NEW YORK ENERGY MART ROGRAM · ToC-1 Table of Contents 1 INTRODUCTION.....1-1
Transcript of NEW YORK ENERGY MART ROGRAM · ToC-1 Table of Contents 1 INTRODUCTION.....1-1
NEW YORK ENERGY $MARTSM PROGRAM
QUARTERLY EVALUATION AND STATUS REPORT
QUARTERLY REPORT TO THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION
QUARTER ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 2007
FINAL REPORT
NOVEMBER 2007
ToC-1
Table of Contents
1 INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................................1-1 1.1 Organization of the Report............................................................................................................1-1
2 PORTFOLIO-LEVEL REPORTING.................................................................................................2-1 2.1 Budget and Spending Status .........................................................................................................2-1 2.2 Portfolio Level Findings ...............................................................................................................2-3
2.2.1 Progress Toward Goals ....................................................................................................2-3 2.2.2 Summary of Program Benefits.........................................................................................2-5
2.3 Solicitations Update ......................................................................................................................2-6
3 COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL PROGRAMS .................................................................................3-1 3.1 Commercial/Industrial Evaluation Activities................................................................................3-1
3.1.1 Completed Evaluation Activities .....................................................................................3-1 3.1.2 Evaluation Activities in Progress and Planned ................................................................3-1
3.2 Summary of C/I Evaluation Results .............................................................................................3-1 3.2.1 Progress Toward Non-Energy Goals ...............................................................................3-1 3.2.2 Energy, Peak Demand, and Fuel Savings ........................................................................3-1 3.2.3 C/I Existing Buildings Non-Participant Market Effects Study........................................3-4
3.3 Peak Load Management Program (PLMP)...................................................................................3-7 3.3.1 Progress Toward Goals ....................................................................................................3-7 3.3.2 Energy, Peak Demand and Fuel Savings .........................................................................3-8
3.4 Enhanced Commercial and Industrial Performance Program (ECIPP) ........................................3-8 3.4.1 Progress Toward Goals ....................................................................................................3-8 3.4.2 Energy, Peak Demand and Fuel Savings .........................................................................3-9
3.5 New York Energy $martSM Business Partners ............................................................................3-10 3.5.1 Progress Toward Goals ..................................................................................................3-10 3.5.2 Energy, Peak Demand and Fuel Savings .......................................................................3-10
3.6 New York Energy $martSM Loan Fund and Financing Program ................................................3-11 3.6.1 Progress Toward Goals ..................................................................................................3-11 3.6.2 Energy, Peak Demand and Fuel Savings .......................................................................3-12
3.7 Energy Smart Focus Program .....................................................................................................3-12 3.7.1 Progress Toward Goals ..................................................................................................3-12 3.7.2 Energy, Peak Demand and Fuel Savings .......................................................................3-13
3.8 High Performance New Buildings Program ...............................................................................3-13 3.8.1 Progress Toward Goals ..................................................................................................3-13 3.8.2 Energy, Peak Demand and Fuel Savings .......................................................................3-13
3.9 FlexTech Technical Assistance Program....................................................................................3-14 3.9.1 Progress Toward Goals ..................................................................................................3-14 3.9.2 Energy, Peak Demand and Fuel Savings .......................................................................3-14
4 RESIDENTIAL AND LOW-INCOME PROGRAMS ......................................................................4-1 4.1 Residential and Low-Income Evaluation Activities .....................................................................4-1
4.1.1 Completed Evaluation Activities .....................................................................................4-1 4.1.2 Evaluation Activities in Progress and Planned ................................................................4-1
4.2 Summary of Residential and Low-Income Evaluation Results ....................................................4-1
Table of Contents
ToC-2
4.2.1 Progress Toward Non-Energy Goals ...............................................................................4-1 4.2.2 Energy, Peak Demand, and Fuel Savings ........................................................................4-1
4.3 Single Family Home Performance Program .................................................................................4-4 4.3.1 Progress Toward Goals ....................................................................................................4-4 4.3.2 Energy, Peak Demand and Fuel Savings .........................................................................4-5
4.4 Multifamily Building Performance Program ................................................................................4-6 4.4.1 Progress Toward Goals ....................................................................................................4-6 4.4.2 Energy, Peak Demand and Fuel Savings .........................................................................4-7 4.4.3 Other Evaluation Findings ...............................................................................................4-8
