NEW YORK ENERGY MART ROGRAM · ToC-1 Table of Contents 1 INTRODUCTION.....1-1

NEW YORK ENERGY $MARTSM PROGRAM

QUARTERLY EVALUATION AND STATUS REPORT

QUARTERLY REPORT TO THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION

QUARTER ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 2007

FINAL REPORT

NOVEMBER 2007

ToC-1

Table of Contents

1 INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................................1-1 1.1 Organization of the Report............................................................................................................1-1

2 PORTFOLIO-LEVEL REPORTING.................................................................................................2-1 2.1 Budget and Spending Status .........................................................................................................2-1 2.2 Portfolio Level Findings ...............................................................................................................2-3

2.2.1 Progress Toward Goals ....................................................................................................2-3 2.2.2 Summary of Program Benefits.........................................................................................2-5

2.3 Solicitations Update ......................................................................................................................2-6

3 COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL PROGRAMS .................................................................................3-1 3.1 Commercial/Industrial Evaluation Activities................................................................................3-1

3.1.1 Completed Evaluation Activities .....................................................................................3-1 3.1.2 Evaluation Activities in Progress and Planned ................................................................3-1

3.2 Summary of C/I Evaluation Results .............................................................................................3-1 3.2.1 Progress Toward Non-Energy Goals ...............................................................................3-1 3.2.2 Energy, Peak Demand, and Fuel Savings ........................................................................3-1 3.2.3 C/I Existing Buildings Non-Participant Market Effects Study........................................3-4

3.3 Peak Load Management Program (PLMP)...................................................................................3-7 3.3.1 Progress Toward Goals ....................................................................................................3-7 3.3.2 Energy, Peak Demand and Fuel Savings .........................................................................3-8

3.4 Enhanced Commercial and Industrial Performance Program (ECIPP) ........................................3-8 3.4.1 Progress Toward Goals ....................................................................................................3-8 3.4.2 Energy, Peak Demand and Fuel Savings .........................................................................3-9

3.5 New York Energy $martSM Business Partners ............................................................................3-10 3.5.1 Progress Toward Goals ..................................................................................................3-10 3.5.2 Energy, Peak Demand and Fuel Savings .......................................................................3-10

3.6 New York Energy $martSM Loan Fund and Financing Program ................................................3-11 3.6.1 Progress Toward Goals ..................................................................................................3-11 3.6.2 Energy, Peak Demand and Fuel Savings .......................................................................3-12

3.7 Energy Smart Focus Program .....................................................................................................3-12 3.7.1 Progress Toward Goals ..................................................................................................3-12 3.7.2 Energy, Peak Demand and Fuel Savings .......................................................................3-13

3.8 High Performance New Buildings Program ...............................................................................3-13 3.8.1 Progress Toward Goals ..................................................................................................3-13 3.8.2 Energy, Peak Demand and Fuel Savings .......................................................................3-13

3.9 FlexTech Technical Assistance Program....................................................................................3-14 3.9.1 Progress Toward Goals ..................................................................................................3-14 3.9.2 Energy, Peak Demand and Fuel Savings .......................................................................3-14

4 RESIDENTIAL AND LOW-INCOME PROGRAMS ......................................................................4-1 4.1 Residential and Low-Income Evaluation Activities .....................................................................4-1


4.2 Summary of Residential and Low-Income Evaluation Results ....................................................4-1

Table of Contents

ToC-2

4.2.1 Progress Toward Non-Energy Goals ...............................................................................4-1 4.2.2 Energy, Peak Demand, and Fuel Savings ........................................................................4-1

4.3 Single Family Home Performance Program .................................................................................4-4 4.3.1 Progress Toward Goals ....................................................................................................4-4 4.3.2 Energy, Peak Demand and Fuel Savings .........................................................................4-5

4.4 Multifamily Building Performance Program ................................................................................4-6 4.4.1 Progress Toward Goals ....................................................................................................4-6 4.4.2 Energy, Peak Demand and Fuel Savings .........................................................................4-7 4.4.3 Other Evaluation Findings ...............................................................................................4-8

4.5 Market Support Program...............................................................................................................4-8 4.5.1 Progress Toward Goals ....................................................................................................4-8 4.5.2 Energy, Peak Demand and Fuel Savings .........................................................................4-9

4.6 Communities and Education Program ........................................................................................4-10 4.6.1 Progress Toward Goals ..................................................................................................4-10

4.7 EmPower New YorkSM ...............................................................................................................4-11 4.7.1 Progress Toward Goals ..................................................................................................4-11 4.7.2 Energy, Peak Demand and Fuel Savings .......................................................................4-11

4.8 Buying Strategies and Energy Awareness Program ...................................................................4-12 4.8.1 Progress Toward Goals ..................................................................................................4-12

5 RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS ........................................................................5-1 5.1 Research & Development (R&D) Program Evaluation Activities ...............................................5-1


5.2 Summary of R&D Evaluation Results ..........................................................................................5-1 5.2.1 Progress Toward Non-Energy Goals ...............................................................................5-1 5.2.2 Energy, Peak Demand, Fuel Savings, and Clean Generation ..........................................5-2

5.3 Public Benefit Power Transmission and Distribution Research ...................................................5-3 5.3.1 Progress Toward Goals ....................................................................................................5-3

5.4 Clean Energy Infrastructure..........................................................................................................5-3 5.4.1 Progress Toward Goals ....................................................................................................5-3 5.4.2 Clean Energy Generation.................................................................................................5-4 5.4.3 Other Evaluation Findings ...............................................................................................5-5

5.5 Power Systems Product Development ..........................................................................................5-6 5.5.1 Progress Toward Goals ....................................................................................................5-6

5.6 DG-CHP Demonstration...............................................................................................................5-6 5.6.1 Progress Toward Goals ....................................................................................................5-6 5.6.2 Energy, Peak Demand and Fuel Savings .........................................................................5-7

5.7 Demand Response and Innovative Rate Research ........................................................................5-8 5.7.1 Progress Toward Goals ....................................................................................................5-8 5.7.2 Energy, Peak Demand and Fuel Savings .........................................................................5-9

5.8 Electric Transportation................................................................................................................5-10 5.8.1 Progress Toward Goals ..................................................................................................5-10

5.9 Environmental Monitoring, Evaluation, and Protection (EMEP)...............................................5-10 5.9.1 Progress Toward Goals ..................................................................................................5-10

5.10 Industrial Research, Development and Demonstration...............................................................5-12 5.10.1 Progress Toward Goals ..................................................................................................5-12

5.11 Municipal Water and Wastewater Efficiency .............................................................................5-13 5.11.1 Progress Toward Goals ..................................................................................................5-13 5.11.2 Energy, Peak Demand and Fuel Savings .......................................................................5-15

5.12 Next Generation and Emerging Technologies ............................................................................5-15

Organization of the Report

ToC-3

5.12.1 Progress Toward Goals ..................................................................................................5-15

Appendix A Logic Models

LIST OF TABLES Table 2-1. Financial Status of New York Energy $martSM through September 30, 2007 ($million) ........2-1 Table 2-2. Individual Programs – Financial Status through September 30, 2007 ($ million) ..................2-2 Table 2-3. Cumulative Program Benefits from Installed Measures..........................................................2-5 Table 2-4. Solicitations Issued in 3rd Quarter 2007 ...................................................................................2-6 Table 3-1. C/I Program Cumulative Annual Electricity Savings through September 30, 2007 and

Progress toward Five-Year Goal .........................................................................................3-2 Table 3-2. C/I Program Cumulative Peak Demand Savings through September 30, 2007 and Progress

toward Five-Year Goal........................................................................................................3-3 Table 3-3. C/I Program Cumulative Annual Fuel Savings through September 30, 2007.........................3-4 Table 3-4. Peak Load Management Program – Goal and Achievement ...................................................3-8 Table 3-5. PLMP Cumulative Annual Energy and Peak Demand Savings (through September 2007) ...3-8 Table 3-6. Enhanced Commercial and Industrial Performance Program – Goals and Achievements......3-9 Table 3-7. ECIPP Cumulative Annual Energy and Peak Demand Savings (Through September 2007) .3-9 Table 3-8. New York Energy $martSM Business Partners Program – Goal and Achievement ...............3-10 Table 3-9. New York Energy $martSM Business Partners Cumulative Annual Energy and Peak

Demand Savings (through September 2007) ....................................................................3-10 Table 3-10. New York Energy $martSM Loan Fund and Financing Program – Near-Term Goals and

Achievements for Commercial/Industrial Projects ...........................................................3-12 Table 3-11. Loan Fund Cumulative Annual Energy and Peak Demand Savings (through June 2007)..3-12 Table 3-12. Energy Smart Focus Program – Goal and Achievement .....................................................3-13 Table 3-13. High Performance New Buildings Program – Near-Term Goals and Achievements .........3-13 Table 3-14. High Performance New Buildings Cumulative Annual Energy and Peak Demand Savings

(through September 2007).................................................................................................3-14 Table 3-15. FlexTech Technical Assistance Program – Goal and Achievement....................................3-14 Table 3-16. FlexTech Technical Assistance Program Cumulative Annual Energy and Peak Demand

Savings (through September 2007)...................................................................................3-15 Table 4-1. Residential and Low-Income Program Cumulative Annual Electricity Savings through

September 30, 2007 and Progress toward Five-Year Goals................................................4-2 Table 4-2. Residential and Low-Income Program Cumulative Peak Demand Reductions through

September 30, 2007.............................................................................................................4-3 Table 4-3. Residential and Low-Income Program Cumulative Annual Fuel Savings through

September 30, 2007 and Progress toward Five-Year Goals................................................4-3 Table 4-4. Single Family Home Performance Program – Goals and Achievements ................................4-5 Table 4-5. Single Family Home Performance Program Cumulative Annual Energy and Peak Demand

Savings (Through September 2007)....................................................................................4-6 Table 4-6. Multifamily Building Performance Program – Goals and Achievements ...............................4-7 Table 4-7. Multifamily Building Performance Program Cumulative Annual Energy and Peak Demand

Savings (Through September 2007)....................................................................................4-7 Table 4-8. Number of Units Participating According to Status ................................................................4-8 Table 4-9. Market Support Program – Goals and Achievements .............................................................4-9 Table 4-10. Market Support Program Cumulative Annual Energy and Peak Demand Savings

(Through September 2007) ...............................................................................................4-10 Table 4-11. Communities and Education Program – Near-Term Goals and Achievements ..................4-11 Table 4-12. EmPower New YorkSM Program – Goal and Achievement ...............................................4-11

Table of Contents

ToC-4

Table 4-13. EmPower New YorkSM Program Cumulative Annual Energy and Peak Demand Savings (Through September 2007) ...............................................................................................4-12

Table 4-14. Buying Strategies and Energy Awareness Program – Goals and Achievements ................4-12 Table 5-1. R&D Program Electricity Savings and Clean Generation through September 30, 2007 ........5-2 Table 5-2. R&D Program Cumulative Peak Demand Reductions through September 30, 2007..............5-2 Table 5-3. R&D Program Cumulative Annual Fuel Savings through September 30, 2007 .....................5-3 Table 5-4. Public Benefit Power Transmission and Distribution Research Program – Goals and

Achievements......................................................................................................................5-3 Table 5-5. Clean Energy Infrastructure Program – Goals and Achievements .........................................5-4 Table 5-6. Clean Energy Infrastructure Program Cumulative Annual Clean Generation (Through

September 2007) .................................................................................................................5-5 Table 5-7. PV System Size and Cost Summary as of October 24, 2007 ..................................................5-5 Table 5-8. Power Systems Product Development Program – Goals and Achievements .........................5-6 Table 5-9. DG-CHP Demonstration Program – Goals and Achievements ...............................................5-7 Table 5-10. DG-CHP Program Cumulative Annual Energy and Peak Demand Savings (Through

September 2007) .................................................................................................................5-8 Table 5-11. Demand Response and Innovative Rate Research Program – Goals and Achievements .....5-9 Table 5-12. Demand Response and Innovative Rate Research Program Cumulative Annual Energy

and Peak Demand Savings (Through September 2007)....................................................5-10 Table 5-13. Electric Transportation Program – Achievements..............................................................5-10 Table 5-14. Environmental Monitoring, Evaluation, and Protection Program – Goals and

Achievements....................................................................................................................5-11 Table 5-15. Industrial Research, Development and Demonstration Program – Near-Term Goals and

Achievements....................................................................................................................5-13 Table 5-16. Municipal Water and Wastewater Efficiency Program – Goals and Achievements ..........5-14 Table 5-17. Next Generation and Emerging Technologies Program – Goals and Achievements ..........5-16

1-1

1

Introduction

This report provides an update on the progress of the New York Energy $martSM Public Benefits Program (Program) toward meeting its stated goals. It contains evaluation results on Program activities through the quarter ending September 30, 2007. The last full annual report on progress (through December 31, 2006) was issued in March 2007, and the last quarterly progress report was issued in August 2007.1

The 13-year Program, funded by a System Benefits Charge (SBC) and administered by the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority (NYSERDA), was initiated in 1998 by order of the New York State Public Service Commission2 (the Commission) and embodies three funding cycles.3 The Program portfolio consists of numerous initiatives promoting energy efficiency and demand management, facilitating renewable energy development, providing energy services to low-income New Yorkers, and conducting research and development. The activities pursued by the Program include disseminating information to increase consumer energy awareness, marketing, providing financial incentives, developing and testing new products, commercializing new technologies, and gathering data and information.

1.1 Organization of the Report

This report was prepared by NYSERDA staff with contributions from a team of independent third-party evaluation contractors. The contractors work closely with NYSERDA’s program implementation staff and contractors, customers, and market and trade allies to develop an understanding of the Program offerings and to conduct independent assessments of the Program’s impacts and progress toward the established public policy goals. The evaluation functions covered by the specialty contractor teams are: impact evaluation; market characterization and assessment; and process assessment and evaluation management. The report is divided into the following sections:

1 New York State Energy Research and Development Authority, New York Energy $martSM Program Evaluation and Status Report, Final Report, March 2007 and New York State Energy Research and Development Authority, New York Energy $martSM Program, Quarterly Evaluation and Status Report, August 2007. 2 Case 94-E-1052, et al., In the Matter of Competitive Opportunities Regarding Electric Service, Opinion 98-3, issued January 30, 1998. 3 The most recent cycle was initiated with the New York State Public Service Commission order in Case 05-M-0900, In the Matter of the System Benefits Charge III, Order Continuing the System Benefits Charge (SBC) and the SBC-funded Public Benefit Programs, issued and effective December 21, 2005.

Introduction

1-2

Section 1 Introduction

Section 2 Portfolio-Level Reporting

Section 3 Commercial/Industrial Programs

Section 4 Residential and Low-Income Programs

Section 5 Research and Development Programs

Appendix A - Program Logic Models

2-1

2

Portfolio-Level Reporting

2.1 Budget and Spending Status

This section presents financial data for the New York Energy $martSM Program from 1998 through September 30, 2007. Of the $1.87 billion, 13-year budget, $1.68 billion is allocated to four major program areas; Commercial/Industrial, Residential, Low-Income, and Research and Development (R&D), and a general awareness campaign. The percentage of each program area budget spent to date is: 47.0% for Commercial/Industrial, 63.4% for Residential, 41.4% for Low-Income, and 34.9% for R&D. Budgets and spending are presented in Table 2-1 along with costs for program administration, evaluation, Environmental Disclosure1, and the New York State Cost Recovery Fee2. Table 2-2 shows the budget and spending for individual New York Energy $martSM programs.

Table 2-1. Financial Status of New York Energy $martSM Program through September 30, 2007 ($million)

Funds Spent

Total 13-

Year Budget 1

SBC I & SBC II 2

SBC III 3 Total Spent % of Budget

Spent

Commercial/Industrial 634.0 247.1 50.6 297.8 47.0%

Residential 312.8 165.4 33.0 198.4 63.4%

Low-Income 318.6 86.6 45.3 131.9 41.4%

Research and Development 388.4 105.9 29.8 135.6 34.9%

General Awareness4 (Marketing) 31.0 15.9 3.1 19.0 61.1%

Program Areas Total $1,684.7 $620.9 $161.8 $782.6 46.5%

Program Administration 128.2 59.8 15.6 75.4 58.8%

Metrics and Evaluation 34.4 14.5 3.1 17.6 51.3%

Environmental Disclosure 1.9 0.8 0.1 0.9 49.2%

1 This program provides electricity commodity suppliers with data for informing customers about the fuel mix and associated environmental impacts of their electricity sources. 2 The New York State Cost Recovery Fee is assessed for services to public authorities. The fee is determined by the New York State Division of Budget and imposed and collected by the Department of Taxation and Finance.


