Annual Report, REAP

27
CONSERVATION STARTS HERE 2639 Spruce Street Boulder, Colorado 80302 303.999.3820 303.440.0703 fax www.ConservationCenter.org www.ReSourceYard.org 2009 REAP Annual Report March 8, 2010 Prepared by JC Martel Residential Energy Action Program Manager Center for ReSource Conservation 2639 Spruce Street Boulder, Colorado 80302

description

This 2009 Annual Report provides program design and impact, social mobilization strategies, and energy and carbon data analysis for Boulder County\’s Residential Energy Action Program (REAP).

Transcript of Annual Report, REAP

Page 1: Annual Report, REAP

CONSERVATION STARTS HERE

2639 Spruce Street ♦ Boulder, Colorado 80302 ♦ 303.999.3820 ♦ 303.440.0703 fax www.ConservationCenter.org ♦ www.ReSourceYard.org

2009 REAP Annual Report March 8, 2010

Prepared by

JC Martel

Residential Energy Action Program Manager Center for ReSource Conservation

2639 Spruce Street Boulder, Colorado 80302

Page 2: Annual Report, REAP
Page 3: Annual Report, REAP

www.conservationcenter.org

Page 3 of 27

Executive Summary Since its inception, the REAP Program has assisted in market transformation. It began with subsidized audits. Boulder’s audit program grew the audit market to a point of saturation with a countywide education and awareness campaign coupled with financial incentives. The post audit consulting service, now branded the Residential Energy Action Program (REAP), that the residential audit program transitioned into in 2009 has been driving the private market to evolve as well. In addition, private companies are integrating a REAP consulting model into contractor and consulting businesses. The program has succeeded in reaching its goal of energy education for Boulder County residents. Some of the key accomplishments from the 2009 program include: The 2009 program delivered:

direct outreach to 924 homeowners

465 energy audits, and

269 action consultations. Top 3 program elements most valued services of REAP to homeowners:

1. Personalized Home Energy Action Plan 2. One-on-one energy counseling 3. Subsidized energy audit

Energy Audits:

Out of 2657 Xcel Energy audits completed in Xcel’s Colorado territory, 30% were done in Boulder County, or 798 audits.

88% of Xcel audits completed in Boulder County included infrared, 76% included blower door, and 12% were clipboard audits.

Action Program:

Carbon Savings Assumptions for 98 Homes in the Action Program

Aggregate 504,859 lbs Aggregate 229 mtCO2e

Carbon Savings Assumptions for 1700 Homes Projected

Aggregate 8,770,300 lbs Aggregate 3,978 mtCO2e

63% of homes reduced their greenhouse gas emissions.

79% - 91% had made home improvements as a result of the action program.

Investment average of $7,185 per home.

Averages of 4 energy upgrades were made per home.

Carbon Savings Assumptions for 269 Homes in the Action Program

Aggregate 138,6708 lbs Aggregate 629 mtCO2e

Page 4: Annual Report, REAP

www.conservationcenter.org

Page 4 of 27

Table of Contents

REAP Overview ............................................................................................................. 5

REAP Impact ................................................................................................................. 8

REAP Program Overview ............................................................................................ 8

Energy Audits .............................................................................................................. 9

Action Program .......................................................................................................... 10

Symbiotic POOH Utility Bill Analysis .......................................................................... 15

Customer Satisfaction ............................................................................................... 18

Marketing and Outreach ............................................................................................ 20

Social Mobilization ..................................................................................................... 23

2010 REAP Outlook..................................................................................................... 25

Appendices ................................................................................................................. 28

