California Energy Savings Assistance Program (ESAP) Program Overview

Click to edit Master title style

1

California Energy Savings

Assistance Program (ESAP)Program Overview

Goals, Accomplishments & Challenges

Senate Committee on Energy, Utilities & Communication

Hearing on Energy Efficiency, May 17, 2011

Jeanne Clinton and Ava Tran,

California Public Utilities Commission


2

Energy Savings Assistance Program Overview Purpose:

Reduce energy consumption by eligible households, Lower utility bills for these low income participants, and Improve quality of life via health, safety, comfort improvements.

Eligible Participants: Estimated 5 million eligible households in IOU service areas, earning < 200% of federal poverty level. Income Eligibility

Household Size CARE & Energy Savings Assistance Programs (at 200% FPG)

1-2 $31,800 3 $37,400 4 $45,100 5 $52,800 6 $60,500

Each Additional $7,700


3

Energy Savings Assistance Program Overview Eligible Participants:

Covers single family, multi-family, mobile home, non-profit group living home customers; renters as well as owners.

Penetration Goals and Achievements to Date:

2009-2010 participation includes approximately 23% Multifamily treatment statewide

PG&E 340,884 214,637 63%SCE 250,336 184,492 74%SoCalGas 400,279 206,421 52%SDG&E 61,152 42,520 70%Total 1,052,651 648,070 62%

2009-2011 Goals2009-2010

Achievements % ReachedUtility

Dwelling TypePercent of All California

HouseholdsPercent of Low Income

HouseholdsSingle family 64% 43%Multi-family (2-4 Units) 8% 7%Multi-family (5+ Units) 23% 43%Mobile home 6% 6%


4

ESAP Program At-A-Glance Program Components and Funding:

Provides weatherization, energy efficiency, minor home repairs, and household energy education

IOUs administer; services delivered through various IOU approved contractors and local providers

Ratepayers support 100% of costs of installed measures

Program funded by gas and electric ratepayers: CY 2011 $167 M from electric ratepayers (originally via

public goods charge component) and CY 2011 $152 M from gas public purpose funds


5

Energy Savings Assistance Program Goals

Low Income Energy Efficiency Strategic Plan Vision* By 2020, 100 percent of eligible and willing customers will have

received all cost-effective low income energy efficiency measures.

Strategic Plan Goals By 2020, all eligible customers will be given the opportunity to

participate in the Energy Saving Assistance Program; and The Energy Saving Assistance Program will be an energy resource by

delivering increasingly cost-effective and longer-term savings.

* ESAP is a companion program to the CARE rate discount. CARE offers 20% rate discount on utility bills to the same eligible population. CY 2011 authorized collections for CARE are $900 million. If successful, ESAP will reduce both energy use and annual cost of CARE.


6

Energy Savings Assistance ProgramBudgets and Penetration

Program Budgets

$130

$157 $157

$254

$311 $320

$0

$50

$100

$150

$200

$250

$300

$350

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

$ M

illio

ns

Program Year

Homes Treated

169,674 164,892195,273

305,596

372,360 374,694

0

50,000

100,000

150,000

200,000

250,000

300,000

350,000

400,000

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

Program Year

Hom

es

Program Year 2010 PGE SCE SDGE SoCalGas

Average Cost Per Home $1,078.07 $534.41 $874.84 $606.33


7

Energy Savings Assistance ProgramSavings Progress

Energy Savings (kWh)

0

20,000,000

40,000,000

60,000,000

80,000,000

100,000,000

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

Program Year

KWH

Savin

gs

Energy Savings (Therms)

0

1,000,000

2,000,000

3,000,000

4,000,000

5,000,000

6,000,000

7,000,000

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

Program Year

Ther

ms

Program Year 2010 PGE SCE SDGE SoCalGas

Average kWh Savings per Home 374 286 337 0

Average Therms Savings per Home 20 0 20 19

Portfolio Utility Cost Test 0.59 0.77 0.50 0.27


8

Energy Savings Assistance ProgramAccomplishments

Emphasis on long term and enduring savings, rather than quick fixes Smarter outreach by focusing on customers with high energy use,

burden, and insecurity, as well as whole neighborhoods New, single statewide name for the program across all utilities Enhanced outreach to the disabled, some 20% of eligible customers A greater focus on cost-effectiveness of chosen measures A greater focus on promoting workforce education and training A greater focus on equity across the low-income housing population Reached over 300,000 homes in 2010 with a goal to reach another

300,000+ in 2011 Estimated energy savings of 86,500 mWh and 5,700 mTherms in 2010


9

Program Evaluation and Measurement of Outcomes

Independent consultants evaluate the program's energy savings impacts, effectiveness of IOUs’ program delivery methods, and efficiency behavioral practices of low income customers.