2-2

Funds Spent

Total 13-

Year Budget 1

SBC I & SBC II 2

SBC III 3 Total Spent % of Budget

Spent

NYS Cost Recovery Fee 25.4 9.2 2.9 12.1 47.6%

Other Costs Total $189.9 $84.3 $21.8 $106.0 55.9%

Total New York Energy SmartSM $1,874.7 $705.2 $183.6 $888.8 47.4% 1 Reflects reallocation of funding among programs as approved by the Public Service Commission. 2 SBC I: July 1, 1998 through June 30, 2001; SBC II: July 1, 2001 through June 30, 2006. 3 SBC III: July 1, 2006 through June 30, 2011. 4 General Awareness previously included in Residential Program Area. Totals may not sum exactly due to rounding. Source: NYSERDA

Table 2-2. Individual Programs – Financial Status through September 30, 2007 ($ million)

Budget Funds Spent

Program Total Budget 1

SBC I & SBC II 2 SBC III 3

Total Funds Spent

% of Budget Spent

Commercial/Industrial Peak Load Management 88.2 35.1 6.7 41.8 47.4% Enhanced Commercial/ Industrial Performance 238.2 100.3 14.1 114.4 48.1% New York Energy $martSM Business Partners 43.9 21.1 3.8 24.9 56.8% Loan Fund and Financing 25.4 12.3 6.1 18.4 72.6% Energy Smart Focus 18.9 4.8 2.0 6.9 36.4% High Performance New Buildings 164.4 53.1 15.1 68.2 41.5% FlexTech Technical Assistance 55.2 20.4 2.8 23.2 42.0%

Total Commercial & Industrial $634.0 $247.1 $50.6 $297.8 47.0% Residential & Low-income

Single Family Home Performance 107.5 47.4 13.1 60.5 56.3% Multifamily Building Performance 44.5 18.3 6.7 25.0 56.4% Market Support Residential 148.9 96.5 11.5 108.0 72.6% Communities and Education 11.9 3.2 1.7 4.9 40.9%

Subtotal Residential $312.8 $165.4 $33.0 $198.4 63.4% Single Family Home Performance 83.7 27.7 9.3 37.0 44.2% Multifamily Building Performance 150.1 35.5 21.5 57.0 38.0% EmPower New York 58.3 8.8 13.5 22.3 38.3% Buying Strategies & Energy Awareness 16.6 4.7 0.9 5.6 33.9% Other 9.9 9.9 0.0 9.9 100%

Subtotal Low-Income $318.6 $86.6 $45.3 $131.9 41.4% Total Residential and Low-income $631.3 $252.0 $78.3 $330.3 52.3%

Research and Development Public Benefit Power Transmission and Distribution 10.0 0.0 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1% Clean Energy Infrastructure 91.2 19.0 13.8 32.8 35.9% Distributed Energy Resources: Power Systems Product Development & DG-CHP Demonstrations 149.2 34.0 9.5 43.5 29.1%

Demand Response and Innovative Research 10.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0% Electric Transportation 5.0 0.0 0.4 0.4 7.9% Environmental, Monitoring, Evaluation, & 39.1 17.7 2.3 20.0 51.2%

Portfolio Level Findings

2-3

Budget Funds Spent

Program Total Budget 1

SBC I & SBC II 2 SBC III 3

Total Funds Spent

% of Budget Spent

Protection Industrial and Municipal Process Efficiency 15.0 0.0 <0.1 <0.1 0.2% Next Generation and Emerging Technologies 42.7 18.3 2.4 20.7 48.5% Wholesale Renewable Energy Market 22.7 16.5 1.4 17.8 78.4%

Other 3.4 0.4 0.0 0.4 12.6% Total Research and Development $388.4 $105.9 $29.8 $135.6 34.9%

General Awareness (Marketing) 31.0 15.9 3.1 18.9 61.1%

Total New York Energy $martSM Programs $1,684.7 $620.9 $161.8 $782.6 46.5% 1 Reflects reallocation of funding among programs as approved by the Public Service Commission. 2 SBC I: July 1, 1998 through June 30, 2001; SBC II: July 1, 2001 through June 30, 2006. 3 SBC III: July 1, 2006 through June 30, 2011. Totals may not sum exactly due to rounding. Source: NYSERDA

2.2 Portfolio Level Findings

2.2.1 Progress Toward Goals

Overall, the New York Energy $martSM programs are performing well toward their five-year goals3 in the areas of energy savings, demand reduction, and other key metrics. This section discusses general progress toward these goals. Sections 3, 4, and 5 contain more detailed information. In summary:

• The Commercial/Industrial (C/I) programs are showing good progress toward their individual electricity and demand savings goals. Progress on the large majority of programs has exceeded 15%.

• Within the C/I program area, twelve different five-year goals have been set for metrics other than energy and peak demand savings. These metrics capture progress in key areas such as the number of customers served, allies participating, and dollars leveraged. The programs are performing well on these non-energy goals.

• The Residential and Low-Income programs are making good progress toward their individual electricity and fuel savings goals. With the exception of one program that has been significantly revised and is still ramping up, all the other programs are performing at expected levels.

• Twenty-six long-term goals have been set for important non-energy metrics in the Residential and Low-Income areas, including the number of customers participating, outreach efforts and people affected, and dollars leveraged. Overall, the programs are making good progress toward these goals.

• Almost 40 long-term non-energy goals have been set for the R&D portfolio. These goals address metrics such as solicitations released, projects funded, information dissemination, co-funding, and

3 Five-year goals were specified in the System Benefits Charge Proposed Plan for New York Energy $martSM Programs (2006-2011), March 2, 2006. These goals were set at the program level, and included energy savings, demand reductions and other important metrics. The five-year goals cover the time period from July 1, 2006 through June 30, 2011.


2-4

technology transfer. In general, the programs are tracking well toward these long-term non-energy goals.

Beyond the above-stated goals, programs are also making excellent progress toward the following overarching public policy goals.

• Goal 1: Improve New York's energy system reliability and security by reducing energy demand and increasing energy efficiency, supporting innovative transmission and distribution technologies that have broad application, and enabling fuel diversity, including renewable resources.

- Together, the New York Energy $martSM programs are saving approximately 3,100 GWh of electricity annually.

- Approximately 1,214 MW of peak demand reduction has been installed, including 666 MW from permanent measures and 548 MW from curtailable measures.

- More than 100 GWh of clean, renewable energy is being generated annually, enough to power more than 16,000 homes per year.

• Goal 2: Reduce the energy cost burden of New Yorkers by offering energy users, particularly the State's lowest income households, services that moderate the effects of energy price increases and volatility and provide access to cost-effective energy efficiency options.

- The New York Energy $martSM programs are saving customers approximately $480 million annually on their energy bills.

- In total 71,840 low-income households have been served. On average, each household’s energy bill has been reduced by $195 per year.

- The New York Energy $martSM Program has achieved a benefit-cost ratio of 2.1 under the most conservative Total Market Effects Test ratio.4

• Goal 3: Mitigate the environmental and health impacts of energy use by increasing energy efficiency, encouraging the development of support services for renewable energy resources, and optimizing the energy performance of buildings and products.

- The emission reductions from the New York Energy $martSM Program energy savings are more than 2,610 tons of nitrogen oxide, 4,790 tons of sulfur dioxide, and 2.0 million tons of carbon dioxide annually, the equivalent of removing more than 400,000 cars from the road.

• Goal 4: Create economic opportunity and promote economic well-being by supporting emerging energy technologies, fostering competition, improving productivity, stimulating the growth of New York energy businesses, and helping to meet future energy needs through efficiency and innovation.

- The New York Energy $martSM programs have led to the creation or retention of approximately 3,700 jobs.

4 Benefit-cost analysis is conducted once annually and results were presented in NYSERDA, New York Energy $martSM Program Quarterly Evaluation and Status Report, Quarter Ending March 31, 2007, May 2007.

Portfolio Level Findings

2-5

- Over the past fifteen months, NYSERDA has worked with eight companies to expand their renewable energy businesses (6) and renewable energy product manufacturing (2) in New York.

2.2.2 Summary of Program Benefits

Table 2-3 shows the cumulative New York Energy $martSM Program benefits through September 30, 2007, and through the last three calendar years. Cumulative annual electric savings has reached 3,100 GWh. Peak demand reduction efforts have led to a total reduction of 1,214 MW that consists of permanent and curtailable demand reductions. Renewable energy generation now amounts to 106 GWh.

Table 2-3. Cumulative Program Benefits from Installed Measures

Benefits

Through Year-End 2004

Through Year-End

2005

Through Year-End

2006

Through September 30,

20073

Electricity Savings from Energy Efficiency and On-Site Generation (Annual GWh) 1,400 1,950 2,350 3,100

Peak Demand Reduction (MW) 860 1,040 1,113 1,214

Permanent Measures (MW) 325 445 495 666

Curtailable1 535 595 618 548

Annual Energy Bill Savings to Participating Customers ($ Million) $195 $275 $330 $480

Net Fuel Savings (Annual MMBtu) 2,600,000 4,000,000 4,049,000 4,900,000

Renewable Energy Generation (Annual GWh) 102 103 105 106

Jobs Created and Retained per Year2 2,500 3,100 3,700 3,700

NOx Emissions Reductions (Annual Tons) 1,280 1,750 2,060 2,610

SO2 Emissions Reductions (Annual Tons) 2,320 3,170 3,800 4,790

CO2 Emissions Reductions (Annual Tons) 1,000,000 1,400,000 1,600,000 2,035,000

Equivalent number of cars removed from NY roadways. 200,000 275,000 320,000 405,000 1 Curtailable MW have decreased due to a reassessment of the impact of the Enabling Technologies program. MWs enabled under the SBC2 program Enabling Technologies for Price Responsive Load were not required to persist beyond the period of the contract. As such, the available MWs have steadily declined since the program’s close. 2 Figures in this row represent the average number of jobs created and retained through year-end. Results from 2004 and 2005 have been restated based on new analysis conducted in 2006. 3 Due to the addition of 2005 and 2006 CFL energy savings and 2006 appliance savings from the ENERGY STAR Products program, the electricity savings and demand reductions for 3rd quarter 2007 show a significant increase from year-end 2006. Year-end savings for 2005 and 2006 were not back-adjusted to reflect these additional savings. The gains in savings also impact bill savings, gas and oil savings, and emissions reductions.


2-6

2.3 Solicitations Update

Table 2-4 shows Requests for Proposals (RFPs) and Program Opportunity Notices (PONs) released during the third quarter of 2007. Only new solicitations released in the third quarter are included. Additional solicitations released prior to the third quarter could still be open.

Table 2-4. Solicitations Issued in 3rd Quarter 2007

Solicitation Number Solicitation Name Solicitation

Release Date Solicitation

Closing Date

Commercial and Industrial Program Area

PON 1060 Loan Fund Incentives 8/27/07 7/31/09

R&D Program Area

PON 1141 Environmental Monitoring, Evaluation, and Protection (EMEP) Program Ecosystem Research

8/27/07 10/1/07

PON 1164 Advanced Sensors and Controls for Building and Industrial Applications

7/23/07 10/3/07

PON 1179 Environmental Monitoring, Evaluation, and Protection (EMEP) Program Air Quality Research

9/17/07 11/06/07

3-1

3

Commercial/Industrial Programs

3.1 Commercial/Industrial Evaluation Activities

3.1.1 Completed Evaluation Activities

One major evaluation study, focusing on non-participant market effects and spillover, was completed this quarter. Results of this study are summarized in Section 3.2.3. Results were used to update net-to-gross ratios for Enhanced Commercial/Industrial Performance, FlexTech Technical Assistance, Small Commercial Lighting, and the Loan Fund.

3.1.2 Evaluation Activities in Progress and Planned

Several major evaluations are underway in the C/I sector. Results from phase one of the New York City process and market evaluation, and High Performance Buildings market characterization and assessment are likely to be included in the March 2008 annual evaluation report. Results from the following additional studies will be reported out as these efforts are completed: review of gross and net savings from the 25 largest energy-saving projects; prospective benefits study for the High Performance New Buildings Program; evaluation of savings from rate analysis and aggregation studies; Peak Load Management Program market characterization and assessment; ECIPP process evaluation; and Loan Fund process evaluation.

3.2 Summary of C/I Evaluation Results

3.2.1 Progress Toward Non-Energy Goals

Within the C/I program area, 12 different five-year goals have been set for metrics other than energy and peak demand savings. These metrics capture progress in key areas such as the number of customers served, allies participating, and dollars leveraged. After 15 months of the five-year measurement period, progress is tracking as expected on the majority of these goals.

3.2.2 Energy, Peak Demand, and Fuel Savings

Table 3-1 shows the electricity savings achieved by the Commercial/Industrial programs as well as progress toward the five-year goals that have been established for select programs. Table 3-2 shows peak


3-2

demand savings and progress toward several program-specific goals in that area. Table 3-3 shows other fuel savings.

Table 3-1. C/I Program Cumulative Annual Electricity Savings through September 30, 2007 and Progress toward Five-Year Goal

Energy Savings (GWh)

Savings Achieved through Program

June 30, 2006a

September 30, 2007

Five-Year Goal through June 30,

2011

Progress Toward Five-

Year Goal (% achieved)

Peak Load Management: Permanent ConEdison

106.4a 61.9a

138.0 87.3

107 55

30% 46%

Enhanced Commercial and Industrial Performance Program ConEdison

730.6

224.1

932.9

251.3

320

N/A

63%

N/A

Business Partners Program ConEdison

54.1 4.3

66.5 7.4

80 N/A

16% N/A

Loan Fund and Financing ConEdison

49.6 0.5

68.7 17.8

N/A N/A

N/A N/A

High Performance New Buildings ConEdison

223.2 48.2

327.6 81.0

210 N/A

50% N/A

Flex Tech Technical Assistance ConEdison

644.1 115.2

896.7 242.1

400 N/A

63% N/A

Overlap Removed 126.7 173.7 N/A N/A

ConEdison C/I Total 454.3 686.8 N/A N/A

Statewide C/I Total 1,681.3 2,256.8 N/A N/A

Note: N/A means not applicable (i.e., a goal has not been set for this program). a Savings reported previously included projects funded through the ConEdison Power Savings Partners Program. These savings have been removed to more accurately reflect accomplishments.

Summary of C/I Evaluation Results

3-3

Table 3-2. C/I Program Cumulative Peak Demand Savings through September 30, 2007 and Progress toward Five-Year Goal

Peak Demand Savings (MW)

Savings Achieved through Program June 30,

2006a September

30, 2007

Five-Year Goal through June 30,

2011

Progress Toward Five-

Year Goal (% achieved)

Peak Load Management: Permanent ConEdison

42.5a 27.4a

52.9 35.8

60 45

17% 19%

Peak Load Management: Callable ConEdison

421.1a 188.3a

437.3 197.9

240 125

7% 8%


132.5

54.7

160.0

62.1

50

N/A

55%

N/A

Business Partners Program ConEdison

11.8 1.0

15.9 2.0

16 N/A

25% N/A


14.3 0.5

43.4 16.0

N/A N/A

N/A N/A

High Performance New Buildings ConEdison

45.5 15.9

75.2 24.8

24 N/A

124% N/A

Flex Tech Technical Assistance ConEdison

120.9 30.6

167.6 45.3

80 N/A

58% N/A

Flex Tech Technical Assistance: Callable 10.2 11.7 N/A N/A

Overlap Removed 24.5 39.1 N/A N/A

ConEdison C/I Total 318.4 384.0 N/A N/A

Statewide C/I Total 774.4 925.0 N/A N/A

Note: N/A means not applicable (i.e., a goal has not been set for this program). a Savings reported previously included projects funded through the ConEdison Power Savings Partners Program. These savings have been removed to more accurately reflect accomplishments.


3-4

Table 3-3. C/I Program Cumulative Annual Fuel Savings through September 30, 2007

Fuel Savings (MMBtu)


June 30, 2006 September 30, 2007


3,252 420

5,409 651


137,239 4,941

704,986 52,874

Flex Tech Technical Assistance1 ConEdison

3,164,000 800,846

3,508,920 947,408

Overlap Removed 158,200 212,509

ConEdison C/I Total 806,207 1,000,934

Statewide C/I Total 3,146,291 4,006,447

Note: No one-year goals for fuel savings were established. 1 The methodology to assess impacts focuses on developing samples based on electricity savings, rather than fuel, resulting in a less than optimal sample for fuel-savings projects and fluctuation over time in the calculated impacts. Also, the program recommends on-site generation, which would result in an increase in fuel use, offsetting fuel reductions achieved.

3.2.3 C/I Existing Buildings Non-Participant Market Effects Study

The Summit Blue Market Characterization, Assessment, and Causality (MCAC) evaluation team last examined non-participant spillover in 2005. The evaluation conducted in 2007 reassessed this estimate and examined broad market effects resulting from NYSERDA’s New York Energy $martSM Programs with a specific emphasis placed on the NEMA Premium® motors market. Thus, the current evaluation consisted primarily of causality/attribution work that focused on identifying the impacts of program interventions beyond what would have happened without the program.

Research Approach

The research approach used by the MCAC Team to conduct the C/I market effects evaluation consisted of planning meetings with NYSERDA evaluation and program staff and the Premium-Efficiency Motors Program implementation contractor; a review of secondary data sources; telephone interviews with thought leaders in the energy efficiency arena to discuss market effects evaluation techniques; a review of NYSERDA’s portfolio-, sector-, and program-level Logic Model Reports; primary data collection via telephone surveys with non-participating C/I end-use customers; primary data collection via telephone surveys and Delphi panels with motor vendors and manufacturers; and an analysis of 2005 NEMA motor shipment data by state1.

This approach also examined a variety of primary and secondary data sources to assess impacts attributable to the New York Energy $martSM Program not just in terms of energy savings and peak demand reduction, but also in terms of other progress indicators, including skills, attitudes, behaviors,

1 The 2005 data are the latest data available from NEMA.

Summary of C/I Evaluation Results

3-5

product offerings, and policies.2 These other impacts are termed market effects because they are expected to persist well beyond the natural life-cycle of the New York Energy $martSM Program, thereby affecting market dynamics and decision-making by actors who participated in the NYSERDA program offerings as well as those who did not.

Market Assessment and Non-Participant Spillover - Findings

Results for the market assessment and attribution (i.e., non-participant spillover) evaluations were based on surveys conducted with non-participating end-use customers. Select findings from the market assessment and non-participant spillover components of the MCAC evaluation included:

• Non-participant end-use customers reported a general awareness of NYSERDA’s presence in the marketplace, a situation likely related to NYSERDA’s program promotion and outreach activities as well as other external influences, including fluctuating energy prices, broad economic conditions, and perceived environmental considerations among others. Similar to prior research findings, market actors tend to be more familiar with the overarching New York Energy $martSM Program than with specific program offerings.

• Electric utilities, NYSERDA, and the New York Energy $martSM Program were perceived as the most credible sources providing information or services related to energy efficiency services and technologies. These results confirm prior research findings showing that NYSERDA’s involvement in the market provides credibility to help market actors present and gain approval on efforts to incorporate energy efficiency measures into new equipment installations and business planning activities. The results also imply a possible opportunity for NYSERDA to develop strategic marketing and implementation relationships with electric utilities across the State to generate increased market awareness of energy efficiency opportunities, and possibly greater market uptake of NYSERDA program offerings.

• Most organizations reported that the importance of energy efficiency considerations in their selection of energy-using systems and equipment had increased over the past five years primarily due to three market level trends: (1) a desire to mitigate the impact of rising energy costs; (2) a desire to lessen their organizations’ environmental impacts and (3) a growing market awareness of energy efficiency opportunities. Nonetheless, additional untapped energy efficiency opportunities likely exist, and efforts to overcome key market barriers in terms of lack of experience and performance uncertainties with high efficiency measures and equipment should be continued. Furthermore, targeted efforts to disseminate knowledge to key decision-makers able to influence organizational purchasing processes also should be continued.

• Significant barriers to further implementation of energy-efficient measures, such as availability of equipment and uncertainty about equipment reliability, are being reduced as key market actors become increasingly familiar with energy efficiency measures and equipment; however, first/incremental cost remains a perceived impediment, and should remain a focus of program intervention strategies going forward.

2 To view the complete list of relevant progress indicators see: Program Theory and Logic Model Evaluation Contractor Team, NYSERDA Commercial and Industrial Sector Level Program Logic, Final, July 23, 2007.