Page 5: Annual Report, REAP

www.conservationcenter.org

Page 5 of 27

REAP Overview The Energy Division’s REAP program began as a pilot energy audit program in 2006. The Residential Energy Audit Program was a subsidized energy audit program that subcontracted professional energy auditors to conduct energy audits that included collection and analysis of utility data from each client, a home visit and audit report. Over 1,700 audits were conducted during those 2 ½ years. However, it became apparent that an audit did not necessarily lead to action. And if it did, the program did not involve post audit implementation data tracking; therefore post-audit implementation achievements from REAP were not calculable until the close of 2009. The consequence of lacking post-audit implementation data has been a negative reputation for energy audit programs in both the residential and commercial sectors. In reality, one could argue that 100% of homeowners during or after an energy audit do something. It can be argued that while auditors do not typically retrofit the home at the time of the audit, an auditor educates the client to strategically open or close blinds to maximize passive solar gain, reminds the homeowner to turn off power strips, and urges the homeowner to move furniture away from vents for proper heat distribution. Additionally, energy efficiency often becomes incorporated into home improvement projects when it otherwise may not be, such as in a bathroom or kitchen remodel, or building an addition. The program changed to address this gap in post audit tracking in 2009. In February 2009, Xcel Energy launched its own subsidized audit program, so the CRC evolved the REAP program from an audit program to an action program. This included working in partnership with Xcel to offer their subsidized audit and contacting each homeowner about their plan to implement the recommended energy efficiency improvements. Based on the homeowner’s action plan, REAP staff recommend contractors, review project bids, and ensure that the projects qualify for the maximum amount of financial incentives. Figure 1 give a visual representation of REAP’s flow process.

Page 6: Annual Report, REAP

www.conservationcenter.org

Page 6 of 27

Figure 1. Flow Process

The Action Program was born out of community demand for an unbiased assistance program beyond the audit, and a local government need for post audit data tracking. REAP still promotes homeowners to start with an energy audit for a full-home analysis that can then be reviewed by an energy consultant at our Boulder-based nonprofit. The consultant helps the homeowner develop an action plan, and then reviews contractor’s estimates to ensure that the projects will qualify for the maximum amount of financial incentives. REAP provides energy reduction monitoring so that the homeowner and program oversight can confirm that the projects are successful in achieving greenhouse gas emissions reductions. Energy consultations fall into a tiered system, the services include the following:

one-on-one interaction with the homeowner to discuss retrofit options,

estimated cost and greenhouse gas summaries,

contractor referrals, and

financing information.

Page 7: Annual Report, REAP

www.conservationcenter.org

Page 7 of 27

The program tiers, bronze, silver and gold, refer to how many times the homeowner receives the above mentioned services. Figure 2 outlines the program outcomes for the 2009 program:

direct outreach to 924 homeowners,

465 energy audits, and

269 action consultations. Figure 2.

Figure 3 displays a visual representation of REAP. Figure 1.

2009 Residential Energy Action Program Results

0

200

400

600

800

1000

2009 YTD

2009 Goal

2009 YTD 924 269 465 20

2009 Goal 0 220 390 87

Outreach Consultations Xcel Audits Non-Xcel Audits

Page 8: Annual Report, REAP

www.conservationcenter.org

Page 8 of 27

Which Three did you Find Most Useful?

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22

One-on-one energy counseling

A personalized Home Energy Action Plan

Subsidized energy audit

Contractor referrals in a trade alley network

Review of contractor's estimates

Assistance with rebate forms

Federal tax incentive information

ClimateSmart Loan Program information

Energy reduction monitoring

Educational seminars and training

Facilitate bulk purchasing

REAP Impact REAP Program Review The REAP program: 1) provides a subcontracted energy audit to indicate cost-effective energy conservation gains that can be achieved in individual homes (audit); and 2) provides one-on-one interaction with homeowners to discuss the recommendations (action). After a year of implementing the new REAP (Action Program), the CRC estimates that many homeowners will use the program’s services for up to four years after their energy audit, as homeowners use REAP as a revolving service. Many enter the program with plans to make one or two upgrades within the first year after the audit and then the program prompts homeowners to chart additional upgrades beyond their original plan. A key value of REAP is its variety of program offerings that are available to meet any homeowner’s needs. REAP staff analyze each component of a homeowner’s project to offer suggestions for energy efficiency integration. Figure 3 shows the program offerings in REAP that a sample size of homeowners valued most. As a homeowner commented, “I would likely still have done the insulation and some solar work, but without knowing about it I would likely have not done some of the smaller, more effective stuff like putting on a storm door or air sealing.” Sample REAP energy counseling scenarios:

If a homeowner only wants to spend $400 on energy upgrades, an action consultation and utility analysis such as a GH Tracker report can best leverage that homeowner’s investment.

Another homeowner might wish to spend $100,000. They can start with an energy audit, receive a utility analysis report, and numerous consultations to help them retrofit each system of their home. After such a large investment, this homeowner might value from a post-retrofit audit to confirm a healthy air exchange level and an additional utility analysis to measure the impact of their retrofit.