4.5 Market Support Program...............................................................................................................4-8 4.5.1 Progress Toward Goals ....................................................................................................4-8 4.5.2 Energy, Peak Demand and Fuel Savings .........................................................................4-9
4.6 Communities and Education Program ........................................................................................4-10 4.6.1 Progress Toward Goals ..................................................................................................4-10
4.7 EmPower New YorkSM ...............................................................................................................4-11 4.7.1 Progress Toward Goals ..................................................................................................4-11 4.7.2 Energy, Peak Demand and Fuel Savings .......................................................................4-11
4.8 Buying Strategies and Energy Awareness Program ...................................................................4-12 4.8.1 Progress Toward Goals ..................................................................................................4-12
5 RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS ........................................................................5-1 5.1 Research & Development (R&D) Program Evaluation Activities ...............................................5-1
5.1.1 Completed Evaluation Activities .....................................................................................5-1 5.1.2 Evaluation Activities in Progress and Planned ................................................................5-1
5.2 Summary of R&D Evaluation Results ..........................................................................................5-1 5.2.1 Progress Toward Non-Energy Goals ...............................................................................5-1 5.2.2 Energy, Peak Demand, Fuel Savings, and Clean Generation ..........................................5-2
5.3 Public Benefit Power Transmission and Distribution Research ...................................................5-3 5.3.1 Progress Toward Goals ....................................................................................................5-3
5.4 Clean Energy Infrastructure..........................................................................................................5-3 5.4.1 Progress Toward Goals ....................................................................................................5-3 5.4.2 Clean Energy Generation.................................................................................................5-4 5.4.3 Other Evaluation Findings ...............................................................................................5-5
5.5 Power Systems Product Development ..........................................................................................5-6 5.5.1 Progress Toward Goals ....................................................................................................5-6
5.6 DG-CHP Demonstration...............................................................................................................5-6 5.6.1 Progress Toward Goals ....................................................................................................5-6 5.6.2 Energy, Peak Demand and Fuel Savings .........................................................................5-7
5.7 Demand Response and Innovative Rate Research ........................................................................5-8 5.7.1 Progress Toward Goals ....................................................................................................5-8 5.7.2 Energy, Peak Demand and Fuel Savings .........................................................................5-9
5.8 Electric Transportation................................................................................................................5-10 5.8.1 Progress Toward Goals ..................................................................................................5-10
5.9 Environmental Monitoring, Evaluation, and Protection (EMEP)...............................................5-10 5.9.1 Progress Toward Goals ..................................................................................................5-10
5.10 Industrial Research, Development and Demonstration...............................................................5-12 5.10.1 Progress Toward Goals ..................................................................................................5-12
5.11 Municipal Water and Wastewater Efficiency .............................................................................5-13 5.11.1 Progress Toward Goals ..................................................................................................5-13 5.11.2 Energy, Peak Demand and Fuel Savings .......................................................................5-15
5.12 Next Generation and Emerging Technologies ............................................................................5-15
Organization of the Report
ToC-3
5.12.1 Progress Toward Goals ..................................................................................................5-15
Appendix A Logic Models
LIST OF TABLES Table 2-1. Financial Status of New York Energy $martSM through September 30, 2007 ($million) ........2-1 Table 2-2. Individual Programs – Financial Status through September 30, 2007 ($ million) ..................2-2 Table 2-3. Cumulative Program Benefits from Installed Measures..........................................................2-5 Table 2-4. Solicitations Issued in 3rd Quarter 2007 ...................................................................................2-6 Table 3-1. C/I Program Cumulative Annual Electricity Savings through September 30, 2007 and
Progress toward Five-Year Goal .........................................................................................3-2 Table 3-2. C/I Program Cumulative Peak Demand Savings through September 30, 2007 and Progress
toward Five-Year Goal........................................................................................................3-3 Table 3-3. C/I Program Cumulative Annual Fuel Savings through September 30, 2007.........................3-4 Table 3-4. Peak Load Management Program – Goal and Achievement ...................................................3-8 Table 3-5. PLMP Cumulative Annual Energy and Peak Demand Savings (through September 2007) ...3-8 Table 3-6. Enhanced Commercial and Industrial Performance Program – Goals and Achievements......3-9 Table 3-7. ECIPP Cumulative Annual Energy and Peak Demand Savings (Through September 2007) .3-9 Table 3-8. New York Energy $martSM Business Partners Program – Goal and Achievement ...............3-10 Table 3-9. New York Energy $martSM Business Partners Cumulative Annual Energy and Peak
Demand Savings (through September 2007) ....................................................................3-10 Table 3-10. New York Energy $martSM Loan Fund and Financing Program – Near-Term Goals and