3-6

• More than one-quarter of the end-use customers3 surveyed indicated that the New York Energy $martSM Program had influenced them to increase the efficiency of measures or equipment installed in their projects. Given these findings, as well as the general awareness of NYSERDA’s presence in the marketplace, the non-participant spillover analysis provides evidence that the New York Energy $martSM Program is impacting the overall market beyond those energy savings measured at participating projects.

• Given the uncertainty in the size of the non-participant renovation/equipment-replacement market, the MCAC analysis provides a broad range of non-participant spillover estimates attributable to the New York Energy $martSM Program. Cumulative annual non-participant spillover savings range from a low of 89 GWh to a high of 394 GWh, which corresponds to 5% to 23% of the total gross savings from NYSERDA’s commercial and industrial programs, i.e., 1,670 GWh4 per year, with a reasonable best estimate value judged by the MCAC Team to be 15% (258 GWh) of the total gross savings.5

The non-participant spillover estimate is applied to the following programs: Enhanced CIPP, Technical Assistance, Loan Fund, and Small Commercial Lighting. This spillover value does not apply to the New Construction Program since the equipment-replacement spillover savings do not apply to new construction projects. In addition, Commercial HVAC and Premium Efficiency Motors are not included due to the more purely market transformational nature of the two programs than the other C/I programs, and since the estimated spillover values calculated for the two programs in prior MCAC evaluations accounted for non-participant effects.

Market Effects in the NEMA Premium® Motors Market – Findings

NYSERDA’s program offerings by design include both resource acquisition and market transformation strategies that lead to substantial impacts that are measured not just in terms of energy savings and peak demand reduction, but also in terms of other progress indicators, including skills, attitudes, behaviors, product offerings, and policies. These other impacts are termed market effects because they are expected to persist well beyond the natural life-cycle of the New York Energy $martSM Program, thereby affecting market dynamics and decision-making by actors who participated in the NYSERDA program offerings as well as those who did not. The current evaluation assessed and quantified the magnitude of these market effects in the NEMA Premium® motors market, through telephone surveys and Delphi panels, with motor vendors and manufacturers as well as analyses of 2005 NEMA motor shipment data by state. Select findings from the market effects component of the evaluation include:

• A broad awareness of NYSERDA program offerings exists within the motor vendor community and vendors are actively engaged in selling the products promoted by the NYSERDA programs. Many vendors credit NYSERDA programs, among other factors, with helping to develop the market for NEMA Premium® motors and advanced motor controls.

3 Each of whom were non-participants, eligible for the New York Energy $martSM Program, who had installed energy-using equipment within the past two years. 4 Realized gross savings values were taken from the New York Energy $martSM Program Evaluation and Status Report, March 2007. 5 It is important to note that the spillover percentages here are not directly comparable to those presented in 2005 due to NYSERDA’s adoption of a revised net-to-gross formula in 2006. This change requires that non-participant spillover be calculated on gross program savings as opposed to net program savings. For comparison purposes, the previous best estimate of non-participant spillover (14%) would actually be 10% using the new methodology based on gross program savings.

Peak Load Management Program (PLMP)

3-7

• The majority of motor vendors reported broad increases in their customers’ awareness of and familiarity with NEMA Premium® motors and advanced motor controls as well as the corresponding market demand, over the past five years, for these types of products. The vendors felt that these trends had in turn driven motor manufacturers to expand their available product lines and influenced the number of vendors/contractors offering NEMA Premium® motors to the market.

• Overall, motor vendors estimated that impacts from NYSERDA’s programs had doubled the market share of NEMA Premium® motors from 12% (vendor estimate in the absence of NYSERDA programs) to 24% (vendor estimate of current market share). The market share estimate provided by vendors suggests that a goal of NYSERDA’s Premium-Efficiency Motors Program to increase the market share of NEMA Premium® motors to at least 19% has been exceeded and that this would not have been the case in the absence of NYSERDA’s programs.

• Motor vendors reported significant remaining market opportunities for specific end-use applications involving NEMA Premium® motors and advanced motor controls. Vendors noted that the single greatest remaining market opportunity for both NEMA Premium® motors and advanced motor controls exists in the compressor market with other opportunities present, albeit to a somewhat lesser extent, in HVAC equipment applications and pumping applications.

• Motor vendors reported that rising energy costs are the primary factor driving increased sales of NEMA Premium® motors and advanced motor controls, with increasing market awareness of these technologies, as well as NYSERDA’s program offerings also contributing to increased adoption. The majority of vendors indicated that they expect sales of NEMA Premium® motors to increase in the coming year; however, their sales expectations decreased noticeably when asked to consider a market without NYSERDA’s presence.

In general, motor manufacturers held similar views of the market as those reported by the motor vendors. A noticeable exception is that all manufacturer respondents stated that their organizations’ sales of NEMA Premium® motors in New York would be the same over the next year even if NYSERDA’s Premium-Efficiency Motors Program was discontinued. Given that manufacturer representatives are often key actors affecting ongoing market dynamics, it is important that NYSERDA expand existing outreach activities to motor manufacturers (and vendors) to keep them well informed about program features and changes as the available program offerings evolve over time. Doing so should help increase motor manufacturer and vendor satisfaction with, and favorable opinion of, available program offerings; thereby creating additional sales agents to assist with program marketing efforts. In addition, successfully engaging motor manufacturers and vendors in available program offerings will help NYSERDA better meet its goals of promoting competitive markets for energy efficiency products and services as well as expanding the delivery channels and other market infrastructure required to generate additional market uptake of energy-efficient technologies and practices.

3.3 Peak Load Management Program (PLMP)


As shown in Table 3-4, the Peak Load Management Program has a goal to assist 750 customers in five years. Thus far, the program has assisted 161 customers, and has achieved approximately 20% of its five-year goal.


3-8

Table 3-4. Peak Load Management Program – Goal and Achievement

Activity Program Goal

(July 1, 2006 through June 30, 2011)

Achieved July 1, 2006 through September 30, 2007

% of Goal Achieved

Customers receiving assistance 750 161 21%

3.3.2 Energy, Peak Demand and Fuel Savings

Table 3-5 shows the cumulative annual energy and peak demand savings from the PLMP. A realization rate and net-to-gross ratio are applied to adjust the program reported savings based on the most recent Measurement and Verification (M&V) and Attribution evaluation studies. Net savings in the rightmost column are the total savings being claimed by the program after these evaluation activities.

Table 3-5. PLMP Cumulative Annual Energy and Peak Demand Savings (through September 2007)

Program Reported Savings

M&V Realiza-tion rate

Adjusted Gross

Savings

Freerider-ship Spillover

Net-to-Gross Ratio1

Net Savings

DEGI (MW) 91.8 0.86 78.9 24% 25% 0.95 75.0

LC/S (MW) 153.7 0.92 141.4 24% 25% 0.95 134.4

PDRE ( MW) 45.8 0.94 43.1 25% 37% 1.03 44.3

Cooling Recom-missioning (MW) 8.6 1.0 8.6 0% 0% 1.0 8.6

IM (MW) 244.3 0.85 207.7 10% 22% 1.1 228.0

Total MW 544.2 N/A 479.7 N/A N/A N/A 490.2

PDRE (MWh) 110,281 1.0 110,281 25% 37% 1.03 113,314

Cooling Recom-missioning (MWh) 24,700 1.0 24,700 0% 0% 1.0 24,700

Total MWh 134,981 N/A 134,891 N/A N/A N/A 138,014 1 Net-to-Gross Ratio = (1-Freeridership) * (1+Spillover). N/A – Not Applicable

3.4 Enhanced Commercial and Industrial Performance Program (ECIPP)


Table 3-6 shows the two five-year, non-energy goals for ECIPP and progress to date. Progress on both goals has reached the expected level 15 months into the five-year measurement period.

Enhanced Commercial and Industrial Performance Program (ECIPP)

3-9

Table 3-6. Enhanced Commercial and Industrial Performance Program – Goals and Achievements

Activity Program Goals


Achieved July 1, 2006 through September 30,

20071 % of Goal Achieved

Leveraged Funds ($ million) $400-450 $115 29%

Customer Projects 3,300-3,500 625 19% 1 Metrics from previous quarter were brought forward. Third quarter metrics are still being examined.


Table 3-7 shows the cumulative annual energy and peak demand savings from the ECIPP. A realization rate and net-to-gross ratio are applied to adjust the program-reported savings based on the most recent Measurement and Verification and Attribution evaluation studies. Net savings in the rightmost column are the total savings being claimed by the program after these evaluation activities.

The market effects study discussed in Section 3.2.3 included a reassessment of non-participant spillover attributable to several of the C/I existing buildings programs, including all elements of ECIPP. As a result of this study, the overall spillover value and net-to-gross ratios were increased by 1% for the Commercial/Industrial Performance and Smart Equipment Choices program elements. These latest results are incorporated into Table 3-7.

Table 3-7. ECIPP Cumulative Annual Energy and Peak Demand Savings (Through September 2007)

Program Reported Savings

Realiza-tion Rate

Adjusted Gross

Savings


Net-to-Gross Ratio

Net Savings

Commercial/Industrial Performance Program

MWh/year 800,236 1.01 808,238 31% 45% 1.05a 848,650

MW On-Peak 176.1 0.77 135.6 31% 45% 1.05a 142.4

Smart Equipment Choices

MWh/year 125,822 0.93 117,015 51% 46% 0.72b 84,251

MW On-Peak 26.3 0.93 24.5 51% 46% 0.72b 17.6

MMBtu/year 7,013 1.0 7,013 51% 46% 0.72b 5,049

Enhanced Commercial/Industrial Performance Program (ECIPP) - Total

MWh/year 926,058 N/A 925,253 N/A N/A N/A 932,901

MW On-Peak 202.5 N/A 160.1 N/A N/A N/A 160.0

MMBtu/year 7,013 N/A 7,013 N/A N/A N/A 5,049

a Net-to-Gross Ratio = 1-Freeridership + Spillover (a weighted average of the NTG ratios estimated in the previous MCAC analysis and the current analysis is shown here). b Net-to-Gross Ratio = (1-Freeridership) * (1+Spillover). N/A – Not Applicable


3-10

3.5 New York Energy $martSM Business Partners


Table 3-8 shows the Business Partners Program goal to sign up 1,500 partners over five years. Although 746 allies are currently participating in Small Commercial Lighting, 71 new allies have signed up since July 1, 2006. Program staff expects an increase in allies as the core services and program elements ramp up.

Table 3-8. New York Energy $martSM Business Partners Program – Goal and Achievement





Business Partners (signed up) 1,500 71 5%


Table 3-9 shows the cumulative annual energy and peak demand savings from the Business Partners Program. A realization rate and net-to-gross ratio are applied to adjust the program-reported savings, based on the most recent Measurement and Verification and Attribution evaluation studies. Net savings in the rightmost column are the total savings being claimed by the program after these evaluation activities.

The market effects study discussed in Section 3.2.3 included a reassessment of non-participant spillover attributable to several of the C/I programs, including Small Commercial Lighting. As a result of this study, the overall spillover value and net-to-gross ratio were increased by 1%. These latest results are incorporated into Table 3-9.

Table 3-9. New York Energy $martSM Business Partners Cumulative Annual Energy and Peak Demand Savings (through September 2007)

Program-Reported Savings

Realization Rate

Adjusted Gross

Savings Freeridership Spillover

Net-to-Gross Ratio1

Net Savings

Small Commercial Lighting

MWh/year 40,947 0.94 38,490 39% 80% 1.10 42,339

MW On-Peak

10.6 1.0 10.6 39% 80% 1.10 11.6

Premium-Efficiency Motors2

MWh/year 9,885 1.0 9,885 67% 168% 0.88 8,776

MW On-Peak

1.8 1.0 1.8 67% 113% 0.70 1.3

Commercial HVAC3

MWh/ year

6,767 N/A 6,767 N/A N/A N/A 6,767

New York Energy $martSM Loan Fund and Financing Program

3-11


Realization Rate

Adjusted Gross


Net-to-Gross Ratio1

Net Savings

MW On-Peak

2.0 N/A 2.0 N/A N/A N/A 2.0

Hospitality Lighting

MWh/ year

8,660 Not Evaluated

8,660 Not Evaluated

Not Evaluated

Not Evaluated

8,660

MW On-Peak

0.9 Not Evaluated

0.9 Not Evaluated

Not Evaluated

Not Evaluated

0.9

Total Business Partners

MWh/ year

66,259 N/A 63,802 N/A N/A N/A 66,542

MW On-Peak

15.3 N/A 15.3 N/A N/A N/A 15.8

1 Net-to-Gross Ratio = (1-Freeridership) * (1+Spillover). 2 Savings from the prior motor incentive program have been held constant since last year. Savings achieved in 2006 from the new motor management program and the STAC 100 Motors program, in the amount of 296,202 kWh and 48 kW, have been added in the Net Savings column. 3 Savings for the Commercial HVAC portion of the program have been reduced as of 4th Quarter 2006. This approach was taken due to the known short-term nature of savings from advanced diagnostics and commissioning, which were part of the program. N/A – not applicable

3.6 New York Energy $martSM Loan Fund and Financing Program


Three longer-term non-energy goals have been set for the Loan Fund and Financing Program. These five-year goals and progress are shown in Table 3-10. The Loan Fund will likely exceed its five-year goals for the number of participating lenders and the leveraged loan amount. Progress on the goal for the number of customers receiving assistance is on track at this point.


3-12

Table 3-10. New York Energy $martSM Loan Fund and Financing Program – Near-Term Goals and Achievements for Commercial/Industrial Projects

Activity

Program Goals (July 1, 2006

through June 30, 2011)


2007

% of Goal Achieved

Customers receiving assistance (closed commercial/industrial loans) 500 131 26%

Participating lenders (signed participation agreements) 75 54 73%

Leveraged loan amount (for closed commercial/industrial loans) $60 million $44.2 74%


Table 3-11 shows the cumulative annual energy and peak demand savings from the Loan Fund and Financing Program. A realization rate and net-to-gross ratio are applied to adjust the program reported savings based on the most recent Measurement and Verification and Attribution evaluation studies. Net savings in the rightmost column are the total savings being claimed by the program after these evaluation activities.

The market effects study discussed in Section 3.2.3 included a reassessment of non-participant spillover attributable to several of the C/I existing buildings programs, including the Loan Fund. As a result of this study, the overall spillover value and net-to-gross ratio were increased by 1% for the Loan Fund. These latest results are incorporated into Table 3-11.

Table 3-11. Loan Fund Cumulative Annual Energy and Peak Demand Savings (through June 2007)

Program-Reported Savings1

Realiza-tion Rate

Adjusted Gross

Savings

Freerider-ship Spillover Net-to-Gross

Ratio2 Net

Savings

MWh/year 87,462 0.81a 73,901 27% 20% 0.93 68,728

MW On-Peak 29.3 1.73a 46.7 27% 20% 0.93 43.4

MMBtu 476,610 1.59 758,050 27% 20% 0.93 704,986 1 Due to coding issues in the program database, presented here are savings through 2nd Quarter 2007. 2 Net-to-Gross Ratio = 1-Freeridership+Spillover. a The realization rates calculated only apply to the custom measure kWh and kW savings. Savings arising from pre-qualified measures have a realization rate of 1.0.

3.7 Energy Smart Focus Program


Table 3-12 shows the Energy Smart Focus Program five-year goal for participants receiving assistance. The Program has achieved 3% of its goal. However, only the Energy Smart Schools Program element existed prior to July 2006, and services to other sectors are currently ramping up.

High Performance New Buildings Program

3-13

Table 3-12. Energy Smart Focus Program – Goal and Achievement




% of Goal Achieved

Participants Receiving Assistance 21,000 690 3%


Energy Smart Focus is primarily a sector-based energy information and services program. Services provided vary by sector, but ultimately many customers will elect to participate in other New York Energy $martSM programs. Energy and demand savings that may be attributable to the Focus Program are tracked and reported under the other New York Energy $martSM programs.

3.8 High Performance New Buildings Program


Three long-term non-energy goals have been set for the High Performance New Buildings Program. Table 3-13 shows these five-year goals and progress to date. With progress on all goals falling between 18% and 27%, the Program progress is tracking as expected fifteen months into the five-year measurement period.

Table 3-13. High Performance New Buildings Program – Near-Term Goals and Achievements

Activity





Customers receiving assistance (completed projects) 750 136 18%

Construction market affected (square feet) 75 Million 16.7 Million 22%

Participating A&E firms (completed projects) 800 217 27%


Table 3-14 shows the cumulative annual energy and peak demand savings from the High Performance New Buildings Program. A realization rate and net-to-gross ratio are applied to adjust the program reported savings based on the most recent Measurement and Verification and Attribution evaluation studies. Net savings in the rightmost column are the total savings being claimed by the program after these evaluation activities.


3-14

Table 3-14. High Performance New Buildings Cumulative Annual Energy and Peak Demand Savings (through September 2007)


Realiz-ation Rate

Adjusted Gross

Savings


Net-to-Gross Ratio1

Net Savings

MWh/year 253,345 1.06 268,546 40% 85% 1.22 327,626

MW On-Peak 58.1 1.06 61.6 40% 85% 1.22 75.2

1 Net-to-Gross Ratio = 1-Freeridership+Spillover (a weighted average of the NTG ratios estimated in the previous MCAC analysis and this current analysis is shown here).

3.9 FlexTech Technical Assistance Program


Shown in Table 3-15 is the FlexTech Technical Assistance goal and progress in terms of the number of customers served. With 19% of its five-year goal achieved, the Program is tracking as expected 15 months into the measurement period.

Table 3-15. FlexTech Technical Assistance Program – Goal and Achievement

Activity Program Goal


Achieved July 1, 2006 through September

30, 2007

% of Goal Achieved

Customers receiving assistance (approved proposals) 3,000 575 19%


Table 3-16 shows the cumulative annual energy and peak demand savings from the FlexTech Technical Assistance Program. The adjustments resulting from the measurement and verification evaluation study are applied within the program-reported figure. A net-to-gross ratio is applied to adjust the program-reported savings based on the most recent Attribution evaluation study. Net savings in the rightmost column are the total savings being claimed by the program after these evaluation activities.

The market effects study discussed in Section 3.2.3 included a reassessment of non-participant spillover attributable to several of the C/I existing buildings programs, including FlexTech Technical Assistance. This study recommended a 1% increase in the non-participant spillover value being used for the program. However, due to rounding, applying the 1% additional spillover did not have an overall effect on the net-to-gross ratio. Therefore, the adjustment factors shown in Table 3-16 are unchanged from last quarter.