Figure 2. Evaluating the Program’s Usefulness

Page 9: Annual Report, REAP

www.conservationcenter.org

Page 9 of 27

Non-Xcel/Pre-Xcel Audits

10

23

5

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

Boulder

Longmont

Superior

Boulder County: Unincorporated

and NonParticipating Cities

Energy Audits 2009 Goal: 390 energy audits 2009 Actual: 465 energy audits Homeowners who contacted the CRC for an energy audit were seamlessly connected to the Xcel program for an audit or were provided a Boulder County or Longmont Power and Communications subsidized audit. Figure 4 gives a breakdown of 2009 audits by location. Out of 2657 Xcel Energy audits completed in Xcel’s Colorado territory, 30% were done in Boulder County, or 798 audits. 88% of Xcel audits completed in Boulder County included infrared, 76% included blower door, and 12% were clipboard audits. Five Home Performance with Energy Star (HPwES) projects were completed in Boulder County in 2009 whereas 50 HPwES assessments were completed in Xcel’s Colorado territory. Prior to the commencement of the Xcel Energy audit program, the CRC conducted a limited number of REAP audits to homeowners who were on the waiting list for an extended period of time. Figure 5 shows the

breakdown of non-Xcel/pre-Xcel audits. These audits were conducted in January and February of 2009 and were billed to the cities and Boulder County at rate of $150/each. In addition, audits in non-Xcel territories were continued.

Figure 4. Non/Pre Xcel Audits

Xcel Audits

136

186

69

25

49

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

Boulder

Longmont

Superior

Louisville

Boulder County: Unincorporated

and NonParticipating Cities

Figure 3. Xcel Audits

Page 10: Annual Report, REAP

www.conservationcenter.org

Page 10 of 27

Action Consultations

16

65

129

47

12

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

Boulder

Longmont

Superior

Louisville

Boulder County: Unincorporated

and NonParticipating Cities

Action Program 2009 Goal: 220 Action Program participants 2009 Actual: 269 Action Program participants Action consultations is a term used to describe a variety of services - one-on-one interaction with a homeowner to discuss retrofit options, a Home Energy Action Plan with a prioritized list of improvements, estimated cost and greenhouse gas calculations, contractor referrals, review of contractor’s estimates, and financing information. The action consultations focus on home improvements of interest to the homeowner that also yield the highest return on investment in terms of energy savings. Figure 7 outlines the jurisdictional breakdown of the action program consultations.

Of the 269 Action Program participants, 98 completed an Action Program cycle. Figure 8 is a snapshot of those 98 homes with the improvements that were completed, currently planned, and recommended by the auditor or desired by the homeowner.

Figure 5. Action Consultations

Page 11: Annual Report, REAP

www.conservationcenter.org

Page 11 of 27

Carbon Emissions Reductions for 98 Homes Participating in the

Action Program Project Status Update Project

2.34 mtCO2e

4.05 mtCO2e

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

1

mtC

O2

e

Actual GHG Savings

Potential GHG Savings

Figure 6. Project Status Update

Project Status of 98 Homes Participating in the Action Program

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

Attic InsulationWall Insulation

Perimeter InsulationAir Sealing

Whole House or Attic FanWindows

Weather Strip DoorsFurnace/Boiler

Duct SealingWater Heating

LightingSolar PV

Solar ThermalCooling

Refrigerator ReplacementDishwasher

Clothes WasherDryer

Low flow showerhead

POST REAP PLANNED RECOMMENDED or DESIRED

Figure 9 assumes an average reduction of 2.34 metric tons of CO2e per home with a potential for 4.05 metric tons of CO2e* for the 98 homes who gave project status updates in January’s phone call campaign.i

*NOTE: The REAP Program Manager created a calculator that estimates energy savings and greenhouse gas reductions per household was prepared based on Xcel Energy’s Demand Side Management Plan (pages 419-457.) The calculator was also built into the REAP database to summarize expected and potential energy reductions and greenhouse gas savings associated with project statuses.