Achievements for Commercial/Industrial Projects ...........................................................3-12 Table 3-11. Loan Fund Cumulative Annual Energy and Peak Demand Savings (through June 2007)..3-12 Table 3-12. Energy Smart Focus Program – Goal and Achievement .....................................................3-13 Table 3-13. High Performance New Buildings Program – Near-Term Goals and Achievements .........3-13 Table 3-14. High Performance New Buildings Cumulative Annual Energy and Peak Demand Savings
(through September 2007).................................................................................................3-14 Table 3-15. FlexTech Technical Assistance Program – Goal and Achievement....................................3-14 Table 3-16. FlexTech Technical Assistance Program Cumulative Annual Energy and Peak Demand
Savings (through September 2007)...................................................................................3-15 Table 4-1. Residential and Low-Income Program Cumulative Annual Electricity Savings through
September 30, 2007 and Progress toward Five-Year Goals................................................4-2 Table 4-2. Residential and Low-Income Program Cumulative Peak Demand Reductions through
September 30, 2007.............................................................................................................4-3 Table 4-3. Residential and Low-Income Program Cumulative Annual Fuel Savings through
September 30, 2007 and Progress toward Five-Year Goals................................................4-3 Table 4-4. Single Family Home Performance Program – Goals and Achievements ................................4-5 Table 4-5. Single Family Home Performance Program Cumulative Annual Energy and Peak Demand
Savings (Through September 2007)....................................................................................4-6 Table 4-6. Multifamily Building Performance Program – Goals and Achievements ...............................4-7 Table 4-7. Multifamily Building Performance Program Cumulative Annual Energy and Peak Demand
Savings (Through September 2007)....................................................................................4-7 Table 4-8. Number of Units Participating According to Status ................................................................4-8 Table 4-9. Market Support Program – Goals and Achievements .............................................................4-9 Table 4-10. Market Support Program Cumulative Annual Energy and Peak Demand Savings
(Through September 2007) ...............................................................................................4-10 Table 4-11. Communities and Education Program – Near-Term Goals and Achievements ..................4-11 Table 4-12. EmPower New YorkSM Program – Goal and Achievement ...............................................4-11
Table of Contents
ToC-4
Table 4-13. EmPower New YorkSM Program Cumulative Annual Energy and Peak Demand Savings (Through September 2007) ...............................................................................................4-12
Table 4-14. Buying Strategies and Energy Awareness Program – Goals and Achievements ................4-12 Table 5-1. R&D Program Electricity Savings and Clean Generation through September 30, 2007 ........5-2 Table 5-2. R&D Program Cumulative Peak Demand Reductions through September 30, 2007..............5-2 Table 5-3. R&D Program Cumulative Annual Fuel Savings through September 30, 2007 .....................5-3 Table 5-4. Public Benefit Power Transmission and Distribution Research Program – Goals and
Achievements......................................................................................................................5-3 Table 5-5. Clean Energy Infrastructure Program – Goals and Achievements .........................................5-4 Table 5-6. Clean Energy Infrastructure Program Cumulative Annual Clean Generation (Through
September 2007) .................................................................................................................5-5 Table 5-7. PV System Size and Cost Summary as of October 24, 2007 ..................................................5-5 Table 5-8. Power Systems Product Development Program – Goals and Achievements .........................5-6 Table 5-9. DG-CHP Demonstration Program – Goals and Achievements ...............................................5-7 Table 5-10. DG-CHP Program Cumulative Annual Energy and Peak Demand Savings (Through
September 2007) .................................................................................................................5-8 Table 5-11. Demand Response and Innovative Rate Research Program – Goals and Achievements .....5-9 Table 5-12. Demand Response and Innovative Rate Research Program Cumulative Annual Energy
and Peak Demand Savings (Through September 2007)....................................................5-10 Table 5-13. Electric Transportation Program – Achievements..............................................................5-10 Table 5-14. Environmental Monitoring, Evaluation, and Protection Program – Goals and
Achievements....................................................................................................................5-11 Table 5-15. Industrial Research, Development and Demonstration Program – Near-Term Goals and
Achievements....................................................................................................................5-13 Table 5-16. Municipal Water and Wastewater Efficiency Program – Goals and Achievements ..........5-14 Table 5-17. Next Generation and Emerging Technologies Program – Goals and Achievements ..........5-16
1-1
1
Introduction
This report provides an update on the progress of the New York Energy $martSM Public Benefits Program (Program) toward meeting its stated goals. It contains evaluation results on Program activities through the quarter ending September 30, 2007. The last full annual report on progress (through December 31, 2006) was issued in March 2007, and the last quarterly progress report was issued in August 2007.1
The 13-year Program, funded by a System Benefits Charge (SBC) and administered by the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority (NYSERDA), was initiated in 1998 by order of the New York State Public Service Commission2 (the Commission) and embodies three funding cycles.3 The Program portfolio consists of numerous initiatives promoting energy efficiency and demand management, facilitating renewable energy development, providing energy services to low-income New Yorkers, and conducting research and development. The activities pursued by the Program include disseminating information to increase consumer energy awareness, marketing, providing financial incentives, developing and testing new products, commercializing new technologies, and gathering data and information.
