Developing the Business Case for Updating the Region’s End-use Load Shapes

1. Developing the Business Case for Updating the Region’s End-use Load Shapes Assessment of Findings Presented by Curt Puckett and Lorin Molander August 21, 2012

2. Overview of Presentation • Project Objectives • Overview of End-Use Data • Findings from Stakeholder Webinars & Interviews • Updates Since 2009 • National Perspectives & Resources • Preview of Business Case

3. Project Objectives • Develop the business case for a comprehensive PNW electric end-use data collection study • Assessment of Regional Interest and Need • Assessment of Updates since 2009 KEMA Study • Assessment of National and Out-of-Region Resources • Assessment of the No Action Option • Analysis of Options for Proceeding with Study • Develop the Business Case for a Range of Viable Options

4. Section 3: Overview of End-Use Data • Background and context: • What is it? • Who uses it? • How is it used? • How is it collected or developed? • Existing data sources NEEA RBSA metering data provided by Ecotope

5. Section 4: Assessment of Regional Interest and Need • Objective: Lay the foundation for the business case by assessing the current interests and needs of the region’s stakeholders. • Process: Webinars and Interviews, discussing: • How do the groups currently use end use information, • How do the they envision using the data in the future, • What are the risks associated with continuing to use the current data, • What business decisions are being made based on their analyses, and • What are their current data requirements and priorities?

6. Webinar Series

7. Summary of Stakeholder Input Via Webinars • A general consensus that end-use data was important to their utility’s business operation; • While difficult to quantify the monetary benefits associated with improved information, the utilities were making significant investments based on the information flowing through the analysis; • Concern with the existing data coverage, timeliness and relevance; • The importance and need for better time-differentiated information was increasing; • The availability of supporting information had significantly increased including the expansion of smart meter investments yielding access to time-differentiated whole facility information; and • There may be various approaches that could be used to help fill the existing data gaps.

8. Common Concerns About Existing Data Sources • The vintage (i.e., age) of the data (1980s – early 1990s); • That appliance characteristics and usage have changed (e.g., increased efficiency standards); • There are new emerging/growing technologies (e.g., computers, plasma TVs, etc.); • ELCAP did not adequately capture small “standby” loads, which is a category of load that has grown significantly since ELCAP; • Static loads are not in the majority anymore (it’s either motors or electronics); • The existing load shape data are often “problematic” and require some conditioning, (e.g., load peaking at strange times); and • There is strong interest in measure shapes, not just end-use load shapes.

9. Stakeholder Interviews • Based on feedback from the webinars, interview questions were developed: • Current State; • Current or potential use(s) • Source(s) of data • Recent updates or developments of new end-use data • Concerns/issues with current sources • Future State; • Investment(s) based on analyses using end-use information; • Specific data requirements and supporting information; • Sampling and study preferences; and • Load shape library user preferences. • 17 interviews of Pacific Northwest stakeholders: • 15 organizations were represented • 38 individuals participated • 18 were from EE • 10 were from a load forecasting/load research • 10 were from resource acquisition, smart grid, DR, transmission, regulatory

10. Summary of Stakeholder Input Via Interviews • Current uses of load shapes and demand statistics • Cost effectiveness analysis • Energy efficiency and demand response planning and evaluation • Savings forecasts, conservation potential, smart grid, cost of service and rates, load forecasting, and measure savings/load impacts • Distribution planning, resource planning, and load composition modeling • Potential uses of end-use load shapes or demand statistics • Provide the effects of energy efficiency on capacity and capacity-related charges • Better differentiate economic from appliance trends • Inform data validation routines • Provide input to new rate designs • Support dynamic profiling • Help characterize “new” loads including electric vehicles

11. Business Decisions & Investments Based on Analyses • Whether to add in demand-side or supply-side resources; • Which energy efficiency or demand response programs to pursue based on expected savings; • Where to set energy efficiency program incentive levels, • How to improve program forecasting, program targets, total budgets; • Cost-effectiveness, what investments should be made in which programs; • How to allocate within a cost of service study; • Analyze new rate designs, e.g., time-of-use rates; and • New technology investments related to smart grid.