Figure 7. Carbon Emissions Reduction Per Home

Page 12: Annual Report, REAP

www.conservationcenter.org

Page 12 of 27

Carbon Emissions Reductions for 98 Homes Participating in the

Action Program Project Status Update Project

229 mtCO2e

397 mtCO2e

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

1

mtC

O2e

Actual GHG Savings

Potential GHG Savings

Figure 10 assumes an aggregate reduction of 229 metric tons of CO2e per home per year with a potential for 397 metric tons of CO2e for the 269 homes participating in the 2009 Action Program. The average anticipated investment in energy efficiency and renewable energy for REAP participants is $17,100, based on information collected on the REAP application. The median anticipated investment is $15,000. The average and median income of REAP participants is in the $90,000 to $95,000 range. Figure 9. Analysis on 98 Homes

Anticipated Investment from Homeowners

Average Anticipated Investment Per Home on REAP Application $ 17,100.00

Median Anticipated Investment Per Home on REAP Application $ 15,000.00

Investment Assumptions for 98 Homes

Actual Investment Per Home (from calc.) $ 7,185.36

Investment Per Home if All Recommended Improvements are Completed (from calc.) $ 16,084.90

Energy Savings Assumptions for 98 Homes

Aggregate 128,136 kWh Aggregate 20,550 Therms

Per Home 1308 kWh Per Home 210 Therms

Carbon Savings Assumptions for 98 Homes

Aggregate 504,859 lbs Aggregate 229 mtCO2e

Per Home 5159 lbs Per Home 2.34 mtCO2e

Figure 8. Carbon Emissions Reduction for 269

Homes

Page 13: Annual Report, REAP

www.conservationcenter.org

Page 13 of 27

Carbon Emissions Reductions for 269 Homes Participating in the

Action Program

629 mtCO2e

1,090 mtCO2e

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

1

mtC

O2

e

Actual GHG Savings

Potential GHG Savings

Attic insulation, refrigerator replacement, efficient lighting and air-sealing yield the best payback. If all 17 energy efficiency upgrades in the calculator are completed, the project cost would total approximately $21,975 and avoid 10,644 pounds or 4.83 metric tons of CO2 per home. Based on the sample size of 98 homes, an investment from action consultation participants of $7,185.36 per home is assumed. An additional $8,899.54 would need to be spent per home to complete all of the energy efficiency upgrades in the calculator, excluding solar thermal and photovoltaic. Some homes are built to code or retrofits had been completed before REAP, potentially reducing the amount needed to be invested to reach the ideal emissions reductions. Conclusions can be related to 269 homes in the Action Program based on the statistical significance of 98 homes. 98 homes out of 269 people responded to a phone call campaign, yielding a 36% response rate. The primary purpose of the call campaign was to find out what improvements homeowners had made after participating in the Action Program. The study indicates that with 95% confidence it can be stated that 79%-91% of the homeowners in REAP Action have made improvements, with an average of 4 improvements per home. Action participants who joined REAP in Q409 were unlikely to report completed improvements during the call campaign. It is assumed that Q409 participants account for percentage of homeowners that had made no improvements. The following data is based on statistical data from the 98 homes.

Figure 10. Carbon Emissions Reduction for 269

Homes

Page 14: Annual Report, REAP

www.conservationcenter.org

Page 14 of 27

Figure 11 assumes an aggregate reduction of 629 metric tons of CO2e per home with a potential for 1,090 metric tons of CO2e for the 269 homes participating in the 2009 Action Program. Figure 11. Analysis on 269 Homes

Investment Assumptions for 269 Homes

Actual homeowner investment in efficiency improvements $1.9 million

Potential homeowner investment in efficiency improvements $4.3 million

Energy Savings Assumptions for 269 Homes

Aggregate 351,852 kWh Aggregate 56,490 Therms

Per Home 1308 kWh Per Home 210 Therms

Carbon Savings Assumptions for 269 Homes

Aggregate 138,6708 lbs Aggregate 629 mtCO2e

Per Home 5159 lbs Per Home 2.34 mtCO2e

Data relating to past REAP audit-only participants is limited. It is assumed that audits without consultations promotes energy action and that the Action Program increases numbers of retrofits but further analysis must be conducted to examine the impact. The following data can be used to assume a projection if all 1700 homes that have received energy audits in REAP from 2006-2009 enter the Action Program. This data can also give a projection of REAP’s expansion. The statistical significance of 98 homes compared to 1700 REAP participants gives a confidence interval of 12.15. Figure 12. Analysis on 1700 Homes