1.1 Organization of the Report
This report was prepared by NYSERDA staff with contributions from a team of independent third-party evaluation contractors. The contractors work closely with NYSERDA’s program implementation staff and contractors, customers, and market and trade allies to develop an understanding of the Program offerings and to conduct independent assessments of the Program’s impacts and progress toward the established public policy goals. The evaluation functions covered by the specialty contractor teams are: impact evaluation; market characterization and assessment; and process assessment and evaluation management. The report is divided into the following sections:
1 New York State Energy Research and Development Authority, New York Energy $martSM Program Evaluation and Status Report, Final Report, March 2007 and New York State Energy Research and Development Authority, New York Energy $martSM Program, Quarterly Evaluation and Status Report, August 2007. 2 Case 94-E-1052, et al., In the Matter of Competitive Opportunities Regarding Electric Service, Opinion 98-3, issued January 30, 1998. 3 The most recent cycle was initiated with the New York State Public Service Commission order in Case 05-M-0900, In the Matter of the System Benefits Charge III, Order Continuing the System Benefits Charge (SBC) and the SBC-funded Public Benefit Programs, issued and effective December 21, 2005.
Introduction
1-2
Section 1 Introduction
Section 2 Portfolio-Level Reporting
Section 3 Commercial/Industrial Programs
Section 4 Residential and Low-Income Programs
Section 5 Research and Development Programs
Appendix A - Program Logic Models
2-1
2
Portfolio-Level Reporting
2.1 Budget and Spending Status
This section presents financial data for the New York Energy $martSM Program from 1998 through September 30, 2007. Of the $1.87 billion, 13-year budget, $1.68 billion is allocated to four major program areas; Commercial/Industrial, Residential, Low-Income, and Research and Development (R&D), and a general awareness campaign. The percentage of each program area budget spent to date is: 47.0% for Commercial/Industrial, 63.4% for Residential, 41.4% for Low-Income, and 34.9% for R&D. Budgets and spending are presented in Table 2-1 along with costs for program administration, evaluation, Environmental Disclosure1, and the New York State Cost Recovery Fee2. Table 2-2 shows the budget and spending for individual New York Energy $martSM programs.
Table 2-1. Financial Status of New York Energy $martSM Program through September 30, 2007 ($million)
Funds Spent
Total 13-
Year Budget 1
SBC I & SBC II 2
SBC III 3 Total Spent % of Budget
Spent
Commercial/Industrial 634.0 247.1 50.6 297.8 47.0%
Residential 312.8 165.4 33.0 198.4 63.4%
Low-Income 318.6 86.6 45.3 131.9 41.4%
Research and Development 388.4 105.9 29.8 135.6 34.9%
General Awareness4 (Marketing) 31.0 15.9 3.1 19.0 61.1%
Program Areas Total $1,684.7 $620.9 $161.8 $782.6 46.5%
Program Administration 128.2 59.8 15.6 75.4 58.8%
Metrics and Evaluation 34.4 14.5 3.1 17.6 51.3%
Environmental Disclosure 1.9 0.8 0.1 0.9 49.2%
1 This program provides electricity commodity suppliers with data for informing customers about the fuel mix and associated environmental impacts of their electricity sources. 2 The New York State Cost Recovery Fee is assessed for services to public authorities. The fee is determined by the New York State Division of Budget and imposed and collected by the Department of Taxation and Finance.
