Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRobert Mowris & Associates Robert Mowris &f) Associates P.O.Box 2141,Olympic Valley,CA 96146 ♦ (800)786-4130 ♦ Fax (530)581-4970 ♦ rmowris@earthlink.net Date: March 7, 2007 Re: TDPUD Public Benefits Programs and Recommendations (with Attachment) To: Truckee Donner PUD Board of Directors From: Robert Mowris, rmowris@rma-energy.com Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever has." —Margret Mead The purpose of this memorandum is as follows. 1. Withdraw slide 3 regarding historical Public Benefit Program (PBP) spending and savings from the presentation made to the Board of Directors on February 21, 2006 due to insufficient data. Requests were made for full documentation, but the documentation has not been provided. 2. Seek Board approval for documentation of 1998-2006 PBP spending and information to measure and verify the savings. 3. Seek Board approval to evaluate the performance of TDPUD management in terms of facilitating TDPUD customers to make the best and most efficient use of power resources to save energy and the environment, create jobs and improve the local economy, and reduce carbon dioxide emissions and global warming. Delay pay raises until PBP management and spending on conservation can be evaluated. 4. Seek Board approval for Scott Terrell to maintain his previous position as Department Head of Conservation and Energy Efficiency that Mr. Terrell has held for 14 and one-half years. 5. Seek Board approval to immediately collect of 2.85% on customer electricity bills per AB 1890 and AB995. 6. Seek Board approval to establish a 2007 budget for conservation and energy efficiency of $550,000 plus $306,549 of unspent PBP "carry-over" funds from 1998-2006 for a total 2007 budget of$856,549. 7. Seek Board approval for an interim conservation budget of$306,549 (using 1998-2006 PBP carry-over funds) over the next six months on conservation and energy efficiency programs to be managed by Scott Terrell. 8. Seek Board approval for supply-side managers Stephan Hollabaugh and Peter Holzmeister to support Scott Terrell's management and implementation of conservation and energy efficiency programs in the TDPUD service area. Robat't Mowris&AMIates 1 tile:RMA_Memo_TDPUD_3-7-07_DRAFT_v5.doe Discussion 1. The presentation titled "Rapid Development of a Conservation Power Plant,"provided at the TDPUD Board of Directors Meeting on February 21, 2007, included a slide showing TDPUD Public Benefits Program spending of$3.1 million from 1998 through 2006. The slide was prepared based on historical PBP spending data provided by Stephan Hollabaugh, Power Supply Engineer(Table 1). Insufficient documentation was available prior to the meeting on 2-21-07 to evaluate, measure, and verify the PBP spending data. The energy and peak demand savings provided in the presentation were extrapolated from an Evaluation, Measurement, and Verification (EM&V) study of the TDPUD Senate Bill 5X programs implemented from 2001 through 2003 where $140,000 was spent to deliver savings of 708,838 +/- 83,654 kWh and 263.1 +/- 4 kW.l The savings provided in the presentation were for illustrative purposes to indicate what could have been saved if the $3.1 million of public benefits funds were spent in a similar manner to the S135X programs. Table 1. 1998-2006 TDPUD Public Benefit Program S ending (Data from S. Hollabaugh) TDPUD PBP Calendar Total Electric PBP Funds (2.85% Funds Spent PBP Carry- Year Sales (Revenue) of Sales, Revenue) (Not verified) Over Funds 1998 $8,345,678 $237,852 $178,189 $59,663 1999 $8,719,929 $248,518 $256,425 -$7,907 2000 $8,)19,776 $254,214 $566,800 -$312,586 2001 $10,195,219 $290,564 $259,860 $30,704 2002 $13,916,880 $396,631 $303,601 $93,030 2003 $15,282,810 $435,560 $404,906 $30,654 2004 $17,175,950 $489,515 $439,308 $50,207 2005 $17,541,093 $499,921 $277,268 $222,653 2006 $19,266,778 $549,103 $408,971 $140,132 98-2006 $3,401,877 $3,095,328 $306,549 Note: TDPUD PBP funds spent have not been independently verified. In order to obtain an accurate engineering estimate of the historical PBP savings an independent evaluation must be performed of the TDPUD PBP program spending from 1998 through 2006. 