Accounting for Energy Efficiency Programs in Regional Load Forecasts
13
ACCOUNTING FOR ENERGY ACCOUNTING FOR ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROGRAMS IN EFFICIENCY PROGRAMS IN REGIONAL LOAD FORECASTS REGIONAL LOAD FORECASTS
description
Accounting for Energy Efficiency Programs in Regional Load Forecasts. Tim Woolf Massachusetts Department of Public Utilities Planning Advisory Committee Meeting December 16, 2010. Overview. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Transcript of Accounting for Energy Efficiency Programs in Regional Load Forecasts
ACCOUNTING FOR ACCOUNTING FOR ENERGY EFFICIENCY ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROGRAMS IN REGIONAL PROGRAMS IN REGIONAL LOAD FORECASTSLOAD FORECASTS
• The ISO’s current methodology of forecasting energy efficiency savings in New England clearly understates likely future savings.
1. Program Administrators tend to save more in practice than they bid into the FCM.
2. ISO assumes that no new efficiency savings will occur in future years.
• While there are several uncertainties in forecasting energy efficiency savings, these can be addressed through proper planning practices.
TIM WOOLF - MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC UTILITIES SLIDE 2
OverviewOverview
TIM WOOLF - MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC UTILITIES SLIDE 3
Recent MA EE Savings, and Current Plans:Recent MA EE Savings, and Current Plans:Capacity Savings (MW)Capacity Savings (MW)
YearAnnual
PlannedAnnual Actual
Cumulative Savings
Percent of Peak
Demand2006 56 48 48 1%2007 51 60 108 2%2008 55 59 166 3%2009 71 70 236 4%2010 101 337 6%2011 149 486 8%2012 179 665 11%
TIM WOOLF - MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC UTILITIES SLIDE 4
Recent MA EE Savings and Current Recent MA EE Savings and Current PlansPlans
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
EE C
apac
ity S
avin
gs (M
W)
Cumulative Savings
Planned Annual Savings
Actual Annual Savings
TIM WOOLF - MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC UTILITIES SLIDE 5
EE Savings Compared with ISO Forecast:EE Savings Compared with ISO Forecast: Capacity Savings (MW)Capacity Savings (MW)
YearCumualtive
Savings
Capacity Savings -
ISO Approach
Capacity Missed by
ISO Approach
2006 522007 1162008 1802009 2552010 416 250 1662011 609 318 2912012 718 371 348
TIM WOOLF - MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC UTILITIES SLIDE 6
EE Savings Compared with ISO EE Savings Compared with ISO ForecastForecast
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Capa
city
Savi
ngs
(MW
)
Cumualtive Savings
Capacity Missed by ISO Approach
Capacity Savings - ISO Approach
TIM WOOLF - MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC UTILITIES SLIDE 7
Projection of EE Savings – High CaseProjection of EE Savings – High Case
0
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1,400
1,600
1,800
2,000
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Efficie
ncy C
apac
ity Sa
ving
s (M
W)
Capacity Savings - Level EE Savings
Capacity Missed by ISO Approach
Capacity Savings - ISO Approach
TIM WOOLF - MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC UTILITIES SLIDE 8
Projection of EE Savings – Moderate Projection of EE Savings – Moderate CaseCase
0
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1,400
1,600
1,800
2,000 20
06
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Efficie
ncy C
apac
ity Sa
ving
s (M
W)
Capacity Savings - Tapered Scenario
Capacity Missed by ISO Approach
Capacity Savings - ISO Approach
TIM WOOLF - MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC UTILITIES SLIDE 9
Projection – Projection – Moderate Case vs. NESCOE SuggestionModerate Case vs. NESCOE Suggestion
0
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1,400
1,600
1,800
2,000 20
06
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Efficie
ncy C
apac
ity Sa
ving
s (M
W)
Capacity Savings - Tapered Scenario
Capacity Missed by NESCOE Approach
Capacity Savings - NESCOE Approach
• Actual EE savings differ from FCM bids and FCM delivered.
• Planned savings may differ from actual savings.
• There are no plans that go beyond the next few years.
• EE measures retire over time. What is the impact on load?
• Challenges noted in RSP 10 (page 121):+ State diversity of EE makes forecasting challenging.+ Double counting concerns.+ Monitoring and verification.+ Fatigue of EE program participants.+ Diversion of EE funding.
TIM WOOLF - MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC UTILITIESSLIDE
10
Challenges to Forecasting EE SavingsChallenges to Forecasting EE Savings
• ISO should work cooperatively with States and EE Program Administrators to develop load forecasts.
• Goal of the forecasting process should be to develop estimates of the most likely amount of EE savings, not the most conservative amount.
• Program Administrators should provide ISO (and states) with all relevant data regarding EE savings (actual and planned) and FCM bidding, to support the forecast effort.
• States should provide input with regard to expected levels of efficiency funding and savings in future years.
+ Could be coordinated through NESCOE.
TIM WOOLF - MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC UTILITIESSLIDE
11
Preliminary Big Picture Preliminary Big Picture RecommendationsRecommendations
• EE savings differ from FCM bids.+ Analyze the two separately.
• Planned savings differ from actual savings.+ Review historical results, get input from PAs.
• There are no plans after the next few years.+ Get input from States and PAs about legislative and
regulatory context that will drive future activity.
• EE measures retire over time.+ Make reasonable assumptions about measure replacement.
• State diversity makes forecasting challenging.+ Get data and input from each state.
TIM WOOLF - MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC UTILITIESSLIDE
12
Options to Address Challenges - IOptions to Address Challenges - I
• Double counting concerns.+ Identify and develop methodologies to address.
• Monitoring and verification.+ Clarify the issue. Improve M&V standards if necessary.
• Fatigue of EE program participants.+ Not an issue for EE (passive DR).
• Diversion of EE Funding.+ Get input from States. Apply a discount factor if
warranted.
TIM WOOLF - MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC UTILITIESSLIDE
13
Options to Address Challenges - IIOptions to Address Challenges - II