Estimated Investment in Audits 2006-2009

Homeowner investment in audits $240,000

Government investment in audit subsidies $125,000

Utility company investment in audit subsidies $200,000

Investment Assumptions for 1700 REAP Participants

Actual homeowner investment in efficiency improvements $12.2 million

Potential homeowner investment in efficiency improvements $27.3 million

Energy Savings Assumptions for 1700 Homes

Aggregate 2,223,600 kWh Aggregate 357,000 Therms

Per Home 1308 kWh Per Home 210 Therms

Carbon Savings Assumptions for 1700 Homes

Aggregate 8,770,300 lbs Aggregate 3,978 mtCO2e

Per Home 5159 lbs Per Home 2.34 mtCO2e

Page 15: Annual Report, REAP

www.conservationcenter.org

Page 15 of 27

Symbiotic POOH Utility Bill Analysis NOTE: Utility bill analysis differs from the projected analysis for two reasons: 1.) bill analysis includes occupant behavior and purchases of electronic or devices that increase household energy consumption 2.) projected analysis assumes energy reduction per year without taking into account when the project is installed. The following four graphs display results from the weather normalized utility bill analysis of 508 households through Symbiotic Engineering’s Program Overview and Operational History (POOH) platform. These records are a subset of the 1700 homes that have received energy audits from 2006-2009. Figure A presents the cumulative greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reductions of 508 homes from 2006-2009, that have been normalized based on their enrollment date. In other words, the displayed monthly periods represent the first, second, etc. months after a household received an audit. Looking at the first twelve month period after enrollment in the program, the cumulative GHG emissions reductions is approximately 220 mtCO2e. Given that some program participants did not have a full year of post-audit utility billing data, this reported GHG emissions savings is expected to be higher than has been actually realized. Furthermore, if households which realized GHG emissions savings (336 out of 508 homes) are isolated, the observed GHG emissions reductions per household become 1.9 mtCO2e.

Figure A

Page 16: Annual Report, REAP

www.conservationcenter.org

Page 16 of 27

Looking at the first twelve month period after enrollment in the program, the cumulative natural gas emissions reductions is approximately 1,733 therms, as shown in Figure B.

Figure C displays the cumulative electricity saving over the first twelve month period after enrollment date with a cumulative savings of 111,302 kilowatt hours.

Figure B

Figure C

Page 17: Annual Report, REAP

www.conservationcenter.org

Page 17 of 27

Figure D shows the frequency distribution of the percent change in greenhouse gas emissions for 443 homes. The outlier categories of greater than and less than 25 metric tons might be attributed to incomplete data sets. Removing the outlier categories reduces the data set to 316 homes. Therefore, 63% of homes reduced their greenhouse gas emissions.

Figure D

Page 18: Annual Report, REAP

www.conservationcenter.org

Page 18 of 27

Customer Satisfaction A customer satisfaction survey was sent to the 269 Action Program participants, achieving a 13% response rate. Figure 15 evaluates the educational aspect of action consultations. Figure 13. Educational Evaluation

On a scale of 1 to 5, with 5 being the most, how much have you

learned from our program in terms of...

8%

5%

13%

13%

13%

21%

32%

24%

29%

35%

35%

35%

32%

16%

24%

24%

18%

13%

2%

the financial return

(rebates or tax credits)

on your investment?

how to choose an

energy efficient

technology that suits

your needs?

what is involved with the

installation of energy

efficient technology?

how to talk with

contractors about your

energy efficient needs?

This figure indicates that REAP has excelled at teaching homeowners about return on investment and choosing efficient technologies. Based on customer comments, it is recommended for REAP to:

“Expand the lists and price comparison for contractors” “Let people know how much money they could save by implementing the suggestions” “Allow consumers to rate vendors and have this available for others to reference” “A matrix that enables you to discern quickly what services are offered by various

contractors that are listed on your web site. Have a check in each column (e.g. insulation) for a service provided by the contract. Sorting through their promotional sentences does not always make it clear which contractor provides what services.”

“Have someone to check on contractor's work if problems occur”

Page 19: Annual Report, REAP

www.conservationcenter.org

Page 19 of 27

Would you Pay for the REAP Services if it were not Funded by

the Local Governments?

28%

17%

55%

Yes

No

Maybe

In addition, REAP customers were asked “Would you pay for the REAP services if it were not funded by the local government?”