1 attempted to obtain historical PBP data from TDPUD since early January of 2007. On January 9, 2007, 1 sent an e-mail message to Stephan Hollabaugh to obtain documentation about the TDPUD Public Benefit Programs (PBP) from 1997 through 2006. On January 15, 2007, 1 sent an Excel spreadsheet to Stephan Hollabaugh to request the documentation for four areas of spending: 1) Energy efficiency and conservation(EE&C), 2) renewable energy, 3) research, and 4) low income. On February 2, 2007, Stephan sent me a spreadsheet of historical PBP spending data from 1998 through 2006. The spreadsheet sent by Mr. Hollabaugh was used to prepare slide 3 of the presentation, but it was insufficient to provide an accurate evaluation or assessment. I made another request for proper documentation to Mr. Hollabaugh on March 6, 2007. Mr. Hollabaugh has not provided ' Mowris, R., Blankenship,A., Jones, E.,Noack, R. 2005. Measurement&Verification Load Impact Study for Northern California Power Agency Senate Bill 5X Programs,prepared for Northern California Power Agency and the California Energy Commission.Olympic Valley,Calif.: Robert Mowris&Associates. Available online: http://www.calmac.or . Rowt Mowris&AssoOUS 2 file:RMA Memo TDPUD_3-7-07_DRAFT_v5.doe documentation regarding the historical TDPUD PBP spending and associated information regarding energy efficiency incentives and measures. Therefore, I hereby withdraw slide 3 from the earlier presentation due to insufficient data(attached). 2. TDPUD must provide proper documentation including invoices and receipts of the historical PBP spending and associated information. This information must be used to independently evaluate the 1998-2006 programs to determine if TDPUD complied with the AB1890 and AB995 laws regarding collection and spending of public benefit program funds. My most important concern is how the information from Mr. Hollabaugh compares to documentation kept by Mr. Terrell and whether or not there are any discrepancies. This is very important. In order to meet the legislative requirements of AB 1890 and AB995, TDPUD is required to collect and spend 2.85% of total revenues. According to the undocumented information provided by Stephan Hollabaugh on 2-2-07 (Table 1), TDPUD was required to spend $3,401,877 on PBP from 1998 through 2006, but only spent $3,095,328. Therefore, there is $306,549 of unspent PBP "carry-over" funds that still need to be spent as required by California law. 3. The Board of Directors should use this information to evaluate the performance of TDPUD management in terms of facilitating TDPUD customers to make the best and most efficient use of power resources to save energy and the environment, create jobs and improve the local economy, and reduce carbon dioxide emissions and global warming. Delay pgy raises until PBP management and spending on conservation can be evaluated. 4. The Board of Directors must authorize Scott Terrell to maintain his previous position as Department Head of Conservation and Energy Efficiency that Mr. Terrell has held for 14 and one-half years. Scott cannot be effective working under the Administrative Services Manager since this will limit Scott's ability to implement successful conservation programs. The Board must grant permission for Scott to implement successful programs to help ratepayers conserve energy and water. 5. The Board of Directors must immediately authorize the collection of 2.85% on customer electricity bills per AB1890 and AB995. AB2021 requires conservation as the first priority power resource, triennial savings targets, and independent measurement. Conservation and energy efficiency are the most cost effective resource options available to TDPUD. Therefore, most if not all PBP funds should be spent on conservation and energy efficiency. According to Scott Terrell, TDPUD management has budgeted $17,500 directly for conservation in 2007 ($5,000 for incentives, $5,000 for miscellaneous, and $7,500 for conservation education). Subtracting out this amount plus