National WAP Evaluation: Single Family and Mobile Home Energy Impacts

1. National WAP Evaluation: Single Family and Mobile Home Energy Impacts Michael Blasnik M Blasnik & Associates Greg Dalhoff Dalhoff Associates, LLC David Carroll APPRISE

2. Presentation Overview • Purpose • Measurement and Analysis Procedures • Findings for Homes with Natural Gas Main Heat • Findings for Homes with Electric Main Heat • Analysis – Next Steps • Findings for Homes with Fuel Oil Main Heat

3. Purpose • Energy Performance – Document energy savings and cost-effectiveness. • Program Performance – Foundation for documenting all program benefits and costs. • Diagnostic – Assessment of what works best under what conditions.

4. Measurement and analysis procedures

5. Primary Objective • What was the usage of the home prior to weatherization? • What services were delivered to the targeted housing unit and household? • What is the usage of the home after weatherization?

6. Study Scope • Primary Focus • Detailed analysis of Program Year 2008 • WX Program Year – 4/2008 to 3/2009 • State Program Year – 7/2008 to 6/2009 • Supplemental Information • Usage analysis only for Program Year 2007 • Preliminary Information • Usage analysis for clients served in the first half of Program Year 2009

7. Logistical Challenges • What clients were served by the program? • Collection of client account information from 51 grantees and 400 subgrantees for PY 2007, 2008, and 2009 clients • What services did those clients receive? • Collection of detailed information on service delivery for program year 2008 for about 19,000 clients • What is the energy usage of the home before and after weatherization? • Collection of usage data for 57,000 clients from 4/1/2006 through 3/31/2011.

8. Usage Data Requirements • PY 2008 Clients • Weatherized between 4/2008 and 6/2009 • Pre-weatherization usage = 12 months prior to weatherization (as early as 4/2007 through 3/2008) • Post-weatherization usage = 12 months after weatherization (as late as 7/2009 through 6/2010) • Data required for analysis of PY 2008 from April 2007 through June 2010 = 39 Months of Usage Data • PY 2007 Clients – Need data from 4/06 through 6/09 • PY 2009 Clients – Need data from 4/08 through 6/11

9. Usage Data Collection • Natural Gas Main Heat • Sample of 15,000 clients per program year • Total sample of 45,000 clients for PY 07, PY 08, and PY 09 • Requested data from 368 gas utilities for 45,000 clients • Received data from 71% of utilities for 30,000 clients (67%) • Natural Gas and Electric Main Heat • Sample of 19,000 clients per program year • Total sample of 57,000 clients for PY 07, PY 08, and PY 09 • Requested data from 984 electric suppliers for 57,000 clients • Received data from 74% of utilities for 37,000 clients (67%)

10. Analysis Challenges • Differences in Weather from Pre-Program Year to Post-Program Year • Use of PRISM to compare “Weather Normalized” consumption for the two periods • Other factors affecting low income households • Use of a Comparison Group • PY 2008 clients serve as a comparison group for PY 2007 analysis • PY 2009 clients serve as a comparison group for PY 2009 analysis • Attrition from incomplete data or inconsistent data • Use of ORNL model • Use of Fixed Effects regression model

11. Analysis Completeness • How does Weatherization affect the quality of the housing unit? • Indoor Air Quality Field Study • How does Weatherization affect clients? • Indoor Air Quality Field Study Occupant Survey • Program-Wide Occupant Survey • What is the overall benefit of the Program? • Estimation of NonEnergy Benefits

12. Findings for homes with natural gas main heating fuel

13. National WAP Energy ImpactsGas Heated Single Family

14. Climate Zones

15. Climate Zone Energy ImpactsGas Heated Single Family

16. Comparing Energy ImpactsGas Heated Single Family

17. Impacts for Top 25% / Agency Gas Heated Single Family

18. Policy Note • Homes with the highest preWX usage save the most • In 1981, the AVERAGE preWX gas usage was 1,500 therms • Statistics from the 2005 RECS • Low-income households in gas single family = 6.5 million • Use 1200 or more therms = 820,000 (12%) • Use 1600 or more therms = 240,000 (3%) • Projected savings for 2008 on preWX usage of 1,340 therms = 250 therms; on 1,500 therms = 300 therms

19. Findings for homes with electric main heating fuel

20. National WAP Energy ImpactsElectric Heat Single Family

21. Climate Zone Energy ImpactsElectric Heat Single Family

22. Comparing Energy ImpactsElectric Heat Single Family

23. What’s next?

24. Next Steps – Impact Estimates • Other Periods - PY 2007 and PY 2009 • Other Models • ORNL – Reduces sample attrition • Fixed Effects Regression – Different analytic framework • Longer Term Analysis • PY 2007 – 3 years post program analysis (2008, 2009, 2010) • PY 2008 – 2 years post program analysis (2009, 2010) • PY 2009 – 2 years pre program analysis • 2008 to 2009 change (reported gross to net adjustment) • 2007 to 2008 change (potential gross to net adjustment)

25. Next Steps – Diagnostics • Factors Associated with Higher Savings • Pre-Program usage • Pre-Program housing unit conditions • Installed measures • Program factors • Audit procedures • Training investment • Quality control procedures

26. Next Steps – Cost Effectiveness • Document first year savings • Project savings over time based on measure life and price projections • Estimate net present value of savings • Compare to installation costs • Compare to total program costs

27. Findings for homes with fuel oil Main heating fuel

28. Fuel Oil Homes – Data Collection and Analysis Strategy • Sample agencies serving clients with fuel oil main heat • Select a sample of 76 treatment and 52 control clients • October 2010 – PreWX tests, meter homes • January 2011 – Weatherize homes • April 2011 – PostWX tests, retrieve equipment • Analysis – Estimate savings based on metered data

29. National WAP Energy ImpactsFuel Oil Heat Single FamilyWinter 2010/2011 Treatment