FlexTech Technical Assistance Program

3-15

Table 3-16. FlexTech Technical Assistance Program Cumulative Annual Energy and Peak Demand Savings (through September 2007)


Realization Rate

Adjusted Gross

Savings


Net-to-Gross Ratio1

Net Savings

MWh/ year 786,600 1.0 786,600 25% 48% 1.14 896,724

MW On-Peak 147.1 1.0 147.1 25% 48% 1.14 167.6

MW Enabled 10.3 1.0 10.3 25% 48% 1.14 11.7

MMBtu 3,078,000 1.0 3,078,000 25% 48% 1.14 3,508,920 1 Net-to-Gross Ratio = 1-Freeridership+Spillover (a weighted average of the NTG ratios estimated in the previous MCAC analysis and this current analysis is shown here).

4-1

4

Residential and Low-Income Programs

4.1 Residential and Low-Income Evaluation Activities


During the third quarter, sector-level program theory and logic models were completed for both the Residential and Low-Income areas. These logic models can be found in Appendix A.


Several major evaluations are underway in the Residential and Low-Income sectors. Results from the Small Homes Program market characterization and assessment, the prospective benefits analysis of the Home Performance with ENERGY STAR Program, and the Multifamily Building Performance Program process evaluation will likely be included in the March 2008 annual evaluation report. Results from the evaluation of ENERGY STAR product sales attributable to the New York Energy $martSM programs, arrearage reduction resulting from the EmPower Program, Market Support and Outreach process evaluation, and Home Performance process evaluation will be reported out when available.

4.2 Summary of Residential and Low-Income Evaluation Results


Twenty-six long-term goals have been set for important non-energy metrics in the Residential and Low-Income area, including the number of customers participating, outreach efforts and people affected, and dollars leveraged. Fifteen months into the five-year measurement period, progress is tracking as expected on the majority of these goals.

4.2.2 Energy, Peak Demand, and Fuel Savings

Table 4-1 shows Residential and Low-Income program electric savings through September 30, 2007 and progress toward the five-year goals. Table 4-2 and Table 4-3 show peak demand reductions and fuel savings, respectively. Table 4-3 also includes progress toward five-year fuel savings goals.


4-2

Table 4-1. Residential and Low-Income Program Cumulative Annual Electricity Savings through September 30, 2007 and Progress toward Five-Year Goals



June 30, 2006

September 30, 2007

Five-Year Goal through June 30, 2011

Progress Toward

Five-Year Goal

(% achieved)

Single Family Home Performance Program: Existing Homes1 ConEdison

13.5

0.2

16.2

0.3

26.1

N/A

10%

N/A

Single Family Home Performance Program: New Homes ConEdison

7.3

0.7

13.3

0.8

8.9

N/A

67%

N/A

Multifamily Building Performance Program: Existing Buildings2 ConEdison

31.0

19.0

38.5

24.9

249.5

N/A

3%

N/A

Multifamily Building Performance Program: New Buildings ConEdison

0

0

0

0

24

N/A

0%

N/A

Market Support Program ConEdison

539.1a 305.2

647.0 359.4

200 N/A

54% N/A

EmPower New York ConEdison

20.1 1.6

32.6 3.0

51.1 N/A

24% N/A

ConEdison Residential & Low-Income Total 326.7 388.5 N/A N/A

Statewide Residential & Low-Income Total 610.9 747.6 N/A N/A

a This baseline savings figure does not match the 2nd quarter 2006 published value. The impacts for Energy Star Products are derived annually from market data, and the 2nd quarter savings value was estimated retrospectively to provide a more accurate baseline for measuring progress. 1 Savings for the low-income Assisted Home Performance Program (6.0 GWh) are included in this row. 2 Savings for the low-income Assisted Multifamily Program (20.6 GWh) are included in this row, the remainder are savings from the closed Residential Comprehensive Energy and Direct Install programs. N/A – Not Applicable

Summary of Residential and Low-Income Evaluation Results

4-3

Table 4-2. Residential and Low-Income Program Cumulative Peak Demand Savings through September 30, 2007

Demand Savings (MW)




2.0 0.0

2.3 0.0


0.9 0.2

3.6 0.3


3.9 1.7

26.1a 2.7


N/A N/A

0 0


104.3 56.4

121.6 69.0


2.5 0.0

4.6 0.6

ConEdison Residential & Low-Income Total 58.3 72.7

Statewide Residential & Low-Income Total 113.7 158.3

Note: No goals were set for peak demand savings. 1 Savings for the low-income Assisted Home Performance Program are included in this row. They represent 0.9 MW of these savings. 2 Savings for the low-income Assisted Multifamily Program are included in this row. They represent 23.9 MW of these savings. a During the third quarter of 2007 a large project with Rochester Housing Authority, with 2,400 units in 200 buildings was completed. N/A – Not Applicable

Table 4-3. Residential and Low-Income Program Cumulative Annual Fuel Savings through September 30, 2007 and Progress toward Five-Year Goals





Progress Toward

Five-Year Goal

(% achieved)


454,958a

8,599

682,638

12,970

1,199,000

N/A

19%

N/A


376,103b

30,088

523,143

31,389

518,500

N/A

28%

N/A


4-4





Progress Toward

Five-Year Goal

(% achieved)


43,932

12,581

172,145

63,693

6,014,500

N/A

2%

N/A


N/A

N/A

0 0

649,000

N/A

0%

N/A


341,920 184,945

374,163 202,385

N/A N/A

N/A N/A


59,341 0

118,259 123

108,500 N/A

54% N/A

ConEdison Residential & Low-Income Total 236,212 310,560 N/A N/A

Statewide Residential & Low-Income Total 1,276,254 1,870,348 N/A N/A 1 Energy savings for the low-income Assisted Home Performance Program are included in this row. They represent 252,576 MMBtu of these savings. 2 Energy savings for the low-income Assisted Multifamily Program are included in this row. They represent 172,145 MMBtu of these savings. a This value does not match an earlier published value due to changes made to the program tracking database in response to evaluation completed by the M&V contractor. b This value does not match earlier published values as the realization rate for MMBtu was reassessed during this period to a lower level and applied retroactively in order to accurately reflect progress made during the year. N/A – Not Applicable

4.3 Single Family Home Performance Program


As shown in Table 4-4, several long-term production goals have been set for the Single Family Home Performance Program. Progress on three of the four goals is tracking as expected 15 months into the five-year measurement period. Regarding the goal for new low-income ENERGY STAR labeled homes, program staff anticipates that the majority of the assisted ENERGY STAR homes will be manufactured housing with more than one tenant (e.g., duplex, 4-family homes, etc.). Staff is working with organizations, such as the Manufactured Housing Authority, to develop codes for these ENERGY STAR homes. Thus, progress on the goal for new low-income ENERGY STAR homes built is expected to increase soon.

Single Family Home Performance Program

4-5

Table 4-4. Single Family Home Performance Program – Goals and Achievements



Achieved July 1, 2006 through

September 30, 2007

% of Goal Achieved

New York ENERGY STAR Labeled Homes Initiative

New ENERGY STAR Labeled Homes built 10,750 2,787 27%

New low-income ENERGY STAR Labeled Homes built 4,000 6 <1%

Home Performance with ENERGY STAR Initiative

Existing homes served (receiving treatment) 16,125 3,210 20%

Existing low-income homes served (receiving treatment) 10,500 1,681 16%


Table 4-5 shows the cumulative annual energy and peak demand savings from the Single Family Home Performance Program. A realization rate and net-to-gross ratio are applied to adjust the program-reported savings based on the most recent Measurement and Verification and Attribution evaluation studies. Net savings in the rightmost column are the total savings being claimed by the program after these evaluation activities.


4-6

Table 4-5. Single Family Home Performance Program Cumulative Annual Energy and Peak Demand Savings (Through September 2007)


Realization Rate

Adjusted Gross


Net-to-Gross Ratio1

Net Savings

New York ENERGY STAR Labeled Homes Initiative

MWh/year 10,315 1.01 11,347 28% 47.6% 1.17 13,276

MW On-Peak

1.3 2.32 3.1 28% 47.6% 1.17 3.6

MMBtu 604,231 0.74 447,131 28% 47.6% 1.17 523,143

Home Performance with ENERGY STAR2

MWh/year 14,497 1.0 14,497 26% 41% 1.12 16,237

MW On-Peak

2.0 1.04 2.1 26% 41% 1.12 2.3

MMBtu 708,719 0.86 609,498 26% 41% 1.12 682,638

Single Family Home Performance Program – Total


MW On-Peak

3.3 N/A 5.1 N/A N/A N/A 5.9

MMBtu 1,312,950 N/A 1,056,629 N/A N/A N/A 1,205,781 1 Net-to-Gross Ratio = 1-Freeridership+Spillover (a weighted average of the NTG ratios, estimated in the previous MCAC analysis and this current analysis, is shown here). 2 Savings for the low-income Assisted Home Performance Program are included in these figures. They represent approximately 6,000 MWh, 0.9 MW, and 252,576 MMBtu of these savings. N/A – Not Applicable

4.4 Multifamily Building Performance Program


As shown in Table 4-6, several long-term non-energy goals have been set for the Multifamily Building Performance Program. Progress toward these goals has been slow since program staff has focused on designing and contracting for the new combined program. Also, given the long timeframe necessary to complete multifamily projects, savings are expected to ramp up over time. However, projects originally begun under the Assisted Multifamily Program continue to be completed. Section 4.4.3 describes several interim progress indicators.

Multifamily Building Performance Program

4-7

Table 4-6. Multifamily Building Performance Program – Goals and Achievements

Activity

Program Goals

(July 1, 2006 through

June 30, 2011)


September 30, 2007

% of Goal Achieved

Number of existing market rate multifamily units receiving energy efficiency services (completed projects) 39,000 0 0%

Number of new market-rate multifamily units receiving energy efficiency services 7,500 0 0%

Tenant energy savings per year (at $250/unit) $34,875,000 0 0%

Number of existing low-income multifamily units receiving energy efficiency services (completed projects) 148,200 9,393 6%

Number of new low-income multifamily units receiving energy efficiency services 12,700 0 0%

Low-income tenant energy savings per year (at $195/unit) $31,375,500 $1,831,635 6%


Table 4-7 shows the cumulative annual energy and peak demand savings from the Multifamily Building Performance Program. A realization rate and net-to-gross ratio are applied to adjust the program-reported savings based on the most recent Measurement and Verification and Attribution evaluation studies. Net savings in the rightmost column are the total savings being claimed by the program after these evaluation activities.

Table 4-7. Multifamily Building Performance Program Cumulative Annual Energy and Peak Demand Savings (Through September 2007)


Realization Rate

Adjusted Gross

Savings

Free-ridership Spillover

Net-to-Gross Ratio1

Net Savings

Assisted Multifamily Program (AMP)

MWh/year 25,320 0.97 24,560 27% 15% 0.84 20,618

MW On-Peak

22.6 1.26 28.5 27% 15% 0.84 23.9

MMBtu 205,056 1.0 205,056 27% 15% 0.84 172,145

Comprehensive Energy Management (CEM) Program

MWh/year 5,712 0.97 5,541 2% 18% 1.16 6,408

MW On-Peak

0.3 1.77 0.5 2% 18% 1.16 0.6

Low-income Direct Installation

MWh/year 11,494 1.0 11,494 Not Evaluated

Not Evaluated

Not Evaluated

11,494

MW On-Peak

1.6 1.0 1.6 Not Evaluated

Not Evaluated

Not Evaluated

1.6


4-8


Realization Rate

Adjusted Gross

Savings


Net-to-Gross Ratio1

Net Savings

Multifamily Building Performance Program – Total


MW On-Peak

24.5 N/A 30.6 N/A N/A N/A 26.1

MMBtu 205,056 N/A 205,056 N/A N/A N/A 172,145

1 Net-to-Gross Ratio = (1-Freeridership) * (1+Spillover). N/A – Not Applicable

4.4.3 Other Evaluation Findings

Given that the timeline for completing projects is at least a year, there are no projects reporting savings under the new Multifamily Building Performance Program. Table 4-8 shows the number of housing units involved in each point of the pipeline for participation in the Program.

Table 4-8. Number of Units Participating According to Status

Status Number of housing units

Existing Buildings New Construction

Application Submitted 4,493 550

Participation Agreement Signed 67,337 1,898

Design 75% Complete N/A 242

Totals 71,830 2,690

4.5 Market Support Program


Four long-term non-energy goals have been set for the Market Support Program. Table 4-9 shows these goals and progress to date. Good progress is being made on all goals. The number of new independent retailers signed up has already significantly exceeded the five-year goal (193%). This goal may be rexamined, and the Program is now placing greater emphasis on maintaining these existing partnerships with independent retailers and signing up new big-box retailers. Furthermore, the number of participating retailers may fluctuate, based on their interest and performance in the Program.

Market Support Program

4-9

Table 4-9. Market Support Program – Goals and Achievements

Activity





New manufacturing partners signed up 20 12 60%

New retail partners (independent) signed up 100 193 193%

New retail partners (big box, mass merchandisers) signed up 6 4 67%

ENERGY STAR market share increase on targeted products (on average, across products)

25% 6% 24%


Table 4-10 shows the cumulative annual energy and peak demand savings from the Market Support Program. A realization rate and net-to-gross ratio are applied to adjust the program-reported savings based on the most recent Measurement and Verification and Attribution evaluation studies. Net savings in the rightmost column are the total savings being claimed by the program after these evaluation activities.


4-10

Table 4-10. Market Support Program Cumulative Annual Energy and Peak Demand Savings (Through September 2007)


Realiza-tion Rate

Adjusted Gross

Savings


Net-to-Gross Ratio1

Net Savings

ENERGY STAR Products and Marketing (2006)

MWh/year 604,867

MW On-Peak 107.4

MMBtu

Not applicable2

357,854

Keep Cool

MWh/year 5,159 1.0 5,159 18% 15% 0.94 4,865

MW On-Peak 8.8 1.0 8.8 18% 15% 0.94 8.3

Bulk Purchase

MWh/year 19,451 2.03 39,486 10% 5% 0.95 37,314

MW On-Peak 3.9 1.62 6.3 10% 5% 0.95 6.0

MMBtu 24,307 0.71 17,258 10% 5% 0.95 16,309

Market Support Program – Total

MWh/year N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 647,046

MW On-Peak N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 121.6

MMBtu N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 374,163 1 Net-to-Gross Ratio = (1-Freeridership) * (1+Spillover). 2 The net savings attributable to the ENERGY STAR Products and Marketing Program are determined based on market research by the MCAC team. Thus, there are no program-reported savings, realization rate, or net-to-gross adjustments. N/A – Not Applicable

4.6 Communities and Education Program


As shown in Table 4-11, six long-term non-energy goals have been set for the Communities and Education Program. The Program is generally progressing toward these goals as expected.

EmPower New YorkSM

4-11

Table 4-11. Communities and Education Program – Goals and Achievements

Activity

Program Goals(July 1, 2006



2007

% of Goal Achieved

Teachers trained 5,000 789 16%

Students reached 150,000 31,256 21%

Community events held statewide 1,000 351 35%

Recruiting seminars held statewide 500 18 4%

Home performance contractors, technicians, builders and raters recruited for the Single Family Home Performance Program

800 127 16%

Building analysts, designers, energy consultants, equipment installers, etc. recruited for Multifamily Building Performance Program

100 68 68%

4.7 EmPower New YorkSM


As shown in Table 4-12, one long-term non-energy goal has been set for the EmPower Program. The Program is making good progress, having achieved 33% of its five-year goal 15 months into the measurement period.

Table 4-12. EmPower New YorkSM Program – Goal and Achievement

Activity

Program Goal (July 1, 2006



2007

% of Goal Achieved

Households served (completed) 31,500 10,505 33%


Table 4-13 shows the cumulative annual energy and peak demand savings from the EmPower Program. A realization rate is applied to adjust the program-reported savings based on the most recent Measurement and Verification evaluation studies. These programs have not undergone any attribution evaluation, so no adjustment is made for net-to-gross.


4-12

Table 4-13. EmPower New YorkSM Program Cumulative Annual Energy and Peak Demand Savings (Through September 2007)

Program Reported

Savings Realization

Rate Adjusted Gross

Savings Net-to-Gross

Ratio Net Savings

EmPower New York

MWh/year 30,022 0.81 24,318 Not evaluated 24,318

MW On-Peak 3.3 1.0 3.3 Not evaluated 3.3

MMBtu 118,259 1.0 118,259 Not evaluated 118,259

Weatherization Network Initiative

MWh/year 8,242 1.0 8,242 Not evaluated 8,242

MW On-Peak 1.3 1.0 1.3 Not evaluated 1.3

Total

MWh/year 38,264 N/A 32,560 Not evaluated 32,560

MW On-Peak 4.6 N/A 4.6 Not evaluated 4.6

MMBtu 118,259 N/A 118,259 Not evaluated 118,259

N/A – Not Applicable

4.8 Buying Strategies and Energy Awareness Program


Several long-term non-energy goals have been set for the Buying Strategies and Energy Awareness Program. These five-year goals and progress are shown in Table 4-14. Overall, the Program is making good progress toward these goals.

Table 4-14. Buying Strategies and Energy Awareness Program – Goals and Achievements

Activity

Program Goals(July 1, 2006



2007

% of Goal Achieved

Funds leveraged through Buying Strategies initiative $20 million $2.5-3.2 million 15%

Additional low-income individuals reached via newsletters, weekly newspapers, etc. (readership) 5 million 240,000 5%

Additional low-income individuals reached via seminars and workshops (attendees) 15,000 4,164 28%

Additional contractors and other partners recruited in low-income districts 50 9 18%

Additional students reached in schools serving low-income populations (number of individuals given educational materials)

100,000 20,837 21%

5-1

5

Research and Development Programs

5.1 Research & Development (R&D) Program Evaluation Activities


During the third quarter, program theory and logic models have been completed for the R&D sector and for the following five programs/areas. These logic models can be found in Appendix A.

• Clean Energy Infrastructure

• Distributed Energy Resources

• Demand Response and Innovative Rate Research

• Electric Transportation

• Industrial and Municipal Process Efficiency


Several major evaluations are underway for the R&D programs. Results from the PV process evaluation and the first phase of the R&D impact evaluation will likely be included in the March 2008 annual evaluation report. Results from the evaluation of gross and net savings from the 25 largest energy-saving projects and the second phase of the R&D impact evaluation will be reported out as these efforts are completed.

5.2 Summary of R&D Evaluation Results


Almost 40 long-term non-energy goals have been set for the R&D portfolio. These diverse goals address important metrics such as solicitations released, projects funded, information dissemination, co-funding, and technology transfer. Fifteen months into the assessment period, programs are tracking well in terms of making progress toward these longer-term non-energy goals. As appropriate, a percentage is given


5-2

within the goals tables included in this section to denote progress for quantitative goals and explanations are provided on progress toward more qualitative goals.