Commentary varied. Some questioned the cost of such a service, such as “Most likely too expensive without the subsidy” and “it depends on the cost, but overall was a huge help!” Others gave suggestions for program improvement, “If I paid for them, I would want to have an info sheet that showed how my expense paid for itself in X years, just like you get from a solar company instigating you to spend money on them.” Figure 16 summarizes the findings.

A calling campaign to the 269 Action Program participants was executed for project status updates. Contact was made with 98 people, lending a 36% response rate. The primary purpose of the call campaign was to find out what improvements homeowners had made after participating in the Action Program.

85% had made home improvements as a result of the action program. The estimated homeowner investment in energy efficiency and renewable energy improvements for the 98 homeowners was $700,000 in estimated homeowner investment of efficiency and renewable technologies.

Investment average of $7,185 per home.

Averages of 4 energy upgrades were made per home.

Figure 14. Value

Page 20: Annual Report, REAP

www.conservationcenter.org

Page 20 of 27

Marketing and Outreach The CRC provide brochures, website information for REAP and the rebate programs, press releases, provided workshops and presentations for REAP and had two articles in the Conservation Magazine. The CRC staff also made reasonable attempts to solicit media coverage for the program. Per the MOUs, each government partner was required to make a significant contribution to the marketing of REAP. Suggested marketing outlets included:

Utility bill insert

Direct mailing

City Newsletter

Public Service Announcement in local paper

Public Service Announcement on local radio station

Advertisement in local newspaper

Securing a story in local newspaper

Post on City website

Post in free local calendar listings

Place brochure in utility billing office

Post on community website

Post text or produce a sport for local cable channel In addition, REAP was marketed with the following avenues:

REAP PowerPoint Presentations: o Neighborhood meetings, to include city of Boulder Neighborhood Action Group

meetings, Longmont neighborhood meetings and block parties o Businesses, such as Google o Boulder Green Building Guild (BGBG) brown bag lunches o BuildSmart and Green Points educational series

Ads in Daily Camera, Longmont Times, Superior Observer, Mountain Ear, Conservation Magazine

Articles in the Camera, Conservation Magazine, Longmont Times

Bi-monthly tabling at Boulder Farmer’s Market

Boulder County Solar Week, to include: o REAP audits highlighted in Tour applications and in home features in

Conservation Magazine o Signage about REAP in the homes during the tour o Two REAP workshops during Solar Week

Other events included 36 ClimateSmart Loan Program Workshops, Sustainability Fair, Longmont Rhythm on the River, and other events throughout the County

Email distribution in CRC E-news, ClimateSmart E-news, viral emails

Contractor referrals, referrals from realtors

Page 21: Annual Report, REAP

www.conservationcenter.org

Page 21 of 27

Marketing and Outreach Results

for Audit and Action Participants

40%

11%13%

14%

22%ClimateSmart and CRC

Programs/Staff

Local Government

Utility Company

Friends, Family, and Neighbors

Print, Web and Events

Website information on each partner city website, CRC, ClimateSmart, GEO, contractor websites

Word-of-mouth

Utility bill inserts for LPC customers

Mail inserts with realtor’s advertising

Flyer inserts in solar companies sales packets – Namaste Solar, Bella Energy, Uva, Aqua Care

Other programs such as Slow the Flow, ClimateSmart, Solar Home Tour

Building departments for the city of Boulder, Longmont and Boulder County From the REAP application, the CRC was able to determine how REAP participants heard about the program. Figure 17 is an aggregate of how all 2009 participants, who received both audits and action plans, heard about the program.

Figure 15. Marketing and Outreach

Page 22: Annual Report, REAP

www.conservationcenter.org

Page 22 of 27

How many People have you Mentioned this Program to within

your Community?

9%

68%

17%

6%

None

1 to 10

10 to 25

25 to 50

Figure 18 examines the 14% of participants who heard about REAP through their friends, family and neighbors. In a customer satisfaction survey, those surveyed were asked how many people they told about the program. 91% of people who responded told at least one person.