Early 2011 draft evaluation reports concluded the following: Energy savings in 2009 were lower than the 2005 report, possibly due to the

methodology chosen, diminishing savings available, or interim efficiency gains from appliance standards.

Refrigerators and lighting measures account for the largest electricity savings; Water conservation and air sealing/enveloping account for largest gas savings. Increased attention to customer energy education may lead to greater and longer

lasting energy savings. Reducing application paperwork and allowing more self certification may

increase enrollments. Better preparation of customers for enrollment and assessment visits will reduce

the number and overhead costs of program visits to an individual home.


10

Program Challenges

Striking the right balance between achieving cost-effective energy savings versus providing health, comfort, and safety benefits to participants

Fully leveraging and integrating the Energy Savings Assistance program, utility core energy efficiency programs, and other State, Federal and local programs.

Providing sound education to all participants on the benefits of energy efficiency that form long term conservation behaviors.


11

Ongoing Efforts:Increased Coordination with CSD

MOU executed between CPUC and Department of Community Services & Development (CSD) March 17, 2009 with the goal of increasing the number of low-income households in California treated under both programs through increased coordination between the agencies and decreased duplication.

Achieving the goals requires education, information sharing and collaboration between the administrators (CSD, IOUs) and regional/local providers of both programs.

Numerous all-party meetings have been held among these stakeholders. SCE and PG&E have implemented pilots that successfully leverage both

programs. These efforts need to be expanded; still more remains to be done. Key

next steps are: Identify further opportunities for data sharing among other IOUs and

corresponding local providers Identify efficient methods for LIHEAP/ESAP program measures installation


12

Results of IOU Pilot Projects SCE Database Sharing Pilot

SCE revised its database to allow Contractors to enter LIHEAP and ESAP (LIEE) treated home information into one database.

Database system expanded to search for previously-served LIHEAP-treated homes and services to avoid duplication

Results: More seamless referral process, challenges with executing a one stop shop database for leads and measures installed by each program, better cost-tracking.

PG&E Marketing, Education & Outreach and Assessment Pilot The Sacramento Avenues project in 2010 led PG&E, Community Resource

Project, Inc. (CRP), and SMUD to coordinate their low income activities. Together the three informed, recruited and qualified low-income households to

receive ESAP and LIHEAP services. All feasible gas and electric measures and services were provided through one of the Project team members and billed back to the appropriate funding source.

Result: Limited scale one-stop shop from outreach to installation to fully weatherize homes, with minimal disruption to the participating households.


13

SDG&E Energy Upgrade California Multi-Family Program

SDG&E will launch Multi-Family Whole Building Performance Assessment program (May 2011 through 2012) Branded under Energy Upgrade California, and coordinated with the

Energy Savings Assistance Program Goal to treat up to 1,000 multi-family units, or 20-25 MF complexes Max budget of $1,000,000, or average $1,000/unit from mainstream EE

funds, in addition to ESAP budget for eligible units, (additional ~$870/unit in the SDG&E service territory)

Energy savings average target of 20% from whole building Will serve all income segments including low income, moderate income

and market rate buildings Leverages County of San Diego ARRA funds, SDG&E Energy Savings

Assistance Program Funds, and Energy Upgrade California (CEC ARRA and utility EE) funds.


14

IOU Applications for 2012-14 ESAP Programs and Funding filed May 16, 2011 with CPUC

Treat 50% of the eligible population by the end of 2014. Increase coordination efforts with CSD, IOUs, and local providers. Incorporate Lessons learned from Pilots and Study results. Increase focus on multifamily treatment, to overcome

disproportionately small proportion of ESAP participation. On March 22, 2011 Energy Division staff released Guiding Principles and

background data to aid IOUs and stakeholders in development of potential multifamily proposals to be included in ESAP applications.

Principles include: Reducing barriers to multifamily participation, Fully leveraging and integrating the Energy Savings Assistance Program with

utility core energy efficiency programs and other State, Federal and local programs to streamline and improve program delivery and achieve maximum energy efficiency savings, and

Promoting equity across the low-income housing sector.

Documents

California Energy Savings Assistance Program (ESAP) Program Overview