5.2.2 Energy, Peak Demand, Fuel Savings, and Clean Generation

Table 5-1 shows the energy savings and renewable energy production achieved by the R&D portfolio through September 30, 2007. Table 5-2 highlights demand reduction achievements, and Table 5-3 shows impacts for other fuels such as natural gas and oil. These tables also show the change over time since June 30, 2006.

Table 5-1. R&D Program Electricity Savings and Clean Generation through September 30, 2007




DG-CHP Demonstration Program ConEdison

82.7 42.0

111.9 50.4

Renewable Energy Production ConEdison

103.8 0.5

106.3 0.8

Overlap Removed 6.6 8.9

ConEdison R&D Total 42.5 51.2

Statewide R&D Total 179.9 209.2

Table 5-2. R&D Program Cumulative Peak Demand Savings through September 30, 2007

Demand Savings (MW)



DG-CHP Demonstration Program ConEdison

18.1 8.5

24.5 11.1

Demand Response and Innovative Rate Research ConEdison

137.2 68.6

99.0a 21.0

Renewable Energy Production ConEdison

8.1 0.4

9.1 0.4

Overlap Removed 1.3 1.7

ConEdison R&D Total 77.4 32.5

Statewide R&D Total 162.1 130.8

a MWs enabled under the SBC2 program Enabling Technologies for Price Responsive Load were not required to persist beyond the period of the contract. As such, the available MWs have steadily declined since the program’s close.

Public Benefit Power Transmission and Distribution Research

5-3

Table 5-3. R&D Program Cumulative Annual Fuel Savings through September 30, 2007



June 30, 2006 September 30. 2007

DG-CHP Demonstration Program1 ConEdison

-571,310 -266,937

-980,032 -443,074

ConEdison R&D Total -266,937 -443,074

Statewide R&D Total -571,310 -980,032 1 Because the electricity saved by the DG/CHP projects replaces electricity formerly purchased from the grid, the program has reduced fuel used at central generating stations, for a net decrease statewide due to greater efficiency of the DG/CHP systems at sites where imported fuel is used. The fuel avoided at the central generating plant is determined from the electricity generated by the DG/CHP installations. Furthermore, at additional projects such as wastewater treatment plants, electricity generation is powered fully or partially by digester gas produced on site. Such fuel switching achieves natural gas conservation above and beyond what is achieved through efficiency alone.

5.3 Public Benefit Power Transmission and Distribution Research


Two long-term goals have been set for the Public Benefit Power Transmission and Distribution Program. These goals and progress are described in Table 5-4.

Table 5-4. Public Benefit Power Transmission and Distribution Research Program – Goals and Achievements

5.4 Clean Energy Infrastructure


Several long-term non-energy goals have been set for the Clean Energy Infrastructure Program. These five-year goals, as well as progress, are shown in Table 5-5.

Activity Program Goals (July 1, 2006 through June 30, 2011) Achieved July 1, 2006 through September 30, 2007

Issue annual solicitations 12 or more projects resulting in progress toward program objectives

Solicitation (PON 1102) was issued in Q1 of 2007 announcing the availability of $5 million and inviting proposals with two rounds of due dates (May 1, 2007 and November 1, 2007). In Round 1, 13 projects were selected to receive SBC funding. The due date for Round 2 proposals was November 1, 2007.

Technology transfer Identify successful projects, undertake specific outreach and knowledge transfer activities aimed at utilities

This is an on-going activity. Upon completion of projects, NYSERDA will assess the outcome of the various projects that have commenced recently, and undertake specific outreach and knowledge transfer activities aimed at utilities, as appropriate. Greater detail will be provided as projects near completion and outreach can commence.


5-4

Table 5-5. Clean Energy Infrastructure Program – Goals and Achievements

Activity Program Goals (July 1, 2006 through June 30, 2011)


September 30, 2007

% of Goal Achieved

Education, Consumer Awareness and Market Development

New accredited training institutions 3 0 0%

New certification exams 5 1 20%

Training workshops 25

Self-sustaining accredited training and certification programs for clean energy

technologies in addition to PV 13 52%

Renewable Resource Applications

Stakeholder workshops 7 3 43%

Competitive research solicitations 5

Reduction of knowledge and technical barriers currently affecting installation and operation of wholesale and end-use

clean energy technologies 6 120%

Clean Energy Technology Manufacturing and Business Development

Companies expanding renewable business networks

25 6 24%

Companies expanding manufacturing 10

Increase the number of companies developing and manufacturing clean energy technologies, and serving the clean energy businesses in New York 2 20%

5.4.2 Clean Energy Generation

Table 5-6 shows the cumulative annual clean generation from the Clean Energy Infrastructure Program. A realization rate and net-to-gross ratio are applied to adjust the program-reported savings based on the most recent Measurement and Verification and Attribution evaluation studies. Net savings in the rightmost column are the total savings being claimed by the program after these evaluation activities.

Clean Energy Infrastructure

5-5

Table 5-6. Clean Energy Infrastructure Program Cumulative Annual Clean Generation (Through September 2007)


Realization Rate Adjusted

Gross Energy Generations

Net-to-Gross Ratio

Net Energy Generation

End Use Renewables

MWh/year 6,064 1.04 6,307 1.0 6,307

MW On-Peak 3.4 0.85 2.9 1.0 2.9

Wholesale Renewables

MWh/year 99,995 1.0 99,995 1.0 99,995

MW On-Peak 6.2 1.0 6.2 1.0 6.2

Clean Energy Totals

MWh/year 106,059 N/A 106,302 N/A 106,302

MW On-Peak 9.6 N/A 9.1 N/A 9.1

N/A – Not Applicable

5.4.3 Other Evaluation Findings

Analysis of PV System Size and Cost

Table 5-7 highlights some key information from PON 716 on photovoltaic (PV) system size and cost. In total, 698 systems have been installed and an additional 198 systems are in progress. Residential systems are generally half the size of systems in the commercial and industrial sectors. However, average system cost (per KW-DC) is similar across the sectors.

Table 5-7. PV System Size and Cost Summary1

Status Sector Number of

Systems

Average Size

(kW DC)

Average Cost Before Incentive($ per kW DC)

Minimum Cost ($ per kW DC)

Maximum Cost ($ per kW DC)

Completed Residential 634 5.15 $8,695 $5,174 $26,233a

Completed Industrial 4 10.75 $9,073 $8,310 $9,893

Completed Commercial 60 10.77 $8,654 $6,398 $15,686

Subtotal (completed systems) - 698 - $8,807 - -

In Process Residential 162 6.2 $9,015 $6,645 $32,305

In Process Commercial 36 18.81 $9,777 $6,348 $18,844

Total (all systems) - 896 10.42 $9,040 - -

1 Through October 24, 2007. a This relatively high-cost project was a 17.14 KW building-integrated PV system installed on a multifamily building in New York City.


5-6

5.5 Power Systems Product Development


Several long-term non-energy goals have been set for the Power Systems Product Development Program. Goals and accomplishments are shown in Table 5-8.

Table 5-8. Power Systems Product Development Program – Goals and Achievements

Activity Program Goals (July

1, 2006 through June 30, 2011)

Achieved July 1, 2006 through September 30, 2007 % of Goal Achieved

Product development contracts awarded 75

15 (additional proposals received

but not yet evaluated) 20%

New products commercially launched since July 1, 2006 5

1 (Gaia Power Tower)

20%

Cumulative sales ($) $50 million $1 million in 2006a (Gaia Power Tower) 2%

Successful new product field tests and demonstrations 15

3 (others waiting to resolve interconnect problems)

20%

Projects successfully completing milestones 25 8 32%

Assessments and studies of new technologies completed 20

5 (Added SRI assessments)

25%

a 2007 sales figures not yet available. Additionally, $6 million in product sales by Plug Power in 2006 from products launched prior to July 1, 2006.

5.6 DG-CHP Demonstration


Several long-term non-energy goals have been set for the DG-CHP Program. These five-year goals and progress are shown in Table 5-9.

DG-CHP Demonstration

5-7

Table 5-9. DG-CHP Demonstration Program – Goals and Achievements




Issue annual solicitations and incentive offers

Fund 50 or more CHP demonstrations with a cumulative capacity of 100 MW and associated efficiency and environmental benefits, and with 50 MW downstate.

PON 1043 was issued in June 2006. Thirty-four proposals were received on August 22, 2006. Six CHP demontration projects are in process of being contracted and are expected to have an installed capacity of 32 MW (of which 2 MW is downstate). PON 1178 was issued in October 2007 with proposals due January 24, 2008.

12% (Number of projects)

Technology transfer

Conduct technology transfer and outreach activities to broaden acceptance of DG and CHP. Hold annual workshops and publish at least 10 final reports per year.

Currently, site-specific performance data is posted on http://chp.nyserda.org for 28 projects.

N/A


Table 5-10 shows the cumulative annual energy and peak demand savings from the DG-CHP Program. A realization rate and net-to-gross ratio are applied to adjust the program-reported savings based on the most recent Measurement and Verification and Attribution evaluation studies. Net savings in the rightmost column are the total savings being claimed by the program after these evaluation activities.

http://chp.nyserda.org/�


5-8

Table 5-10. DG-CHP Program Cumulative Annual Energy and Peak Demand Savings (Through September 2007)


Realization Rate

Adjusted Gross

Savings


Net-to-Gross Ratio1

Net Savings

MWh/year 115,670 0.90 104,450 15% 26% 1.07 111,866

MW 23.2 0.98 22.9 15% 26% 1.07 24.5

MMBtu/year2 -1,041,027 0.88 -915,062 15% 26% 1.07 -980,032 1 Net-to-Gross Ratio = (1-Freeridership) * (1+Spillover). 2 Because the electricity saved by the DG/CHP projects replaces electricity formerly purchased from the grid, the program has reduced fuel used at central generating stations, for a net decrease statewide due to greater efficiency of the DG/CHP systems at sites where imported fuel is used. The fuel avoided at the central generating plant is determined from the electricity generated by the DG/CHP installations. Furthermore, at additional projects such as waste water treatment plants, electricity generation is powered fully or partially by digester gas produced on site. Such fuel switching achieves natural gas conservation above and beyond what is achieved through efficiency alone.

5.7 Demand Response and Innovative Rate Research


Two long-term non-energy goals have been set for the Demand Response and Innovative Rate Research Program. These five-year goals and progress are shown in Table 5-11.

Demand Response and Innovative Rate Research

5-9

Table 5-11. Demand Response and Innovative Rate Research Program – Goals and Achievements

Activity


through June 30, 2011


% of Goal Achieved

Increase small customer participation in wholesale and local demand response programs (MW)

100 MW

One MW enabled.

In this first year, the program is still ramping up to meet long terms goals of demonstrating enabling load shed technologies. Demonstration of an advanced, remotely activated, load shed ballast was completed at the Con Edison Rye facility. Additional demonstration projects have been funded at five different types of commercial or institutional buildings. The Association for Energy Affordability (AEA) conducted focus groups with Packaged Terminal Air Conditioning (PTAC) manufacturers to encourage incorporation of enabling controls for fleet management of PTAC units – a contributor to New York City peak load requirements. Innoventive Power demonstrated tools to identify demand response opportunities in schools and other building types.

1% of MW goal

Increase the number of multifamily apartment units participating in real-time and other time-sensitive electric rate pilots

3,000 apartment units

A feasibility study was initiated to compare various time-based rates (including ConEd Rider M) in two all-electric multi-family developments (3,100 apartment units, 20MW peak demand) Initiated a demonstration of load management technologies and of time-of-use rate at Georgetown Mews (37 buildings, 930 apartment units, 2,000 KW peak load). Technologies include submetering, fleet-managed window air conditioning, energy information display and heating. The site will also pilot test a time-sensitive rate.

13% (with the 930 units

participating in the

demonstration)


Table 5-12 shows the cumulative annual energy and peak demand savings from the Demand Response and Innovative Rate Research Program. A realization rate and net-to-gross ratio are applied to adjust the program reported savings-based on the most recent Measurement and Verification and Attribution evaluation studies. Net savings in the rightmost column are the total savings being claimed by the program after these evaluation activities.

Enabling Technology was a research and development program that sought innovative ways of aggregating, dispatching and reporting demand response. Projects were selected in part for their ability to demonstrate and commercialize new methods of aggregating load. The program did not require maintenance of the enabled demand reduction. Enabled demand reduction is a potential quantity that may or may not translate into curtailed load in response to a New York Independent System Operator call for emergency resources. These factors contribute to the low realization rate (0.50) shown in Table 5-12.


5-10

Table 5-12. Demand Response and Innovative Rate Research Program Cumulative Annual Energy and Peak Demand Savings (Through September 2007)


Realization Rate

Adjusted Gross

Savings

Net-to-Gross Ratio Net Savings

Enabled MW 208.3 0.50 104.2 0.95 99.0

5.8 Electric Transportation


As shown in Table 5-13, five non-energy metrics are being monitored for the Electric Transportation Program.

Table 5-13. Electric Transportation Program – Achievements

Activity Achieved July 1, 2006 through September 30, 2007

Solicitations released 2

Proposals reviewed 21 (additional proposal not yet reviewed)

Projects funded 5

Funding $800,000

Co-funding $900,000

5.9 Environmental Monitoring, Evaluation, and Protection (EMEP)


Several long-term goals have been set for the Environmental Monitoring, Evaluation and Protection Program. These five-year goals and progress are shown in Table 5-14. The Program is making good progress on all goals.

Environmental Monitoring, Evaluation, and Protection (EMEP)

5-11

Table 5-14. Environmental Monitoring, Evaluation, and Protection Program – Goals and Achievements


(July 1, 2006 through June 30, 2011


Develop detailed multi-year EMEP research plan with input from policymakers, scientists, and stakeholders

Update research plan as needed to ensure relevancy

One planning meeting was held with the EMEP advisors, and three other major research planning meetings were held to assist in plan development. All of the attendees at the planning meetings were state or nationally recognized experts from the policy and scientific communities. NYSERDA contracted with the New York Academy of Sciences to assist in the development of the research plan, which was finalized and released in September 2007.

N/A

Develop, contract, and manage research projects aimed at priority energy-related environmental research areas

Issue 6 to 10 solicitations Contract 40 projects Leverage $20 million into New York, help build a knowledge-based research infrastructure in New York.

Three contractors were selected for the EMEP Outreach and Technical Assistance PON. Six solicitations have been issued that included EMEP funding (focusing on sequestration, impacts of renewable energy, ecosystems, and air quality). Ten projects have been contracted.

60-100% of solicitation goal

25% of goal for projects contracted

Sponsor workshops, conferences, and seminars 5 to 10

EMEP co-sponsored a workshop on the creation of a soil-monitoring network in the Northeast. EMEP hosted a seminar (and “Webinar”) for multiple agency staff on recent findings from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change with IPCC member Dr. Cynthia Rosenzweig. EMEP sponsored the Adirondack Research Consortium conference in Tupper Lake. EMEP co-sponsored a conference on climate change at MIT’s Endicott House.

40-80%

Provide Web-based EMEP data and information

200,000 total customer “visits,” inquiries, and

downloads to the EMEP Web page

During this period, hits on EMEP Web sites totaled over 135,000 and downloads totaled more than 17,000.

76%


5-12




Publish NYSERDA research reports 40

Nine research reports and five executive summaries were published

23%

Publish peer-reviewed journal articles 100

17 articles were published in the area of Air Quality/Health Effects, and 10 articles were published in the area of Ecosystems.

27%

Provide briefings to decision makers 15

Sponsored a meeting with policymakers concerning wind and wildlife. Briefed the new Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) Climate Change Program Director on EMEP program activities, and arranged for a briefing to DEC staff on carbonaceous fine particle issues in New York and the Region.

20%

5.10 Industrial Research, Development and Demonstration


Long-term goals have been set for the Industrial Research, Development, and Demonstration Program in three areas. These five-year goals and progress are shown in Table 5-15.

Municipal Water and Wastewater Efficiency

5-13

Table 5-15. Industrial Research, Development and Demonstration Program – Near-Term Goals and Achievements



Achieved from July 1, 2006 through September 30, 2007

% of Goal Achieved

Issue annual solicitations Fund 30 to 40 cost-shared demonstrations

PON 998 was issued with two rounds of due dates (June 8, and October 5, 2006), with total funding of $4 million. In Round One, NYSERDA selected six projects to receive SBC funding. In Round Two, NYSERDA selected five projects to receive SBC funding. PON 1130 was issued with three rounds of due dates (March 28, July 16, and November 8, 2007), with total funding exceeding $5.7 million. In Round One, NYSERDA selected six projects to receive SBC funding. In Round Two, NYSERDA selected five projects to receive SBC funding. Due date for Round Three proposals is November 8, 2007.

55-73%

Technology transfer

Conduct technology transfer and outreach activities to broaden the acceptance of successful technologies and technical approaches via participation in at least two workshops. Publish at least six final reports per year.

This is an on-going activity. NYSERDA has received indications that several contractors have performed some measure of technology transfer in the form of publication of papers and public speaking engagements at workshops. Greater detail will be provided in the next quarterly report.

N/A

Program metrics

Industrial Process and Productivity Improvement (IPPI) projects supported during the SBC III period are expected to result in cumulative energy savings of $5 million, and project-related incremental sales of $10 million.

Projects are being contracted with requirements for documentation of performance metrics. Projects have not yet been completed; therefore, metrics cannot be ascertained at this time.

N/A

5.11 Municipal Water and Wastewater Efficiency


Several long-term goals have been set for the Municipal Water and Wastewater Efficiency Program. These five-year goals and progress are shown in Table 5-16. The Program is making good progress on all goals.


5-14

Table 5-16. Municipal Water and Wastewater Efficiency Program – Goals and Achievements




Issue annual solicitation

Select and fund 25 or more projects.

Provide assistance to a minimum of 25 municipal

wastewater and water treatment facilities.

PON 1040 was issued, and 17 proposals were received, requesting approximately $3.9 million in NYSERDA funding. Five projects were recommended for funding. Two will receive SBC municipal Water and Wastewater Efficiency Program funding. The other three will receive statutory or other funds.

20%

Technology transfer

Provide critical information on ways to optimize energy use at municipal wastewater

and water treatment facilities. Provide information to 1,000 treatment facilities in New

York.