12. Business Decisions & Investments Based on Analyses (cont.) • How much investment does your organization make overall related to analyses • While difficult to quantify a direct link, the overall level of investment made, in part, based on the end-use data was significant • Numbers in the “millions” of dollars were commonly stated • What was unclear is how better or more current information would have altered those decisions • Importance of end-use load shape data to analyses overall • On a scale of 1 to 7 (with 1 being not at all important and 7 being very important) • About half ranked the importance of end-use load shape data to their analyses overall as a 5, 6, or 7

13. Importance of Accurate Load Shapes • Risks of using potentially inaccurate load shapes • Making poor investment decisions; • Implementing energy efficiency programs that are not cost effective; • System operations (i.e., managing load) are at risk without better information; • Potentially target too much or too little conservation; • Not saving what we think we are during peak hours; and • Forecasting errors resulting in being too “long” or “short” on resources. • Importance of accuracy of end-use information to overall results • Slightly more than half said that the accuracy ranked a 6 or a 7 in importance to the overall results of their analyses

14. Results of Priority Ranking – Residential End-Uses

15. Results of Priority Ranking – Residential Measures

16. Results of Priority Ranking – Non-Residential End-Uses

17. Results of Priority Ranking – Non-Residential Measures Note: This table does not depict entire list of measures provided to respondents, only those measures that ranked medium, high, or highest

18. Data Granularity • Level of granularity • One hour or 15 minute increments • Shorter increments if feasible • The need for shorter intervals was specifically due to DR • Future data granularity needs • About half said no different than now • About one-third expected to need five minutes

19. Sampling and Precision, Study Length • Precision Requirements • About half had specific precision requirements, same as PURPA • Single vs. Multiple End-Uses • About a third of the group said their analyses focused on multiple end-uses • Importance of Research • Case Study of Individual End-Uses • Most ranked this low in importance • Statistical Sample of Single End-Uses • About half valued this research higher in importance • Statistical Sample of Multiple End-Uses • This option was ranked high by most respondents • Length of End-Use Study • At least a year • Limited timeframe would be acceptable in certain cases

20. Load Shape Library • Load Shape Library Accessibility • online option • FTP • searchable database • Load Shape Library Format • Almost half preferred Excel • CSV, SAS or Access. • Site versus Aggregated Data • both raw site-level data and aggregated data • Most Useful Pre-aggregated Data • Lots of answers for how to summarize data

21. Section 5: Regional End-Use Research Activities (Post 2009) • NEEA’s Residential Building Stock Assessment (RBSA) • BC Hydro’s Residential End-Use Metering Project (REUMP) • NorthWestern Energy’s End-Use and Load Profile Study

22. NEEA RBSA Metering Project • This study is currently underway • Plans to meter 90% of the end-uses within about 100 homes • Metering for two years • 5-minute interval energy for: • whole premise, • the sub-metered end-uses, • indoor temperature for the main living area, • outdoor temperature, • Other measurements: • 5-minute snapshots of service voltages, true power, and power factor • Gas furnace and gas water heater run-times • Lighting cycles

23. BC Hydro’s Residential End-Use Metering Project (REUMP) • 13 employee volunteer households sub-metering about 40 end-uses per home • This project is being developed in four phases: • Proof of Concept (2008-2009): Test the idea of using a Zigbee wireless network to collect interval data in a home. • Testing (2009-2010): Equipped three homes with about 100 of these end-use recorders (Ploggs) to test the software and data collection procedures. • Pilot (Current): Goal of covering about 20 homes (currently 13) fully end-use metered with about 800 devices. • Full Implementation (Future): If the Pilot phase is successful, implement a statistical sample of about 300 residential homes across the Province. • BC Hydro staff indicated they are open to collaborating with other organizations in the region for the full implementation phase of the study.