Figure 16. Social Mobilization

Page 23: Annual Report, REAP

www.conservationcenter.org

Page 23 of 27

# o

f H

om

es

Direct Outreach

197

509

30 43

202

Boulder

Longmont

Superior

Louisville

Boulder County: Uninc. and NonParticipating

Social Mobilization The REAP Program led a countywide social mobilization effort. The two primary components of this were: (1) targeted calling campaign and (2) outreach to local social groups. In defining and executing REAP, the CRC looked at the 4 marketing "phases” referenced in the AIDA model. AIDA is an acronym used in marketing that describes a common list of events that are very often undergone when a person is selling a product or service:

A - Awareness: attract the attention of the customer. I - Interest: raise customer interest by focusing on and demonstrating advantages and

benefits (instead of focusing on features, as in traditional advertising). D - Desire: convince customers that they want and desire the product or service and that

it will satisfy their needs. A - Action: lead customers towards taking action and/or purchasing.

Figure 19 displays direct outreach by phone call for participating locations. As part of the focused calling campaign CRC called potential and current REAP participants. CRC used complimentary program lists (i.e. CRC's water audit list) to generate Awareness-Interest-Desire (A-I-D) for REAP and facilitate Action. Further, the current REAP lists were

used to develop a target list for insulation participants. Calls were made to this target list in an effort to drive repeat action (these are participants that have already taken action by joining REAP - some have already made EE improvements - and repeat action is often easier to insight than initial action). As part of the outreach to local social groups, the Energy Division staff developed contacts and conducted informational meetings with various organizations, including volunteer organizations, local companies, and homeowner associations. Summary presentations were given to organizations and interested parties on the Insulate Colorado program and on REAP as a whole. This effort also included training Energy Corps (a complimentary County program) on effective homeowner engagement and energy efficiency education. This outreach further prompted A-I-D and is expected to lead to future Action (i.e. program enrollment). The following table outlines the results of CRC's efforts on the social mobilization effort.

Figure 17. Outreach with Calling Campaign

Page 24: Annual Report, REAP

www.conservationcenter.org

Page 24 of 27

Figure 18. Social Mobilization with Mass Media

GEO Marketing Grant Social Mobilization with Mass Media Goal Actual Estimated Investment

Aw

are

ness I

nte

rest

Desire

CRC Total Outreach (generated from phone call campaign) Targeted Call List Local Social Groups

500 605 $5,000

CRC Total Incoming (generated from media campaign) Emails to CRC Calls to CRC

none specified 63 $15,000

Actio

n

CRC Total Action REAP Enrollment Energy Consultation

none specified 192

From CRC's perspective, the marketing campaign was effective in generating Awareness, Interest and Desire (A-I-D), and also in prompting Action (i.e. REAP enrollment). The stated objective of this specific marketing program was, "Increase awareness of the Insulate Colorado and the parent program, Residential Energy Action Program, thereby generating phone calls to CRC; and also the ClimateSmart Loan Program and Boulder County Energy Corp." From that viewpoint, the program was successful, and it is anticipated that the benefits of this campaign (A-I-D-A generation) will continue for some time. Figure 19. Marketing GEO M arketing Grant -

M arketing

N um b er

R eac hed

C lic k t o

C lim at eS m art

Web sit e

C lic k f or

M ore

Inf orm at ion

N ot es

D aily C am era A d s

O nline

P r int

1 5 1 ,0 0 0

7 0 ,0 0 01 8 4

c om p arab le t o ind ust ry

s t and ard s

Em ail B last

C lim at eS m art L is t

C R C - R EA P L is t

2 ,3 7 2

1 ,4 8 3

6 9 1

6 1 5

1 4 6

1 2 7

2 9 % op ened t he em ail

6 .2 % c lic k ed f or m ore

inf orm at ion 4 1 %

op ened em ail 8 .6 %

c lic k ed f or m ore

inf orm at ion

T w it t er 4 0 0

Page 25: Annual Report, REAP

www.conservationcenter.org

Page 25 of 27

2010 REAP Outlook For the 2010 program, the program has continued with the REAP flow process outlined on page 6. However, to maximize efficiencies and build capacity, the following program elements will be considered. Internal efficiencies:

To assist in transitioning new staff into the program, a REAP Operations Manual was created so that the program is easily operable by new staff, volunteers and interns. The manual includes office passwords and logins, procedures for sending and receiving paperwork, outreach and marketing history, an energy information reference guide for the most frequently asked questions, links to rebate forms and tax information, and procedures for utility data collection and distribution. The Manual standardizes program practices and procedures.