NYSERDA sponsored an energy management training session that targeted the municipal wastewater treatment sector, which was co-developed by EPRI and the New York Water Environment Association (NYWEA). Approximately 70 individuals attended, including plant operators, municipal officials, regulators, consultants, and engineers. Additionally, in conjunction with NYWEA and the Energy Smart Focus Contractor, NYSERDA is developing an energy management Webinar series and an issue of Clearwaters (published by NYWEA) that will focus solely on energy management. Energy management presentations were given at six New York State Environmental Facilities Corporation (EFC)-facilitated Co-Funding Committee conferences and at three DEC-sponsored training sessions for local elected officials. A presentation also was given as part of a Webcast hosted by the Comptroller’s Office. At least 200 individuals attended these presentations. Final Reports from the two submetering projects are available online. An Energy Smart Focus contractor was selected and the contract has been finalized.

33%

Energy and cost savings $2-3 million per year See paragraph below for explanation of progress.

Technical Assistance 30

Seven new projects were funded, totaling $80,000; and six projects, representing $120,000 were completed.

43%

Next Generation and Emerging Technologies

5-15


As projects are completed (taking an average of seven years in this sector), the savings are expected to amount to more than 73,000 MWh of electricity and 11.9 MW of peak demand reduction, resulting in a savings of $8.7M for the participating municipalities. Furthermore, existing technology transfer and outreach programs have resulted in additional energy savings and non-energy benefits. Continuation of the Initiative’s existing programs, in conjunction with those under development, is expected to add even more energy savings and demand reductions than are currently anticipated within the sector.

5.12 Next Generation and Emerging Technologies


Several long-term goals have been set for the Next Generation and Emerging Technologies Program. These five-year goals and progress are shown in Table 5-17.


5-16

Table 5-17. Next Generation and Emerging Technologies Program – Goals and Achievements




Advanced Building Program Two solicitations Two or more demonstration test beds

Four solicitations completed. Eleven projects contracted (six product development/five demonstrations). RFP 1032 Reference Design Guidebook: This project (1) identified incremental measures needed to raise energy performance of new residential construction. Final report submitted in October. PON 1062 Advanced Building Envelopes and Energy Systems: These projects (2) monitored/demonstrated advanced building systems that substantially reduce central air conditioning loads. PON 1126 Next Generation Technologies for Residential Buildings: Under Round One, 11 proposals were received and seven projects were selected with total funding of $795,000. Under Round Two, eight proposals were received with total requested funding of $1.3 million. These projects will develop/demonstrate technology to reduce AC KW loads , on-site power production, design strategies for reduced load and other energy efficient technologies development. PON 1096 Demonstration of High Performance Residential Homes: six project proposals were received and four projects were selected with total funding of $2.5million. These projects will demonstrate high performance homes.

>100%

Next Generation and Emerging Technologies

5-17




Daylighting Applications

50-100 design assistance projects five daylighting implementations in buildings

Two contracts signed for daylighting technical consulting. One preliminary design assistance project has been completed. No activity on daylighting implementation in buildings to date. PON 1079 Daylight Technical Services, Training and Demonstrations: All five contracts have been signed, work underway. RFP 1068 Establishment of a Lighting Incubator Center to Support Lighting Start-up Companies in New York: Lighting technology greenhouse contract has been signed. Contract will be signed after the first executive board meeting in November 2007. PON 1122 Innovation in Lighting: New Products, Demonstrations, and Testing: three contracts have been signed, two are in negotiation.

N/A

Solar Thermal Applications Two solicitations Five demonstrations

One solicitation completed. PON 1085 – Solar Thermal Demonstrations: five signed contracts, four in negotiation. eight of the nine projects are demonstrations.

50% of the solicitations goal

100% of the demonstrations goal

Emerging Technologies Five solicitations 25 product development projects

Rounds One and Two completed for one solicitation. Fifteen product development projects underway. PON 1105 Next Generation Emerging Technologies: Under Round One, four contracts are signed, and five contracts are in negotiation. Under Round Two, 11 contracts are in negotiation.

20% of the solicitations goal

60% of the product development project

goal

Appendix A: Logic Models

This section includes nine logic models completed during the third quarter of 2007 by NYSERDA’s evaluation contractors. These logic models are for the following programs/areas:

• General Awareness Logic Model

• Residential Sector Logic Model

• Low-Income Sector Logic Model

• R&D Sector Logic Model

• Clean Energy Infrastructure Logic Model

• Distributed Energy Resources Logic Model

• Demand Response and Innovative Rate Research Logic Model

• Electric Transportation Logic Model

• Industrial and Municipal Process Efficiency Logic Model

A-1

Appendix A

A-2

Gen

eral

Aw

aren

ess L

ogic

Mod

el

(Pro

cess

)

Mes

sage

and

m

ater

ials

de

velo

pmen

t

Plan

ning

and

co

ordi

natio

n M

onito

ring,

qua

lity

cont

rol a

nd

eval

uatio

n A

ctiv

ities

Out

puts

Shor

t-T

erm

Out

com

es (1

-3 y

ears

)

Prog

ram

pla

ns c

oord

inat

ed

with

NY

Ene

rgy

$mar

t pr

ogra

ms

Mar

ketin

g m

essa

ges

deve

lope

dEd

ucat

iona

l mat

eria

l de

velo

ped

Key

Ext

erna

l Inf

luen

ces:

inve

stm

ent c

limat

e, p

oliti

cal p

riorit

ies,

ener

gy p

rices

, cod

es a

nd st

anda

rds,

activ

ities

of n

on-N

YSE

RD

A

effic

ienc

y an

d re

new

able

eff

orts

, fed

eral

ene

rgy

polic

ies i

nclu

ding

the

Fede

ral E

nerg

y Po

licy

Act

of 2

005

and

the

Fede

ral t

ax c

redi

ts o

f 200

6 an

d 20

07, w

eath

er a

nd it

s eff

ects

on

ener

gy b

ills,

and

com

petit

ion

with

all

mes

sage

s (m

essa

ge o

verlo

ad)

Ener

gy sa

ving

s, pe

ak d

eman

d re

duct

ion,

and

rela

ted

bill

redu

ctio

n,

envi

ronm

enta

l and

hea

lth b

enef

its

Impl

emen

tatio

n an

d su

ppor

t of c

ampa

igns

Med

ia b

uy c

ontra

cts,

ads,

pl

acem

ent,

reac

h, fr

eque

ncy,

m

essa

ges d

eliv

ered

Inpu

ts: F

unds

, sta

ff

expe

rienc

e, m

arke

t kno

wle

dge

and

appr

oach

to m

edia

and

ca

mpa

ign

Effe

ctiv

enes

s mon

itorin

g an

d ev

alua

tions

Incr

ease

d de

man

d fo

r ene

rgy

effic

ient

, dem

and

redu

ctio

n/sh

iftin

g an

d re

new

able

ene

rgy

actio

ns a

nd

equi

pmen

t

Con

sum

er a

war

enes

s and

un

ders

tand

ing

of w

hy to

mak

e ef

ficie

ncy,

load

shift

ing

and

rene

wab

le d

ecis

ions

Dec

isio

ns a

nd a

ctio

ns

rein

forc

ed

Act

ions

take

n to

incr

ease

ene

rgy

effic

ienc

y, sh

ift lo

ad a

nd a

dopt

re

new

able

ene

rgy

tech

nolo

gies

Posi

tive

exam

ples

and

wor

d-of

-m

outh

Inte

rmed

iate

and

L

ong-

Ter

m

Out

com

es(3

+ yr

s)

Con

sum

er a

war

enes

s and

un

ders

tand

ing

of h

ow to

take

ac

tions

for e

nerg

y ef

ficie

ncy,

lo

ad sh

iftin

g an

d re

new

able

en

ergy

ado

ptio

n

Appendix A

A-3

Res

iden

tial S

ecto

r L

ogic

Mod

el

Trai

ning

and

Te

chni

cal A

ssis

tanc

eR

ecru

iting

, Par

tner

ing

and

Col

labo

ratio

n

Dev

elop

ing

and

Impl

emen

ting

Prom

otio

nal/M

essa

ge

Cam

paig

ns a

nd

educ

atio

nal m

ater

ials

Act

iviti

es

Out

puts

Shor

t-T

erm

Out

com

es (1

-5 y

ears

)

Lon

g-T

erm

O

utco

mes

10+

yrs

Ret

aile

rs, m

anuf

actu

rers

, dis

tribu

tors

bu

ilder

s, co

ntra

ctor

s, co

mm

unity

co

ordi

nato

rs, b

uild

ing

perf

orm

ance

co

ntra

ctor

s, pa

ckag

ers,

and

key

educ

atio

n le

ader

s as p

artn

ers

Qua

lity

Ass

uran

ce

Rev

iew

and

m

onito

ring

Dev

elop

men

t and

pro

visi

on

of tr

aini

ng a

nd m

ater

ials

;W

ork

and

assi

st p

artn

ers

with

ava

ilabi

lity

and

prom

otio

n of

ene

rgy-

effic

ient

, ren

ewab

le a

nd lo

ad

man

agem

ent p

rodu

cts a

nd

serv

ices

Incr

ease

d av

aila

bilit

y an

d pr

oduc

t ran

ge fo

r hi

gh e

ffic

ienc

y, re

new

able

and

load

m

anag

emen

t pro

duct

s, bu

ildin

gs a

nd

serv

ices

(with

out N

YSE

RD

A su

pply

/mid

-m

arke

t ass

ista

nce)

Dat

a av

aila

ble

for r

evie

w; Q

A/

QC

revi

ews;

Fie

ld a

sses

smen

ts

of w

ork

and

train

ing;

ef

fect

iven

ess m

onito

ring;

PO

P us

e an

d pr

oper

labe

ling

Key

Ext

erna

l Inf

luen

ces:

inve

stm

ent c

limat

e, p

oliti

cal p

riorit

ies,

ener

gy p

rices

, cod

es a

nd st

anda

rds,

activ

ities

of n

on-N

YSE

RD

A e

ffic

ienc

y an

d re

new

able

eff

orts

, fed

eral

ene

rgy

polic

ies i

nclu

ding

the

Fede

ral E

nerg

y Po

licy

Act

of 2

005

and

the

Fede

ral t

ax c

redi

ts o

f 200

6 an

d 20

07, w

eath

er

and

its e

ffec

ts o

n en

ergy

bill

s, co

sts a

nd p

erfo

rman

ce o

f new

er, m

ore

effic

ient

tech

nolo

gies

, per

cept

ions

of t

he v

alue

of "

gree

n" b

uild

ings

and

LE

ED, a

ctiv

ities

of p

ublic

and

inst

itutio

nal p

urch

aser

s and

pro

ject

s, co

mpe

ting

prio

ritie

s for

tim

e an

d m

oney

, and

com

petit

ion

with

all

mes

sage

s (m

essa

ge o

verlo

ad)

Ret

aile

rs, m

anuf

actu

rers

, dis

tribu

tors

, hom

e bu

ilder

s, le

nder

s, an

d sc

hool

s rec

ogni

ze p

rofit

abili

ty/v

alue

of

prom

otin

g/ed

ucat

ing/

lend

ing

on h

igh

effic

ienc

y an

d re

new

able

pro

duct

s, bu

ildin

gs a

nd se

rvic

es (w

ithou

t N

YSE

RD

A su

pply

/mid

-mar

ket a

ssis

tanc

e)

Fina

ncia

l A

ssis

tanc

e

Proj

ects

ass

iste

d;C

oope

rativ

e ad

verti

sing

pl

aced

; Mar

ket s

hare

in

cent

ives

Inpu

ts: F

unds

, sta

ff, a

llies

, aw

aren

ess a

nd

cred

ibili

ty o

f EN

ERG

Y S

TAR

and

NY

SER

DA

, re

latio

nshi

ps w

ith k

ey st

akeh

olde

rs/m

arke

t act

ors

and

polic

y m

aker

s, an

d m

arke

t kno

wle

dge

Ad/

mes

sage

cam

paig

ns d

evel

oped

; m

edia

buy

s; G

et E

nerg

y $m

art

web

site

; On-

line

cam

paig

ns; S

peci

al

prom

otio

ns; E

duca

tiona

l mat

eria

l

Supp

ly, i

nfra

stru

ctur

e an

d de

man

d w

ork

toge

ther

to in

crea

se m

arke

t val

ues f

or

ENER

GY

STA

R la

bel,

hig

h ef

ficie

ncy,

re

new

able

and

load

man

agem

ent p

rodu

cts,

build

ings

, ser

vice

s; E

nerg

y co

nsci

ous s

ocie

ty

Qua

lifie

d m

arke

t act

ors;

In

crea

sed

avai

labi

lity

and

prod

uct r

ange

for h

igh

effic

ienc

y, re

new

able

and

load

m

anag

emen

t pro

duct

s, se

rvic

es a

nd o

ptio

ns

Incr

ease

d pr

opor

tion

of e

quip

men

t, ho

mes

and

serv

ices

pur

chas

ed a

re

ENER

GY

STA

R la

bele

d/hi

gh e

ffic

ienc

y eq

uipm

ent;C

omm

uniti

es a

nd

scho

ols m

ore

ener

gy e

ffic

ient

/ sus

tain

able

;En

ergy

savi

ngs,

peak

dem

and

redu

ctio

n, a

nd re

late

d bi

ll re

duct

ion,

en

viro

nmen

tal a

nd h

ealth

ben

efits

Ener

gy sa

ving

s, pe

ak d

eman

d re

duct

ion,

and

rela

ted

bill

redu

ctio

n, e

nviro

nmen

tal a

nd

heal

th b

enef

its

Incr

ease

d va

lid in

form

atio

n, k

now

ledg

e an

d pr

ogra

m-

supp

orte

d de

man

d fo

r EN

ERG

Y S

TAR

labe

led

and

high

eff

icie

ncy

prod

ucts

, hom

es, b

uild

ings

, ren

ewab

le

optio

ns, l

oad

man

agem

ent a

nd ra

te o

ptio

ns

Incr

ease

d de

man

d fo

r EN

ERG

Y S

TAR

la

bele

d, h

igh

effic

ienc

y, re

new

able

pr

oduc

ts, b

uild

ings

and

serv

ices

(with

out

NY

SER

DA

supp

ly/m

id-m

arke

t ass

ista

nce)

Inte

rmed

iate

-T

erm

Out

com

es(5

-10

yrs)

Incr

ease

d pu

rcha

ses o

f hi

gh e

ffic

ienc

y,

rene

wab

le a

nd lo

ad

man

agem

ent p

rodu

cts

and

serv

ices

Mai

ntai

n an

d in

crea

se

parti

cipa

tion

and

supp

ort

from

mar

ket i

nfra

stru

ctur

e ac

tors

Polic

y, p

lann

ing

and

com

mun

ity c

oord

inat

ion

and

deve

lopm

ent

Age

ncy,

pro

gram

, cu

rric

ulum

s and

com

mun

ity

com

mitt

ees,

plan

s and

po

licy;

Col

labo

ratio

n w

ith

othe

r eff

icie

ncy

and

dem

and

resp

onse

pro

gram

s and

or

gani

zatio

ns

Age

ncie

s cre

ate

polic

ies

cons

iste

nt w

ith/s

uppo

rting

en

ergy

eff

icie

ncy

and

rene

wab

le

ener

gy, c

omm

unity

cha

mpi

ons,

curr

icul

ums a

ppro

ved

and

prog

ram

s lev

erag

ed

Polic

ies,

com

mun

ity

cham

pion

s, cu

rric

ulum

s all

supp

ort e

ffic

ienc

y in

fras

truct

ure

*The

Gen

eral

Aw

aren

ess p

rogr

am, a

lthou

gh su

mm

ariz

ed w

ithin

this

resi

dent

ial

sect

or-le

vel l

ogic

dia

gram

pro

vide

s im

porta

nt in

form

atio

n an

d ed

ucat

ion

on e

nerg

yef

ficie

ncy

and

rene

wab

le e

nerg

y op

tions

to ta

rget

ed N

ew Y

ork

com

mer

cial

and

in

dust

rial m

arke

t act

ors a

s wel

l

Appendix A

A-4

Low

-Inc

ome

Sect

or L

ogic

Mod

el

Act

iviti

es

Out

puts

Shor

t-Ter

m

Out

com

es

Long

er-T

erm

O

utco

mes

Inpu

ts:

SBC

and

oth

er fu

nds,

staf

f ex

perie

nce,

con

tract

ors,

partn

er a

genc

ies

Age

ncy

Partn

erin

g,

Prog

ram

Info

rmat

ion

Rec

ruitm

ent/

Trai

ning

/ C

ertif

icat

ion

Polic

y c

hang

es a

t pa

rtner

ship

age

ncie

s to

pro

mot

e en

ergy

ef

ficie

ncy,

cha

nges

to

low

-inco

me

hous

ing

Ver

ifica

tion,

Q

A/Q

C

Inte

rmed

iate

- Te

rm

Out

com

es

Fiel

d as

sess

men

ts o

f co

ntra

ctor

wor

k,

conf

irmed

savi

ngs,

resu

lts c

omm

unic

ated

Dire

ct In

stal

ls/

Ener

gy S

ervi

ces/

Fina

ncia

l Ass

ista

nce

Ext

erna

l Inf

luen

ces:

Rul

es a

nd re

gula

tions

at s

tate

and

fede

ral h

ousi

ng a

genc

ies.

Oth

er st

ate

and

fede

ral e

nerg

y po

licie

s. A

genc

y st

ruct

ures

, leg

isla

ted

proc

esse

s. U

tility

reve

nue

de-c

oupl

ing.

Gen

eral

eco

nom

ic c

ondi

tions

and

ene

rgy

pric

es. C

osts

and

per

form

ance

of e

mer

ging

tech

nolo

gies

. Oth

er h

ouse

hold

exp

ense

s. W

eath

er

impa

cts.

Inte

rest

rate

s. M

aste

r ver

sus s

ub-m

eter

ing.

Per

cept

ions

of i

mpo

rtanc

e of

glo

bal c

limat

e ch

ange

. Div

ersi

ty a

nd d

ispe

rsio

n of

low

-inco

me

popu

latio

n ac

ross

Age

ncy

partn

ersh

ips

esta

blis

hed,

pro

gram

in

form

atio

n an

d as

sist

ance

av

aila

ble,

out

reac

h se

rvic

es

crea

ted

Dire

ct in

stal

ls, r

educ

ed

pric

e he

atin

g fu

el,

ince

ntiv

es/fi

nanc

ing

optio

ns a

vaila

ble

for

ener

gy e

ffic

ient

hou

sing

/m

easu

res

Hou

sing

dev

elop

ers,

ener

gy

serv

ices

con

tract

ors,

mid

-m

arke

t par

tner

s rec

ruite

d.