24. NorthWestern Energy’s End-Use and Load Profile Study • Completed in December 2009 • Supports conservation potential assessment • Based on on-site surveys and past studies • Monthly load shapes for residential • Monthly and hourly load shapes for commercial • Hourly shapes based on modeled data

25. Section 6: National Perspectives • Eight respondents • Not as much representation from EE as PNW interviews • Uses of the data and types of decisions being made from results were generally the same as the PNW • Magnitudes of decisions were also in $M, like the PNW • Concerns about data were similar - vintage • Specifically plug loads and new appliance trends • Risks of using inaccurate load data were still mostly associated with mis-characterizing cost effectiveness of EE (even though most were not from EE) • The priority rankings for end-uses and measures all came in generally lower in rank than for the PNW, especially for measures.

26. National Resources – Load Shapes • NEEP Commercial Lighting Load Shape Study • Assembled information across a wide range of EE evaluation studies • NEEP Commercial Unitary HVAC • Large sample of Unitary HVAC from Maryland to New England (n>400) • Glasgow Electric Plant Board • 30 home sample metering WH, HVAC, Refrigerator, Range, Dishwasher, Washer, and Dryer • 20 home Grid Smart appliance change-outs including HPWH and Energy Smart appliances • EPRI Load Shape Library and Customer Load Insights Interest Group • Residential End-Use Metering Program, Australia

27. National Resources – Data Collection Protocols NEEP Draft Protocols International Performance Measurement and Verification Protocol ASHRAE Guideline 14 California Evaluation Protocols Federal Energy Management Program Guidelines ELCAP Other Relevant Projects

28. Section 7: Preview of Business Case Development • Considerations for an Effective Study • End-Use and Measure Priorities • Review of Updates Since 2009 • Sample Size and Design Issues • Types of Data and Information to Collect • Transferability • Sustainability of the Approach • Data Library and User Interface

29. Section 8: No Action Option • Challenges with No-Action Option • Lack of current load shape data for electronics • Increasing value of demand impacts • Concerns about current load shapes reflecting current behavior (e.g., TOU rates) • Interaction and load shape dependence on occupancy • Risks with the No-Action Option • Lack of understanding what drives customer load patterns • Poor planning • Inaccurate projections • Inaccurate forecasts • Resulting in the “wrong” type of investment

30. Section 9: Business Case Development • The Minimal Case • meets the highest priority needs • lower range estimate in terms of cost and level of effort • The Base Case • meets a greater range of stakeholder needs • attention still given to project costs, time and resource (i.e. staff) requirements • The Premium Case • relaxes concerns about data acquisition costs and resource requirements • focusing on what the stakeholders could obtain through a multi-year end-use data collection effort, unconstrained by costs, time and/or resource limitations • A description of each including costs and benefits will be presented in September

31. Residential Options • A Minimal Case • Energy shares developed from CDA • Whole facility metering by housing type • Hourly load shapes for HVAC and WH (expand RBSA sample) • Simulation modeling by housing type (conditioned to whole facility load) • Simulation modeling for SFR (conditioned to RBSA end-use metering) • The Base Case (Builds on Minimal Case) • Expansion of RBSA within Region • The Premium Case (Builds on Base Case) • Extension of RBSA to multi-family • Extension of RBSA to manufactured housing • Simulation modeling by housing type conditioned to end-use metering

32. Non-Residential Options • A Minimal Case • Whole facility metering by facility type • Large survey to secure facility information • On-site sample to secure information for simulation modeling (selected facility types) • Simulation modeling by facility type conditioned to whole facility load • The Base Case (Builds on Minimal Case) • Add: End-use metering for selected end-uses within selected business types • Simulation modeling for selected facility type conditioned to end-use metering • The Premium Case (Builds on Base Case) • Add: End-use metering for additional end-uses within additional business types • Simulation modeling for additional facility type conditioned to end-use metering

33. www.dnvkema.com www.dnv.com