Scott Terrell's salary from $550,000 leaves $432,500 of PBP funds. Where are these PBP funds being spent? The PBP funds cannot be spent entirely on renewable energy, research, and low income programs because this would under fund conservation which is the most cost effective resource option. Renewable energy is far less cost effective than conservation so it shouldn't receive more than 20% of the PBP budget. Research shouldn't receive more than 5%. Low income shouldn't receive more than 10%. This leaves 65% for conservation or $358,000. If is TPDUP only willing to spend 1% or $5,000 on incentives then the estimated savings for past programs from 1998-2006 are probably 100 times lower. It doesn't make sense to Robert MewrW 8e Associates 3 file:RMA Memo TDPUD_3-7-07_DRAFT_v5.doc establish the water and energy committee with an annual incentives budget of$5,000. The ratepayers deserve to receive 100 times more of their PBP money for incentives. 6. TDPUD must establish a 2007 budget for conservation and energy efficiency of$550,000 plus $306,549 of unspent PBP carry-over funds from 1998-2006 for a total 2007 budget of $856,549. These funds will ultimately be spent as determined by the Energy Committee with Board approval. This process will take several months to establish. SB1037 requires reporting to the CEC and local boards, full disclosure to ratepayers of the legally required PBP tax collections, and how PBP funds are spent. It is 66 days into 2007 and TDPUD hasn't provided a 2007 budget for conservation and energy efficiency. Why? 7. Until such time as the Energy Committee is formed and develops a set of recommendations, the Board should authorize Scott Terrell to manage a budget of$306,549 (using 1998-2006 PBP carry-over funds) over the next six months on conservation and energy efficiency programs for residential and commercial lighting, water heating, space heating, and appliances. The immediate PBP funding should be managed by Scott Terrell with the cooperation of expert members from the community. 8. In order to facilitate the success of TDPUD PBP conservation and energy efficiency programs and to avoid conflicts of interest, the Board should direct supply-side managers Stephan Hollabaugh and Peter Holzmeister to support Scott Terrell's management and implementation of conservation and energy efficiency programs in the TDPUD service area. Robert MowrM 8�Associates 4 file:RMA Memo_TDPUD_3-7-07_DRAFT_v5.doc California Conservation Laws • Assembly Bills(AB) 1890 and AB995 require Rapid Development of a California electricity and natural gas utilities to collect and spend 2.85%of revenues for Conservation Program conservation, renewable energy, research,and low income programs. • Senate Bill(SB) 1037 requires reporting to the Prepared by: California Energy Commission and local Robert Mowris, P.E. governing boards. Scott Terrell,Conservation Administrator • AB2021 requires conservation as the first Prepared for Truckee Donner PUD priority power resource,triennial savings Truckee, California targets,and independent measurement. 2 History of TDPUD Public Benefit TDPUD Electricity Usage by Sector Programs nt Public approximately OL-A a Commercial 36% I i i�'-- Residential 50 Water Water • Treatment 5% Pumping 8% • �� Source:TDPUD 2006 Sales Data 4 3 Water and Energy Savings Residential Electricity End Use TDPUD Water Department and TfSA are Largest Electricity Users . Truckee can save 25 to 50%on residential energy use. • Significant energy is required to pump, pressurize, Do-g 'x ug— ax sr. supply, heat,treat, and dispose of water. Boa m nwa.ner ax • Water related energy use accounts for 13%of 21dry &' TDPUD electricity consumption for pumping and treatment and 12%for water heating. HVAD • Water and energy demands are growing at the zax same rate creating concerns. Wa,.r�aa�r • California and southwest water utilities spend 2% 22x of revenues on conservation. • Metering water customers is critically important. e�� " a�msarater California Errer9Y Commission.InleBreietl Energy Policy Fe 1;Dbager8 Waler and Energy Use',)November,2005). Conan,Ronnie,Berry Nelson antl Gary Wdll.Energy Oown fne Drain,Na)ural Rewurces Delense Council,Augus)200a. Source:Estimated from CEC Data S, dviflgs from CDItO,Fred and Mike ftuf0,Cdl fOlnld SfdfeWlOe 5 Residentlal Sec Energy Efficiency Potential Sfudy,Study I0#SW063,April 2003. 