Trai

ning

and

cer

tific

atio

ns

avai

labl

e. A

udit

proc

edur

es

esta

blis

hed

HEA

P,

CBO

s,

WAP

, D

SS,

utili

ties,

seni

ors/

hous

ing

agen

cies

, "gr

een"

age

ncie

s

End-

use

cons

umer

s,en

ergy

effi

cien

t bui

ldin

g sp

ecia

lists

, con

trac

tors

, co

nsul

tant

s, le

nder

s, au

dito

rs, h

eatin

g fu

el

vend

ors

Vend

ors

Con

trac

tors

, bui

ldin

g ow

ners

/dev

elop

ers,

audi

tors

,co

nsul

tant

s, le

nder

sM

arke

t Act

ors

EE b

ecom

es st

anda

rd p

art o

f low

-in

com

e ho

usin

g/eq

uipm

ent

deci

sion

s

Mar

ket i

nfra

stru

ctur

e es

tabl

ishe

d to

ef

fect

ivel

y se

rve

low

-inco

me

cust

omer

s thr

ough

out s

tate

Mor

e ef

ficie

nt re

side

ntia

l/lo

w-in

com

e bu

ildin

g st

ock,

su

stai

ned

ener

gy sa

ving

s

Impr

oved

env

ironm

enta

l qu

ality

, eco

nom

ic w

ell-

bein

g.

Hou

sing

aud

ited,

EE

mea

sure

s in

stal

led,

hom

es w

eath

eriz

ed,

mor

e ef

ficie

nt h

ousi

ng

cons

truct

ed, h

eatin

g fu

el

proc

ured

, hea

ting

equi

pmen

t re

paire

d

Ener

gy se

rvic

es (

e.g.

, m

aint

enan

ce/re

pairs

), te

chni

cal b

uild

ing

assi

stan

ce, a

udits

, cus

tom

er

ener

gy/fi

nanc

ial e

duca

tion

Incr

ease

d aw

aren

ess a

nd

unde

rsta

ndin

g of

low

-inco

me

prog

ram

s and

spec

ific

EE

oppo

rtuni

ties,

elig

ible

cu

stom

ers a

nd p

roje

cts

iden

tifie

d

Mid

-mar

ket p

rogr

am

parti

cipa

nts r

ecru

ited

and

train

ed

kW

, kW

h an

d th

erm

sa

ving

s, bi

ll re

duct

ions

, im

prov

ed a

ir qu

ality

, co

mfo

rt an

d sa

fety

Parti

cipa

nts m

ore

know

ledg

eabl

e ab

out E

E be

nefit

s and

opt

ions

Bui

lder

s, co

ntra

ctor

s, ve

ndor

s and

m

id-s

tream

act

ors f

indi

ng e

ffic

ienc

y op

tions

and

serv

ices

pro

fitab

le

thro

ugh

the

prog

ram

s Mar

ket p

artic

ipan

ts a

ctiv

ely

prom

otin

g E

E pr

oduc

ts,

serv

ices

(a

udits

, ene

rgy

anal

ysis

) and

hou

sing

(e

.g.,

EN

ERG

Y S

TAR

)

Dem

and

for E

E pr

oduc

ts, s

ervi

ces

and

hous

ing

cont

inue

s to

incr

ease

(as

allo

wed

by

inco

me

cons

train

ts)

Cus

tom

ers e

xper

ienc

e re

duce

d en

ergy

cos

ts,

impr

oved

air

qual

ity,

com

fort

and

safe

ty

Sust

aine

d EE

mar

ket i

n th

e lo

w-in

com

e se

ctor

Red

uced

ene

rgy

cost

bu

rden

for l

ow-in

com

e ho

useh

olds

Polic

y an

d Pl

anni

ng

Pro

gram

s coo

rdin

atio

n w

ith lo

w-in

com

e ho

usin

g sp

ecifi

ying

age

ncie

s (e.

g.,

HU

D),

LIFE

mee

tings

and

co

nfer

ence

s org

aniz

ed a

nd

cond

ucte

d; C

olla

bora

tion

with

oth

er e

ffic

ienc

y an

d de

man

d re

spon

se p

rogr

ams

and

orga

niza

tionsPr

ogra

m st

aff,

polic

y m

aker

s,re

gula

tors

, low

-inco

me

ener

gy

serv

ice

prov

ider

s

Incr

ease

d aw

aren

ess o

f lo

w-in

com

e en

ergy

is

sues

and

bes

t pra

ctic

es

by p

rogr

am st

aff,

polic

y m

aker

s, ho

usin

g ag

enci

es

SBC

III G

oals

A

djus

t for

Q

A/

QC

find

ings

A-5

R&

D S

ecto

r L

ogic

Mod

el

Activ

ities

Outp

uts

Shor

t- an

d In

term

ediat

e-Te

rm

Outc

omes

Long

er-T

erm

Outc

omes

Exte

rnal

Influ

ence

s:Av

ailab

ility o

f priv

ate c

apita

l for R

&D in

vest

ment

, ene

rgy

cost

s, co

st/p

erfor

manc

e of c

ompe

ting

and

comp

lemen

tary

techn

olog

ies, e

nd u

sers

' willi

ngne

ss to

adop

t new

tech

nolog

ies, a

ttitu

des t

oward

s fun

ding

high

-ris

k R&

D ac

tivitie

s, fu

ndin

g an

d ac

tivitie

s of o

ther

R&D

initia

tives

, poli

tical

/legi

slativ

e/reg

ulato

ry c

hang

es, c

hang

es in

perc

eptio

ns of

glob

al wa

rmin

g

Proj

ect D

evelo

pmen

t an

d Se

lectio

nSt

udy,

Prov

e Con

cept

sD

evelo

p New

or

Impr

oved

Pro

duct

Prod

uct

Dem

onst

ratio

ns an

d Ed

ucati

on

Inpu

ts:

NYSE

RDA

pro

gram

fu

ndin

g, st

aff, N

YSER

DA

R&D

comp

eten

cies

Proj

ect t

ypes

pr

iorit

ized,

el

igibil

ity

esta

blish

ed fo

r so

licita

tions

Tech

nolo

gy a

nd p

rodu

ct

feasib

ility

studie

s, da

ta co

llecte

d, pa

pers

and

artic

les w

ritten

on

know

ledge

gaine

d

Inte

rmed

iate s

cale

prot

otyp

es de

velo

ped,

pate

nts s

ecur

ed

Prod

uct d

emon

strate

d an

d fie

ld im

pleme

ntati

ons

comp

leted

, edu

catio

nal

mate

rials

publ

ished

, wo

rksh

ops/

semi

nars

co

nduc

ted, a

naly

tical

tools

PONs

/RFP

s iss

ued,

prop

osals

re

view

ed an

d se

lected

for

fund

ing

Info

rmat

ion sh

ared w

ith

R&D

comm

unity

Tech

nolog

y perf

orma

nce/

cost

spec

ifica

tions

im

prov

ing, in

teres

t/inv

estm

ent in

prod

uct

grow

ing

Incr

ease

d pro

duct

visib

ility,

cre

dible

data

on p

erfor

man

ce in

di

fferen

t con

texts

, cos

ts an

d im

pacts

avail

able

to R

&D

comm

unity

, ear

ly ter

m ad

opter

s and

poli

cy m

akers

Busin

ess i

nfra

stru

cture

in pl

ace

to su

ppor

t pro

ducts

it ha

s nu

rture

d, in

creas

ed av

ailab

ility

and

attrac

tiven

ess o

f tec

hnol

ogies

and

serv

ices

Prod

ucers

, sup

plier

s, en

d us

ers s

ee p

rodu

ct va

lue an

d kn

ow h

ow to

appl

y tec

hnol

ogy,

new

indus

try

stand

ards

Busin

ess

Infra

struc

ture/

Mar

ket

Deve

lopm

ent S

uppo

rt

Train

ing a

nd ce

rtific

ation

of

mark

et ac

tors

avail

able,

pr

oduc

tion

and i

nsta

llatio

n inc

entiv

es av

ailab

le, bu

sines

s pa

rtner

ing an

d pla

nning

as

sistan

ce av

ailab

le

Stra

tegic

and f

lexibl

e pro

gram

po

rtfol

io de

velop

ed to

pro

mot

e pu

blic

bene

fits

Prod

uct D

evel

opm

ent

Dem

onstr

ation

Proj

ect M

anag

emen

tRe

sear

ch fo

r Pol

icy

Stud

ies to

Info

rm

Polic

y an

d R&

D Co

mmu

nity

Agen

cy pa

rtners

hips

form

ed, s

tudie

s co

mmis

sione

d, po

licy-

relev

ant r

esea

rch, w

hite

pape

rs, w

orks

hops

Incr

ease

d aw

aren

ess a

nd

unde

rstan

ding

of re

levan

t te

chnic

al, sc

ientif

ic an

d ins

titut

ional

issue

s rela

ted t

o R&

D ba

rriers

, env

ironm

enta

l im

pacts

, pub

lic ag

ency

co

ordin

atio

n

Info

rmed

pol

icies

and p

rogr

ams

deve

loped

, R&

D op

portu

nitie

s id

entif

ied,

enha

nced

agen

cy

coor

dina

tion,

stand

ards

and

regul

ation

s de

velo

ped,f

indin

gs

publ

icize

d

Lab

prot

otyp

es d

evel

oped

, kn

owled

ge of

futu

re R&

D an

d pr

oduc

t opt

ions

Prod

uct T

estin

g and

Re

finem

ent

Prod

ucts

teste

d in

lab an

d rea

l-wor

ld se

tting

s, te

st da

ta av

ailab

le to

the

R&D

comm

unity

Prod

uct r

efine

d acc

ordin

g to

less

ons l

earn

ed

Prod

uct p

erfo

rman

ce pr

oven

an

d int

rodu

ced i

nto t

he

mark

et, c

osts

decr

easin

g

Comm

ercia

l sca

le pr

oduc

t de

velo

ped

and

poten

tial

demo

nstra

ted

Pre-

deplo

ymen

t

Know

ledge

gaine

d fo

r fut

ure R

&D an

d pro

duct

s, fir

ms su

pply

ing ne

w pr

oduc

ts h

ave

credib

ility

and

are ec

onom

ically

viab

le, m

arke

t inf

rastr

uctu

re su

ppor

ts in

creas

ed

dema

nd fo

r new

pro

duct

s

Envi

ronm

enta

l ben

efits

, Ene

rgy

bene

fits (

more

relia

ble p

ower

gene

ration

, incre

ased

energ

y/lo

ad m

anag

emen

t, inc

reas

ed en

ergy

effic

iency

), Eco

nomi

c ben

efits

(new

com

panie

s fo

rmed

, New

Yor

k job

s cre

ated

/reta

ined

, cos

t of r

egula

tory

comp

lianc

e is r

educ

ed)

Incr

ease

d awa

renes

s of

techn

olog

y op

tions

, com

mon

know

ledge

base

esta

blish

ed

Tech

nolo

gy p

erfo

rman

ce

incre

ases

, mile

stone

s ac

comp

lishe

d, pr

oduc

t sta

ndar

ds es

tabli

shed

Incr

ease

in tr

ained

/cert

ified

mar

ket

acto

rs, gr

eater

numb

er of

energ

y/tec

hnol

ogy p

rodu

cers

ope

ratin

g in

Ne

w Yo

rk St

ate,

allian

ces f

orme

d, inn

ovat

ive b

usine

ss s

trate

gies

im

plem

ente

d, red

uced

prod

uct a

nd

insta

llatio

n co

sts

Appendix A

A-6

Cle

an E

nerg

y In

fras

truc

ture

Log

ic M

odel

Act

iviti

es

Out

puts

Shor

t- an

d In

term

edia

te-

Term

O

utco

mes

Long

er-T

erm

O

utco

mes

Ext

erna

l Inf

luen

ces:

Publ

ic a

nd p

rivat

e ca

pita

l for

cle

an e

nerg

y in

vest

men

ts, c

ompe

titio

n fr

om o

ther

stat

es to

recr

uit c

lean

ene

rgy

firm

s, c

hang

ing

ener

gy c

osts

, cos

t/per

form

ance

of c

ompe

ting

and

com

plem

enta

ry te

chno

logi

es, e

nd u

sers

' w

illin

gnes

s to

adop

t new

tech

nolo

gies

, per

cept

ions

abo

ut g

loba

l war

min

g, p

oliti

cal/l

egis

lativ

e/re

gula

tory

cha

nges

Proj

ect D

evel

opm

ent

and

Sele

ctio

nM

arke

t Bar

riers

R

esea

rch

Inpu

ts:

NY

SER

DA

pro

gram

fu

ndin

g, st

aff,

NY

SER

DA

R&

D

com

pete

ncie

s

Proj

ect t

ypes

pr

iorit

ized

, el

igib

ility

es

tabl

ishe

d fo

r so

licita

tions

Res

earc

h st

udie

s co

mpl

eted

, sta

keho

lder

w

orks

hops

con

duct

ed,

barr

iers

iden

tifie

d

Educ

atio

nal m

ater

ials

(b

roch

ures

, rep

orts

) pu

blis

hed,

wor

ksho

ps/

sem

inar

s con

duct

ed,

anal

ytic

al to

ols a

vaila

ble

Stra

tegi

es d

evel

oped

to

addr

ess t

echn

ical

, ec

onom

ic, i

nfor

mat

ion

and

inst

itutio

nal b

arrie

rs

Pote

ntia

l end

-use

rs h

ave

incr

ease

d aw

aren

ess a

nd

know

ledg

e o

f cle

an e

nerg

y co

sts,

bene

fits,

oper

atio

ns;

unde

rsta

nd h

ow to

acq

uire

it;

con

fiden

t in

perf

orm

ance

PON

s is

sued

, pr

opos

als s

elec

ted

for f

undi

ng

Tech

nica

l, ec

onom

ic,

info

rmat

ion

and

inst

itutio

nal b

arrie

rs

over

com

e (in

clud

ing

chan

ges t

o re

gula

tions

, st

anda

rds)

End-

user

s mor

e ac

cept

ing

of

clea

n en

ergy

tech

nolo

gy,

incr

ease

d de

man

d fo

r in

stal

latio

ns

Incr

ease

in tr

aine

d/ce

rtifie

d cl

ean

ener

gy in

stal

lers

and

pr

ofes

sion

als,

new

trai

ning

an

d ce

rtific

atio

n pr

ogra

ms

deve

lope

d, sc

hool

s/pr

ogra

ms

accr

edite

d

Trai

ning

and

cer

tific

atio

n av

aila

ble

for c

lean

-ene

rgy

inst

alle

rs, c

ode

offic

ials

, in

spec

tors

, and

mar

kete

rs

Stra

tegi

c an

d fle

xibl

e pr

ogra

m

portf

olio

de

velo

ped

Trai

ning

and

C

ertif

icat

ion

Info

rmat

ion

for

Polic

y an

d T

echn

olog

y D

evel

opm

ent

Pre-

Dep

loym

ent A

ssis

tanc

e

Out

reac

h an

d Ed

ucat

ion

to E

nd-

Use

rs

Ince

ntiv

es fo

r cle

an e

nerg

y sy

stem

inst

alle

rs a

vaila

ble

(pas

sed

thro

ugh

to e

nd-

user

s to

redu

ce c

osts

)

Out

reac

h an

d in

cent

ives

to

attra

ct c

lean

ene

rgy

busi

ness

es to

New

Yor

k St

ate,

bus

ines

s par

tner

ing,

pl

anni

ng a

nd te

chni

cal

assi

stan

ce a

vaila

ble

Gre

ater

num

ber/v

arie

ty o

f cl

ean

ener

gy sy

stem

des

igne

rs,

man

ufac

ture

rs, d

istri

buto

rs

and

serv

ice

firm

s ope

ratin

g in

St

ate,

star

t-ups

ass

iste

d,

inno

vativ

e bu

sine

ss st

rate

gies

im

plem

ente

d, a

llian

ces f

orm

ed

Inst

alla

tion

Ince

ntiv

es

Cle

an E

nerg

y B

usin

ess R

ecru

itmen

t an

d A

ssis

tanc

e

Div

erse

and

pro

fitab

le

infr

astru

ctur

e of

cle

an e

nerg

y m

anuf

actu

ring

and

dist

ribut

ion

firm

s in

the

Stat

e an

d as

soci

ated

jobs

cre

ated

, re

duce

d sy

stem

cos

ts d

ue to

in

nova

tive

busi

ness

pra

ctic

es

Red

uced

cos

t of i

nsta

llatio

ns

and

insp

ectio

ns, i

ncre

ased

cl

ean

ener

gy sy

stem

pe

rfor

man

ce a

nd re

liabi

lity,

re

duce

d op

erat

ing

cost

s

Mar

ket i

nfra

stru

ctur

e is

read

y to

supp

ly a

nd

serv

e in

crea

sed

dem

and

for c

lean

ene

rgy

Appendix A

A-7

Dis

trib

uted

Ene

rgy

Res

ourc

es L

ogic

Mod

el

Act

iviti

es

Out

puts

Shor

t- an

d In

term

edia

te-

Term

O

utco

mes

Long

er-T

erm

O

utco

mes

Ext

erna

l Inf

luen

ces:

Priv

ate

capi

tal f

or R

&D

inve

stm

ent,

ener

gy c

osts

, cos

t/per

form

ance

of c

ompe

ting

and

com

plem

enta

ry te

chno

logi

es, e

nd u

sers

' will

ingn

ess t

o ad

opt n

ew te

chno

logi

es, f

undi

ng a

nd a

ctiv

ities

of o

ther

R&

D in

itiat

ives

, po

litic

al/le

gist

lativ

e/reg

ulat

ory

chan

ges

Proj

ect D

evel

opm

ent

and

Sele

ctio

n

Pow

er S

yste

ms

Feas

ibili

ty a

nd R

elat

ed

Stud

ies

DG

-CH

P P

rodu

ct

Dem

onst

ratio

ns

Inpu

ts:

NY

SER

DA

pro

gram

fu

ndin

g, st

aff,

NY

SER

DA

R

&D

com

pete

ncie

s

Proj

ect t

ypes

pr

iorit

ized

, el

igib

ility

es

tabl

ishe

d fo

r so

licita

tions

DER

pow

er sy

stem

s pr

oduc

t and

tech

nolo

gy

feas

ibili

ty st

udie

s, be

st

prac

tice

and

busi

ness

mod

el

stud

ies,

regu

lato

ry is

sues

st

udie

s

Inno

vativ

e D

G-

CH

P sy

stem

de

mon

stra

tions

in

stal

led

Mos

t via

ble

and

best

pe

rfor

min

g pr

oduc

ts,

tech

nolo

gies

, and

stra

tegi

es

iden

tifie

d

Ove

rall

grow

th in

the D

ER p

ower

syst

ems m

arke

ts in

New

Yor

k, p

rogr

am re

sults

inco

rpor

ated

into

NY

SER

DA

dep

loym

ent

prog

ram

s (EE

S/R

EAP)