Internal reports are distributed to management staff at CRC for close monitoring of budgets and goals.

Capacity Building:

A one week REAP training tri-annually is recommended to engage students and the community at large to volunteer. The training content should focus on building science, financial incentives, behavior change and how to engage the homeowner.

Satellite sites in Longmont are recommended to remove the social and geographical barrier of program dissemination in Longmont. According to John Farmer’s report, “Reducing Carbon Emissions in Boulder County,” messaging to residents in Longmont differs from other Boulder County cities. It seems important for REAP staff to build relationships with community members in Longmont in person.

Action Program:

Calling campaigns for project status updates should be made monthly to track home improvements. These campaigns also serve as outreach to engage the homeowner in the next level of action, such as the installation of another efficiency measure. Calling campaigns stimulate Awareness, Interest, and Desire which leads to Action.

Figure 22 shows a method that was created to determine if a home is in the low, medium, and high energy use categories. A home in the high usage category is assumed to have more potential for energy reductions than a home in the low usage category. For this exercise, 250 home energy usages were analyzed.

Page 26: Annual Report, REAP

www.conservationcenter.org

Page 26 of 27

Energy Usage Profiles

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

# o

f H

om

es

HIGH

MEDIUM

LOW

Figure 20. Energy Profiling

Square Footage CO2 Emission Level 1 (low)

CO2 Emission Level 2 (med)

CO2 Emission Level 3 (high)

1000-1500 0 to 5 5 to 9 9+

1500-2000 0 to 7 7 to 12 12+

2000-2500 0 to 9 9 to 14 14+

2500-3000 0 to 11 11 to 15 15+

3000-3500 0 to 13 13 to 17 17+

3500-4000 0 to 15 15 to 19 19+

4000+ 0 to 17 17 to 21 21+

Percentage of 250 Participants in Each Category

45% 34% 21%

Targeting high energy users to participate in REAP is a preferred outreach strategy. The return on investment in terms of carbon emission reduction is significantly greater for larger homes. However, after the pilot, Xcel Energy audits and Energy Corps assessments guaranteed lead generation that did not

necessitate energy profiling. In order to conduct consistent energy profiling, energy records must be collected for each home as it enters the program. The format of the energy records would likely be in PDF and would require a data management staff person to transfer the PDF to excel for energy profiling calculations. Energy profiling is highly recommended by REAP staff. Marketing and Outreach:

People who are engaged in a conservation action are likely to be easily motivated to participate in another conservation action. Therefore, it may be worthwhile to cross-promote conservation programs within the CRC. Examples of such cross-promotion includes to habitually call participants in the water audit program each September, to set up an energy outreach booth at the ReSource Yard, and to network with Water and ReSource program contacts to expand REAP into other Colorado cities.

Figure 21. Energy Usage Profiles

Page 27: Annual Report, REAP

www.conservationcenter.org

Page 27 of 27

Tracking and Reporting:

A database that can interface with a customer relations management system and allows multiple users is a high priority for the program. A General Knowledge Base is currently in development to advance the information delivery system much like a call center does.

A Monthly Report Generator was built to ensure consistent monthly reporting to program partners. The monthly report presents program participation data, a marketing and outreach graph, project status summaries and estimated emissions reduction potential. The monthly report will motivate staff to achieve higher emissions reductions and to focus on clients who have numerous efficiency measures to complete.

A comparative analysis can be conducted to understand retrofit increase as a result of the Action Program. A calling campaign to people who have had audits but did not participate in the Action Program could be executed. A comparative analysis of ClimateSmart Loan Program projects versus REAP projects could also be executed.

Customer comments to consider:

“Expand the lists and price comparison for contractors”

“Let people know how much money they could save by implementing the suggestions”

“Allow consumers to rate vendors and have this available for others to reference”

“A matrix that enables you to discern quickly what services are offered by various contractors that are listed on your web site. Have a check in each column (e.g. insulation) for a service provided by the contract. Sorting through their promotional sentences does not always make it clear which contractor provides what services.”

i Carbon emissions are based on City of Boulder’s calculations 0.00532 mtCO2e/therm and 0.0009233 mtCO2e/kWh or 11.7285

lbCO2e/therm and 2.03552 lbCO2e/kWh.