Portfolio-Level Reporting
2-2
Funds Spent
Total 13-
Year Budget 1
SBC I & SBC II 2
SBC III 3 Total Spent % of Budget
Spent
NYS Cost Recovery Fee 25.4 9.2 2.9 12.1 47.6%
Other Costs Total $189.9 $84.3 $21.8 $106.0 55.9%
Total New York Energy SmartSM $1,874.7 $705.2 $183.6 $888.8 47.4% 1 Reflects reallocation of funding among programs as approved by the Public Service Commission. 2 SBC I: July 1, 1998 through June 30, 2001; SBC II: July 1, 2001 through June 30, 2006. 3 SBC III: July 1, 2006 through June 30, 2011. 4 General Awareness previously included in Residential Program Area. Totals may not sum exactly due to rounding. Source: NYSERDA
Table 2-2. Individual Programs – Financial Status through September 30, 2007 ($ million)
Budget Funds Spent
Program Total Budget 1
SBC I & SBC II 2 SBC III 3
Total Funds Spent
% of Budget Spent
Commercial/Industrial Peak Load Management 88.2 35.1 6.7 41.8 47.4% Enhanced Commercial/ Industrial Performance 238.2 100.3 14.1 114.4 48.1% New York Energy $martSM Business Partners 43.9 21.1 3.8 24.9 56.8% Loan Fund and Financing 25.4 12.3 6.1 18.4 72.6% Energy Smart Focus 18.9 4.8 2.0 6.9 36.4% High Performance New Buildings 164.4 53.1 15.1 68.2 41.5% FlexTech Technical Assistance 55.2 20.4 2.8 23.2 42.0%
Total Commercial & Industrial $634.0 $247.1 $50.6 $297.8 47.0% Residential & Low-income
Single Family Home Performance 107.5 47.4 13.1 60.5 56.3% Multifamily Building Performance 44.5 18.3 6.7 25.0 56.4% Market Support Residential 148.9 96.5 11.5 108.0 72.6% Communities and Education 11.9 3.2 1.7 4.9 40.9%
Subtotal Residential $312.8 $165.4 $33.0 $198.4 63.4% Single Family Home Performance 83.7 27.7 9.3 37.0 44.2% Multifamily Building Performance 150.1 35.5 21.5 57.0 38.0% EmPower New York 58.3 8.8 13.5 22.3 38.3% Buying Strategies & Energy Awareness 16.6 4.7 0.9 5.6 33.9% Other 9.9 9.9 0.0 9.9 100%
Subtotal Low-Income $318.6 $86.6 $45.3 $131.9 41.4% Total Residential and Low-income $631.3 $252.0 $78.3 $330.3 52.3%
Research and Development Public Benefit Power Transmission and Distribution 10.0 0.0 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1% Clean Energy Infrastructure 91.2 19.0 13.8 32.8 35.9% Distributed Energy Resources: Power Systems Product Development & DG-CHP Demonstrations 149.2 34.0 9.5 43.5 29.1%
Demand Response and Innovative Research 10.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0% Electric Transportation 5.0 0.0 0.4 0.4 7.9% Environmental, Monitoring, Evaluation, & 39.1 17.7 2.3 20.0 51.2%
Portfolio Level Findings
2-3
Budget Funds Spent
Program Total Budget 1
SBC I & SBC II 2 SBC III 3
Total Funds Spent
% of Budget Spent
Protection Industrial and Municipal Process Efficiency 15.0 0.0 <0.1 <0.1 0.2% Next Generation and Emerging Technologies 42.7 18.3 2.4 20.7 48.5% Wholesale Renewable Energy Market 22.7 16.5 1.4 17.8 78.4%
Other 3.4 0.4 0.0 0.4 12.6% Total Research and Development $388.4 $105.9 $29.8 $135.6 34.9%
General Awareness (Marketing) 31.0 15.9 3.1 18.9 61.1%
Total New York Energy $martSM Programs $1,684.7 $620.9 $161.8 $782.6 46.5% 1 Reflects reallocation of funding among programs as approved by the Public Service Commission. 2 SBC I: July 1, 1998 through June 30, 2001; SBC II: July 1, 2001 through June 30, 2006. 3 SBC III: July 1, 2006 through June 30, 2011. Totals may not sum exactly due to rounding. Source: NYSERDA
2.2 Portfolio Level Findings
2.2.1 Progress Toward Goals
Overall, the New York Energy $martSM programs are performing well toward their five-year goals3 in the areas of energy savings, demand reduction, and other key metrics. This section discusses general progress toward these goals. Sections 3, 4, and 5 contain more detailed information. In summary:
• The Commercial/Industrial (C/I) programs are showing good progress toward their individual electricity and demand savings goals. Progress on the large majority of programs has exceeded 15%.