, im

prov

ed sy

stem

-wid

e re

liabi

lity,

pea

k lo

ad re

duct

ions

PON

s an

d R

FPs

Issu

ed, p

ropo

sals

re

view

ed a

nd

sele

cted

for

fund

ing

Info

rmat

ion

for

Polic

ymak

ers

Stak

ehol

ders

hav

e in

crea

sed

awar

enes

s and

kno

wle

dge

of

DG

-CH

P in

stal

latio

ns,

resu

lts, b

est p

ract

ices

DG

-CH

P In

tegr

ated

Dat

a Sy

stem

web

site

, whi

te

pape

rs, c

ase

stud

ies,

stak

ehol

der c

onfe

renc

es

and

wor

ksho

ps,

tech

nolo

gy tr

ansf

er st

udie

s

Stak

ehol

ders

see

valu

e of

D

ER p

ower

syst

ems,

cons

ider

them

relia

ble,

in

crea

se in

vest

men

t in

the

tech

nolo

gy

Stra

tegi

c an

d fle

xibl

e pr

ogra

m p

ortfo

lios

deve

lope

d

Com

mun

icat

ion

with

st

ate

and

fede

ral p

ublic

po

licy

offic

ials

Polic

ies a

nd st

anda

rds

supp

ort

DER

pow

er

syst

ems

Polic

ymak

ers u

nder

stan

d re

gula

tory

bar

riers

Perf

orm

ance

m

onito

red,

cre

dibl

e da

ta o

n pe

rfor

man

ce,

cost

s, an

d im

pact

s av

aila

ble

Pow

er S

yste

ms

Prod

uct D

evel

opm

ent

Prot

otyp

es d

evel

oped

and

re

fined

, tes

t dat

a av

aila

ble

Prod

uct a

nd te

chno

logy

pe

rfor

man

ce in

crea

ses,

tech

nica

l mile

ston

es a

ttain

ed

Prod

ucts

com

mer

cial

ized

and

ne

w b

usin

ess m

odel

s de

velo

ped

to d

eliv

er n

ew

DER

pow

er sy

stem

pr

oduc

ts a

nd te

chno

logi

es

Info

rmat

ion

D

isse

min

atio

n

Perm

ittin

g, st

anda

rd

inte

rcon

nect

ion

requ

irem

ents

, util

ity

stan

dby

serv

ice,

tarif

fs

addr

esse

d

Syst

ems r

efin

ed

acco

rdin

g to

less

ons

lear

ned

Perf

orm

ance

-bas

ed

ince

ntiv

es u

tiliz

ed to

re

plic

ate

succ

essf

ul D

G-

CH

P de

mon

stra

tions

at

low

er ri

sk

Bro

ader

repl

icat

ion

of D

G-C

HP

syst

ems

Appendix A

A-8

Dem

and

Res

pons

e an

d In

nova

tive

Rat

e R

esea

rch

Log

ic M

odel

Appendix A

Act

iviti

es

Out

puts

Shor

t- an

d In

term

edia

te-

Term

O

utco

mes

Long

er-T

erm

O

utco

mes

Ext

erna

l Inf

luen

ces:

Priv

ate

capi

tal f

or R

&D

inve

stm

ent,

ener

gy c

osts

, cos

t/per

form

ance

of c

ompe

ting

and

com

plem

enta

ry te

chno

logi

es, e

nd u

sers

' will

ingn

ess t

o ad

opt n

ew te

chno

logi

es, f

undi

ng a

nd a

ctiv

ities

of o

ther

R&

D in

itiat

ives

, po

litic

al/le

gist

lativ

e/reg

ulat

ory

chan

ges

Proj

ect D

evel

opm

ent

and

Sele

ctio

n

Tech

nica

l and

Eco

nom

ic

Feas

ibili

ty S

tudi

es

Inpu

ts:

NY

SER

DA

pro

gram

fu

ndin

g, st

aff,

NY

SER

DA

R

&D

com

pete

ncie

s

Proj

ect t

ypes

pr

iorit

ized

, el

igib

ility

es

tabl

ishe

d fo

r so

licita

tions

Flex

ible

load

and

tim

e se

nsiti

ve ra

tes t

echn

ical

an

d ec

onom

ic fe

asib

ility

st

udie

s, da

ta a

vaila

ble

Mos

t tec

hnol

ogic

ally

and

ec

onom

ical

ly v

iabl

e fle

xibl

e lo

ad sy

stem

sid

entif

ied

for d

emon

stra

tion

Incr

ease

d m

arke

tpla

ce

acce

ptan

ce o

f tim

e-se

nsiti

ve ra

te

prog

ram

s and

flex

ible

lo

ad te

chno

logi

es fo

r sm

all c

usto

mer

s

Peak

load

redu

ctio

ns, c

ost s

avin

gs fo

r sm

all c

usto

mer

s, sy

stem

relia

bilit

y in

crea

sed,

sust

aina

ble

busi

ness

dev

elop

ed fo

r equ

ipm

ent s

uppl

iers

an

d tim

e-se

nsiti

ve ra

te p

rovi

ders

PON

s an

d R

FPs

issu

ed, p

ropo

sals

re

view

ed a

nd

sele

cted

for

fund

ing

Info

rmat

ion

Dis

sem

inat

ion

Dem

onst

ratio

ns a

nd p

ilot p

roje

cts

impl

emen

ted

in re

side

ntia

l and

co

mm

erci

al b

uild

ings

to a

sses

s fle

xibl

e lo

ad

tech

nolo

gies

, tim

e-se

nsiti

ve ra

tes

and

prom

isin

g bu

sine

ss m

odel

s

Stra

tegi

c an

d fle

xibl

e pr

ogra

m

portf

olio

s dev

elop

ed

Com

mun

icat

ion

abou

t de

mon

stra

tions

and

pilo

t pe

rfor

man

ce w

ith

stak

ehol

ders

Incr

ease

d aw

aren

ess o

f the

be

nefit

s of

time-

sens

itive

ra

tes a

nd fl

exib

le lo

ad

tech

nolo

gy a

mon

g en

ergy

se

rvic

e co

mpa

nies

, eq

uipm

ent m

anuf

actu

rers

an

d su

pplie

rs, r

esid

entia

l an

d co

mm

erci

al e

nd-u

sers

Perf

orm

ance

mon

itore

d,

cred

ible

dat

a on

beh

avio

ral,

econ

omic

, and

pea

k lo

ad

impa

cts a

vaila

ble

Dem

onst

ratio

ns o

f Fle

xibl

e Lo

ad T

echn

olog

ies,

Tim

e-Se

nsiti

ve R

ate

and

New

B

usin

ess M

odel

s

Tech

nolo

gy a

nd b

usin

ess

mod

els r

efin

ed a

ccor

ding

to

less

ons l

earn

ed

Mor

e sm

all

cust

omer

s pa

rtici

pate

in

who

lesa

le a

nd lo

cal

dem

and

resp

onse

pr

ogra

ms

Dev

elop

men

t of

inno

vativ

e el

ectri

c se

rvic

e ra

tes b

y en

ergy

serv

ices

co

mpa

nies

Incr

ease

d te

chno

logy

pe

rfor

man

ce, o

ptim

al ra

te

stru

ctur

es d

evel

oped

, bus

ines

s m

odel

s dev

elop

ed to

max

imiz

e lo

ad re

duct

ions

and

incr

ease

re

venu

es

Gre

ater

var

iety

of

relia

ble

flexi

ble

load

pro

duct

s and

tim

e-se

nsiti

ve

rate

s in

mar

ketp

lace

A-9

Ele

ctri

c T

rans

port

atio

n L

ogic

Mod

el

Act

iviti

es

Out

puts

Shor

t- an

d In

term

edia

te-

Term

O

utco

mes

Long

er-T

erm

O

utco

mes

Ext

erna

l Inf

luen

ces:

Priv

ate

capi

tal f

or R

&D

inve

stm

ent,

ener

gy c

osts

, cos

t/per

form

ance

of c

ompe

ting

and

com

plem

enta

ry te

chno

logi

es, e

nd u

sers

' will

ingn

ess t

o ad

opt n

ew te

chno

logi

es, f

undi

ng a

nd a

ctiv

ities

of o

ther

R&

D in

itiat

ives

, po

litic

al/le

gist

lativ

e/reg

ulat

ory

chan

ges

Proj

ect D

evel

opm

ent

and

Sele

ctio

nPr

oduc

t/Tec

hnol

ogy

Nee

ds, F

easi

bilit

y an

d R

elat

ed S

tudi

es

Prod

uct D

evel

opm

ent

and

Test

ing

Dem

onst

ratio

ns a

nd

Kno

wle

dge

Dis

sem

inat

ion

Inpu

ts:

NY

SER

DA

prog

ram

fu

ndin

g, st

aff,

NY

SER

DA

R

&D

com

pete

ncie

s

Proj

ect t

ypes

pr

iorit

ized

, el

igib

ility

es

tabl

ishe

d fo

r so

licita

tions

Mar

ket s

tudi

es/p

rodu

ct

need

s ass

essm

ents

, co

ncep

tual

tech

nolo

gy

eval

uatio

ns, p

rodu

ct

feas

ibili

ty s

tudi

es

Prot

otyp

es d

evel

oped

and

re

fined

, tes

t dat

a av

aila

ble,

pa

tent

s sec

ured

Prod

ucts

dem

onst

rate

d an

d fie

ld im

plem

enta

tions

co

mpl

eted

, res

ults

pu

blis

hed,

con

fere

nce

pres

enta

tions

PON

s Is

sued

Mos

t via

ble

and

best

pe

rfor

min

g te

chno

logi

es

iden

tifie

d, fu

ture

pro

duct

/re

sear

ch n

eeds

iden

tifie

d

Tech

nolo

gy p

erfo

rman

ce

incr

ease

sC

redi

ble

data

on

perf

orm

ance

, cos

ts a

nd

impa

cts a

vaila

ble

New

com

pani

es fo

rmed

, New

Yor

k jo

bs c

reat

ed/

reta

ined

, cos

t of r

egul

ator

y co

mpl

ianc

e is

redu

ced

Incr

ease

d en

ergy

eff

icie

ncy

of c

omm

uter

rail/

subw

ay sy

stem

s, in

crea

sed

use

of o

ff-p

eak

pow

er, i

ncre

ased

ele

ctric

ity re

liabi

lity,

redu

ced

ener

gy c

osts

for t

rans

porta

tion

owne

rs a

nd e

nd-u

sers

, m

obili

ty b

enef

its fo

r end

-use

rs, r

educ

ed p

etro

leum

use

, gre

enho

use

gase

s and

crit

eria

em

issi

ons

Prop

osal

s re

view

ed a

nd

sele

cted

for

fund

ing

New

tech

nolo

gies

ado

pted

in

com

petit

ive

mar

kets

, in

crea

sed

sale

s and

roya

lties

Prod

ucer

s, su

pplie

rs, e

nd

user

s see

tech

nolo

gy v

alue

an

d kn

ow h

ow to

app

ly

tech

nolo

gy

Tech

nolo

gies

are

fu

nctio

nally

via

ble,

co

mpa

tible

, cer

tifie

d, a

nd

finan

cing

is a

vaila

ble

Dev

elop

men

t cos

ts d

ecre

ase

Com

mer

cial

izat

ion

Supp

ort,

Prod

uct

Posi

tioni

ng

Targ

et m

arke

ts id

entif

ied,

bu

sine

ss p

lans

dev

elop

ed/

enha

nced

Mar

ketin

g pl

ans/

finan

cial

pl

ans a

nd c

ompe

titiv

e st

rate

gies

dev

elop

ed,

prod

uct p

ositi

onin

g st

udie

s co

mpl

eted

, stra

tegi

c al

lianc

es fo

rmed

Bus

ines

s inf

rast

ruct

ure

supp

orts

pro

duct

s it h

as

nurtu

red,

pro

duct

s rea

dy fo

r co

mm

erci

aliz

atio

n

Stra

tegi

c an

d fle

xibl

e pr

ogra

m p

ortfo

lio

deve

lope

d

Info

rmat

ion

for

Polic

y an

d T

echn

olog

y D

evel

opm

ent

Prod

uct D

evel

opm

ent

Dem

onst

ratio

n an

d Pr

e-D

eplo

ymen

t

Appendix A

A-10

Indu

stri

al a

nd M

unic

ipal

Pro

cess

Eff

icie

ncy

Log

ic M

odel

Act

iviti

es

Out

puts

Shor

t- an

d In

term

edia

te-

Term

O

utco

mes

Long

er-T

erm

O

utco

mes

Ext

erna

l Inf

luen

ces:

Priv

ate

and

mun

icip

al c

apita

l for

R&

D in

vest

men

t, en

ergy

cos

ts, c

ost/p

erfo

rman

ce o

f com

petin

g an

d co

mpl

emen

tary

tech

nolo

gies

, end

use

rs' w

illin

gnes

s to

adop

t new

tech

nolo

gies

, fun

ding

and

act

iviti

es o

f oth

er R

&D

in

itiat

ives

, pol

itica

l/le

gist

lativ

e/re

gula

tory

cha

nges

Proj

ect D

evel

opm

ent

and

Sele

ctio

nR

esea

rch

and

Feas

ibili

ty

Stud

ies

Prod

uct D

evel

opm

ent

and

Test

ing

Dem

onst

ratio

ns a

nd

Kno

wle

dge

Dis

sem

inat

ion

Inpu

ts:

NY

SER

DA

pro

gram

fu

ndin

g, st

aff,

NY

SER

DA

R

&D

com

pete

ncie

s

Proj

ect t

ypes

prio

ritiz

ed,

crite

ria e

stab

lishe

d fo

r so

licita

tions

Con

cept

ual t

echn

olog

y ev

alua

tions

, pro

duct

and

pr

oces

s fea

sibi

lity

stud

ies

Prot

otyp

es d

evel

oped

and

re

fined

, tes

t dat

a av

aila

ble,

pa

tent

s sec

ured

Prod

ucts

dem

onst

rate

d,

resu

lts p

ublis

hed,

co

nfer

ence

pre

sent

atio

ns,

web

site

info

rmat

ion

Prom

isin

g, v

iabl

e an

d be

st

perf

orm

ing

tech

nolo

gies

and

pr

oces

ses i

dent

ified

Tech

nolo

gy p

erfo

rman

ce

incr

ease

sC

redi

ble

data

on

perf

orm

ance

, cos

ts a

nd

impa

cts a

vaila

ble

New

Yor

k jo

bs c

reat

ed, c

ost o

f re

gula

tory

com

plia

nce

is re

duce

d

Red

uced

indu

stria

l pro

cess

ene

rgy,

redu

ced

indu

stria

l was

tes a

nd e

mis

sion

s, in

crea

sed

ener

gy e

ffic

ienc

y in

wat

er/w

aste

wat

er se

ctor

, im

prov

ed N

ew Y

ork

wat

er q

ualit

y, re

duce

d en

viro

nmen

tal

impa

cts o

f was

tew

ater

eff

luen

t

PON

s is

sued

, pr

opos

als r

evie

wed

an

d se

lect

ed fo

r fu

ndin

g, p

artn

ersh

ips

esta

blis

hed

New

tech

nolo

gies

and

pro

cess

es

adop

ted

in i

ndus

trial

and

wat

er/

was

tew

ater

sect

ors,

incr

ease

d sa

les o

f pro

ject

rela

ted

tech

nolo

gies

Prod

ucer

s, su

pplie

rs, e

nd

user

s see

val

ue o

f im

prov

ed

tech

nolo

gies

and

pro

cess

es

valu

e an

d kn

ow h

ow to

ap

ply*

Tech

nolo

gies

and

pro

cess

es

are

func

tiona

lly v

iabl

e,

com

patib

le, c

ertif

ied

and

finan

cing

is a

vaila

ble

Prod

uct c

osts

dec

reas

e

Com

mer

cial

izat

ion

Ass

ista

nce

(Ind

ustri

al)

Bus

ines

s and

mar

ketin

g pl

ans d

evel

oped

/enh

ance

d,

prod

uctio

n fa

cilit

ies

esta

blis

hed/

expa

nded

, en

ergy

man

agem

ent a

nd

eval

uatio

n gu

idan

ce fo

r w

ater

/was

tew

ater

sect

or

avai

labl

e

Prod

uct a

dvis

ory

boar

ds,

partn

ersh

ips f

orm

ed,

prod

uctio

n sy

stem

s de

velo

pmen

t, bu

sine

ss

plan

ning

ass

ista

nce

Prod

ucts

read

y fo

r co

mm

erci

aliz

atio

n, b

usin

ess

infr

astru

ctur

e su

ppor

ts

prod

ucts

it h

as n

urtu

red*

Stra

tegi

c an

d fle

xibl

e pr

ogra

m p

ortfo

lio

deve

lope

d

Info

rmat

ion

for

Polic

y an

d T

echn

olog

y D

evel

opm

ent

Prod

uct D

evel

opm

ent

Dem

onst

ratio

n an

d Pr

e-D

eplo

ymen

t

Trai

ning

and

Tec

hnic

al

Ass

ista

nce

(Wat

er/W

aste

wat

er)

Incr

ease

d kn

owle

dge

of n

ew

ener

gy e

ffic

ient

tech

nolo

gy

and

proc

esse

s and

ene

rgy

man

agem

ent b

est p

ract

ices

Ener

gy m

anag

emen

t and

eq

uipm

ent t

rain

ing

for

plan

t ope

rato

rs, m

unic

ipal

st

aff,

cons

ulta

nts a

nd

prod

uct v

endo

rs

Ener

gy m

anag

emen

t bes

t pr

actic

es u

tiliz

ed re

gula

rly in

w

ater

/was

tew

ater

sect

or

thro

ugho

ut N

ew Y

ork

Partn

ersh

ips f

orm

ed w

ith

Fede

ral a

nd S

tate

age

ncie

s, re

sear

ch o

rgan

izat

ions

, etc

.

* Pr

oduc

ts a

nd te

chno

logi

es p

rom

oted

thor

ugh

R&D

act

iviti

es su

cces

sful

ly tr

ansi

tion

to d

eplo

ymen

t pro

gram

s

Appendix A

Documents

NEW YORK ENERGY MART ROGRAM · ToC-1 Table of Contents 1 INTRODUCTION.....1-1