6 1 Commercial Electricity End Use Conservation Power Plant Benefits • Truckee can save 17 to 50%on commercial energy use. Caokmg L19k,;u9 • Least Expensive: $0.029 per kWh conserved. 3% 39% • Economical,clean,abundant, practical,and reduces global warming. M s0 11—ous 18% • Creates jobs: $3 benefit for every$1 spent. • Improves competitiveness, empowers customers, and is the"bridge"to renewable Off— Eq,iWent energy future. Re69e,,,;a • A62021 requires all California public utilities to weterH-W' „VAC seek energy efficiency and conservation as the 3% 26% first priority loading order for resource planning. 50,rt Estimatedfrom CEG Data.savingsfrom ca/rlbm/a Sbrcwlde Commercbl sector En<rgy fMkimY Potential Study,Study ID#6W039A,gegared for Pacfic Gaz and 11-1-1 Company,Frcd Colto and Mlke Rulo KEMA-%ENERGY Inc. Oakland,Callbmia,July 2002. 7 9 Conservation Program Management TDPUD Conservation Programs • Conservation program management should • Pre-1992: Residential Energy Surveys be separate from supply-side program • 1992-96: Residential/Commercial Energy Surveys management in order to avoid"conflicts of • Chamber Business&EE Partnership interest"between saving energy and water • 1996: GSHP Rebate&Bulk Purchase/Install and"lost revenues." • Management of Public Benefits Programs • 1997-06 TDPUD Public Benefit/Rebate Programs should be a separate TDPUD department to • 1998-2005: Public Agency Conservation provide autonomy, budgetary control, and to o 2001-Present: Green Building Program maximize energy and water savings. • Greater market penetration will increase savings ,a 9 Developing a Rapid and High Community Assessment for Impact Conservation Program Truckee, CA • Historical energy savings from Public Benefits • Communities/Regional Demographics Programs are 6%of 2006 usage and potential o # of Households- 12,000+ cost effective savings are 20 to 50%or more. • # &Type of Businesses- Small, 1,000+ • Education/Marketing/Self-Financing • Community Interest Level • Financial Incentives/Rebates-Standard • Community Economic Resources • Utility Rebates and Financing Program • Conservation Business Infrastructure • Conservation Power Plant in cooperation with * Conservation Labor Resources Town of Truckee and Southwest Gas ,2 2 Conservation Potential Measures Creating Community Awareness, Input, and Participation • High Efficiency Lighting and Controls • Market/Interest Survey • Efficient Building Envelope Measures • Marketing/Media Campaign • Efficient Heating and Cooling • Community Education, Presentations,Seminars, • Efficient Appliances and Refrigeration and Workshops • Efficient Water Heating and Solar Water Heating • TDPUD Advertising, Newsletters, Bill Inserts, • Water Conservation Measures&Water Metering Website,etc. • New Construction/Passive Solar Design • Partnerships with Water Dept.,TTSA, Hospital, School District,Supermarkets, Retailers, • Efficient Motors and Miscellaneous Measures Hospitality, Builders, Realtors,etc. 13 4 Conservation Program Evaluation, Measurement, and Implementation and Auditing Verification of Conservation Programs • Marketing&Education • Audit,Track,and Inspect Energy Efficiency and • Energy Auditing&Contracting Conservation Measures. • Conservation Tracking Database • Evaluate, Measure,and Verify Conservation • Conservation Measures Aggregation/Bulk Pricing Program Savings. • Vendor/Contractor Selection • Report Findings to Program Manager,TDPUD Board,and the CEC per AB1037 and AB2021. • Conservation Measure Installation • Improve and Expand Conservation Program. • Measurement&Verification/Inspection • Evaluation, Measurement, and Reporting 6 15 Conservation Program Costs Truckee Community Conservation Program Development • Program Manager • Develop Program Designs with Input from • Database Manager and Support Conservation Committee and Community • Energy