.010 2003 43 48,853 48,853 1,075,000 122.7 5 0.010 0.010 (j) Total 71 84,937 84,937 1,825,000 208.3 5 0.010 0.010 Small Project / Education Funds 2003 56 5,100 5,100 (k) Total 56 5,100 5,100 Total 2001 8,072 561,428 1,066,621 1,095,304 124.2 Total 2002 14,940 629,590 1,064,558 4,615,650 526.4 Total 2003 13,879 1,208,036 1,746,527 5,912,763 675.0 189.2 GRAND TOTAL 36,723 2,287,122 3,641,196 11,001,02 3 1,254.5 189.2 Endnotes: (a) According to the 2003 Summit Blue Idaho Power A/C Cycling study, the average summer peak reduction was .78 kW/participant and an increase in energy consumption of .4 kWh per cycling event. (b) Ecos Consulting Final Report on Idaho Power Energy Star Residential Lighting Program reported 4 bulbs per participant (71 kWh/yr savings per bulb). (c) 2003 expenditures were for program start-up only. No incentives were paid in 2003. (d) Portland Energy Conservation Inc. Final Report on the pilot assumes 990 cooling hours. (e) In 2003 this Oregon statutory program resulted in 4 jobs totaling $1056.92 completed in 2003 that will be paid in 2004. (f) Energy savings is not estimated for the Idaho program. This program is fuel-blind and allows some health and safety measures. (g) Idaho Power rebates covered approximately 1/2 the total cost to service 31 units. Participant savings is calculated as 1096 kWh/year per unit ($2500 will be paid in 2004 for work done in 2003). (h) Eight audits totaling $3200 were performed in 2001 and paid in 2002. (i) Oregon statutory program. The company does not monitor which audit recommendations are implemented and does not estimate savings for this program. (j) Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance estimates energy savings at .5 kWh/Sq.Ft. of building operation per participant with a cap at 50,000 Sq.Ft. (k) 2003 includes training for 54 participants and 2 audits. *Average Demand = Annual Energy / 8760 Annual Hours **Summer Peak Demand is reported for programs that target summer peak reduction. 35 36 Financial Factors for Demand-Side M anagement Initial Data Adjust- W eight Cost W eighted Cost Timing ment Capital Pre-tax Post-tax Pre-tax Post-tax Discounting Rate Factor Factor Debt 51.060%5.973%3.638%3.050%1.857%Nominal 7.200%0.5 1.03538 Preferred 2.969%6.539%6.539%0.194%0.194%Escalation 2.520%1.0 1.02520 Common 45.971%11.200%11.200%5.149%5.149%Real 4.565%1.00993 100.000%8.393%7.200%Revenue Requirement 7.200%0.5 Tax Factors Deferred tax rate 35% Composite incom e tax rate 39.10%Tax life (yrs)1 Property tax %0.00%Declining balance rate (DBR)100% Deferred tax switch (true/false)TRUE Tax timing (months in 1st yr)12 Inputs in white A B C D E F G Present Value Factor Capital Recovery Factor (PVF)(CRF)Nom inal Number Present Value of Am ount per Year with Nominal to 30-yr of Years $1 per Year Present Value of $1 to Real Nom inal Nominal Real Nominal Real (n)(1 ÷ B)(1 ÷ C)(E ÷ D)(F ÷ F(30)) 1 0.96583 0.96583 1.035375 1.035375 1.000000 1.296288 2 1.86680 1.88950 .535677 .529241 .987984 1.280711 3 2.70724 2.77284 .369380 .360641 .976343 1.265621 4 3.49124 3.61761 .286431 .276425 .965067 1.251005 5 4.22258 4.42551 .236822 .225963 .954146 1.236848 6 4.90480 5.19813 .203882 .192377 .943570 1.223139 7 5.54120 5.93702 .180466 .168435 .933330 1.209864 8 6.13485 6.64365 .163003 .150520 .923416 1.197012 9 6.68863 7.31943 .149508 .136623 .913818 1.184571 10 7.20521 7.96570 .138788 .125538 .904529 1.172530 11 7.68710 8.58376 .130088 .116499 .895539 1.160876 12 8.13662 9.17484 .122901 .108994 .886840 1.149600 13 8.55594 9.74011 .116878 .102668 .878424 1.138690 14 8.94711 10.28070 .111768 .097270 .870282 1.128135 15 9.31200 10.79769 .107388 .092612 .862406 1.117926 16 9.65238 11.29211 .103601 .088557 .854790 1.108053 17 9.96990 11.76495 .100302 .084998 .847424 1.098505 18 10.26609 12.21714 .097408 .081852 .840303 1.089274 19 10.54239 12.64958 .094855 .079054 .833418 1.080349 20 10.80013 13.06315 .092591 .076551 .826763 1.071723 22 11.26484 13.83691 .088772 .072270 .814116 1.055328 24 11.66922 14.54458 .085696 .068754 .802308 1.040021 25 11.85128 14.87541 .084379 .067225 .796703 1.032756 26 12.02111 15.19180 .083187 .065825 .791289 1.025738 28 12.32731 15.78375 .081121 .063356 .781013 1.012417 30 12.59376 16.32513 .079404 .061255 .771434 1.000000 32 12.82562 16.82028 .077969 .059452 .762509 0.988431 35 13.11821 17.48484 .076230 .057192 .750262 0.972555 38 13.35572 18.06611 .074874 .055352 .739269 0.958306 40 13.48866 18.41256 .074136 .054311 .732579 0.949634 42 13.60434 18.72941 .073506 .053392 .726363 0.941575 45 13.75033 19.15468 .072726 .052207 .717857 0.930549 48 13.86883 19.52665 .072104 .051212 .710251 0.920690 50 13.93516 19.74835 .071761 .050637 .705637 0.914708 Present Value Factor (PVF) for n years =Adjustm ent Factor × (1 - ((1 + Rate) ^ -n)) ÷ Rate Real Discount Rate =((1 + Nominal Rate) ÷ (1 + Escalation Rate)) - 1 Nom inal Adjustment Factor =(1 + Nominal Rate) ^ Nominal Timing Factor Escalation Adjustment Factor =(1 + Escalation Rate) ^ Escalation Tim ing Factor Real Adjustment Factor =Nominal Adjustment Factor ÷ Escalation Adjustment Factor For timing factors, use 0 for end of period (ordinary annuity), 1 for beginning of period (annuity due), and 0.5 for midpoint. Conversion Factor