Auditor/Contract/Inspectors • Determine Level of Interest andParticipation • Marketing &Education/Training Costs • Determine Staffing Resources and • Conservation Program Costs and Financing Requirements • Program Materials, Applications, etc. 18 1] 3 Truckee Community Potential Summary Conclusions Conservation Program Timeline • Collect at least 2.85%for Public Benefits Programs on total sales(i.e.,customer bills). • Conservation Committee and TDPUD Staff . Work with Conservation Committee and TDPUD Analyses: 3 months Staff to develop triennial savings targets • Develop Marketing for Program: 2 Months required by AB2021 and plan on conducting independent assessment to measure savings. • Begin Marketing & Education: 1 Month • Design and Implement Conservation Programs. • Database Management& Reporting As • Target higher use customers, older buildings, Required and new construction. • Implement Public Benefits Programs • Work with Town of Truckee and Southwest Gas and other Partners. 20 19 4 - - Solar Wind Works Renewable Energy Power Systems Chris Worcester 118771682-4503 530-581-450:3 fzmx: 30-582 4603 110 Box 2.511 Truckee,CA 96160 www.sOfam,,jndworks,com 3-7-07 Friends, I have been saying to some of you that I wish there was time to sit down and write a letter. I have been called the bringer of light by an off grid client. Robert speaks of staying positive&the truth will set us free. Forgiveness is good &positively felt by all. That said let's stick to the facts, and let the TDPUD Board help us understand in a positive light how the GM's request for a raise is justified. What is it that needs forgiving?I have only been attending these meetings for 4 months. In that time, the time of coal, the public was first informed"we have exhausted all other resources, wind isn't ready&solar isn't ready"Coal is the way of the future, a 50 year or nothing, a$35/Mwatt or$65/Mwatt for RE power. We,the public got educated and expressed many reasons not to sign on. The Board agreed. We were told in Nov. the cost was$5000 to$8000 for research in Coal, in Dec, we were told the cost was$100,000. Forgiveness is a good thing. There was a letter sent out to rate payers at this time by the GM, oops, what were the facts? Forgiveness is a good thing. The old Idaho Power contract came to light time and again during the Coal days, a bail out that is costing $33M to get out of and would have only cost$18M to stay in on until it expired. Forgiveness? The water take over in Glenshire was brought up, promises of$45/month water rates; now costing rate pays$63/month. Yes it's not always easy to forgive. Even the Broadband issue that has so far cost rate payers over$2M out of electrical and water rates were brought to light. Special management was hired to see this to"fruition" at a six digit figure. Are the rate payers getting their monies worth?Oh sweet forgiveness. Next UAMP's is back saying we can have all the wind power we want in our mix for a mere $45/Mwatt. Aren't these the, 50 year or nothing,wind isn't ready, solar isn't ready, exhausted all other resources, guys?To forgive is really healthy. The great state of California dictates conservation as the number one priority by law for utilities to pursue first. How does the TDPUD respond?Let's reprimand our conservation specialist, and Public Relations staff member, let's punish him for insubordination and dock his pay for two weeks, let's demote him, taking away his position as department head. The special hearing cost rate payers thousands, and in the end, he was forgiven, although demoted. Today I grope through my heart, mind&soul for the expansion of my being to find the depth of compassion required for forgiveness, which will bring true happiness. Now we're supposed to consider a raise for the GM, after all is done and said. say"you must be joking", now that's true happiness, found in the truth, in forgiveness. Sincerely, Chris Worcester NABCEP Certified PV Installer USA Distributor of Proven Wind Turbines Toll Free: 877-6824503 Fax: 530-5824603 www.solarwindworks.com chris@solarwindworks.com "Proven Energy Solutions"