• Within the C/I program area, twelve different five-year goals have been set for metrics other than energy and peak demand savings. These metrics capture progress in key areas such as the number of customers served, allies participating, and dollars leveraged. The programs are performing well on these non-energy goals.
• The Residential and Low-Income programs are making good progress toward their individual electricity and fuel savings goals. With the exception of one program that has been significantly revised and is still ramping up, all the other programs are performing at expected levels.
• Twenty-six long-term goals have been set for important non-energy metrics in the Residential and Low-Income areas, including the number of customers participating, outreach efforts and people affected, and dollars leveraged. Overall, the programs are making good progress toward these goals.
• Almost 40 long-term non-energy goals have been set for the R&D portfolio. These goals address metrics such as solicitations released, projects funded, information dissemination, co-funding, and
3 Five-year goals were specified in the System Benefits Charge Proposed Plan for New York Energy $martSM Programs (2006-2011), March 2, 2006. These goals were set at the program level, and included energy savings, demand reductions and other important metrics. The five-year goals cover the time period from July 1, 2006 through June 30, 2011.
Portfolio-Level Reporting
2-4
technology transfer. In general, the programs are tracking well toward these long-term non-energy goals.
Beyond the above-stated goals, programs are also making excellent progress toward the following overarching public policy goals.
• Goal 1: Improve New York's energy system reliability and security by reducing energy demand and increasing energy efficiency, supporting innovative transmission and distribution technologies that have broad application, and enabling fuel diversity, including renewable resources.
- Together, the New York Energy $martSM programs are saving approximately 3,100 GWh of electricity annually.
- Approximately 1,214 MW of peak demand reduction has been installed, including 666 MW from permanent measures and 548 MW from curtailable measures.
- More than 100 GWh of clean, renewable energy is being generated annually, enough to power more than 16,000 homes per year.
• Goal 2: Reduce the energy cost burden of New Yorkers by offering energy users, particularly the State's lowest income households, services that moderate the effects of energy price increases and volatility and provide access to cost-effective energy efficiency options.
- The New York Energy $martSM programs are saving customers approximately $480 million annually on their energy bills.
- In total 71,840 low-income households have been served. On average, each household’s energy bill has been reduced by $195 per year.
- The New York Energy $martSM Program has achieved a benefit-cost ratio of 2.1 under the most conservative Total Market Effects Test ratio.4
• Goal 3: Mitigate the environmental and health impacts of energy use by increasing energy efficiency, encouraging the development of support services for renewable energy resources, and optimizing the energy performance of buildings and products.
- The emission reductions from the New York Energy $martSM Program energy savings are more than 2,610 tons of nitrogen oxide, 4,790 tons of sulfur dioxide, and 2.0 million tons of carbon dioxide annually, the equivalent of removing more than 400,000 cars from the road.
• Goal 4: Create economic opportunity and promote economic well-being by supporting emerging energy technologies, fostering competition, improving productivity, stimulating the growth of New York energy businesses, and helping to meet future energy needs through efficiency and innovation.
- The New York Energy $martSM programs have led to the creation or retention of approximately 3,700 jobs.
4 Benefit-cost analysis is conducted once annually and results were presented in NYSERDA, New York Energy $martSM Program Quarterly Evaluation and Status Report, Quarter Ending March 31, 2007, May 2007.
Portfolio Level Findings
2-5
- Over the past fifteen months, NYSERDA has worked with eight companies to expand their renewable energy businesses (6) and renewable energy product manufacturing (2) in New York.
2.2.2 Summary of Program Benefits
Table 2-3 shows the cumulative New York Energy $martSM Program benefits through September 30, 2007, and through the last three calendar years. Cumulative annual electric savings has reached 3,100 GWh. Peak demand reduction efforts have led to a total reduction of 1,214 MW that consists of permanent and curtailable demand reductions. Renewable energy generation now amounts to 106 GWh.
Table 2-3. Cumulative Program Benefits from Installed Measures
Benefits
Through Year-End 2004
Through Year-End
2005
Through Year-End
2006
Through September 30,
20073
Electricity Savings from Energy Efficiency and On-Site Generation (Annual GWh) 1,400 1,950 2,350 3,100
Peak Demand Reduction (MW) 860 1,040 1,113 1,214
Permanent Measures (MW) 325 445 495 666
Curtailable1 535 595 618 548
Annual Energy Bill Savings to Participating Customers ($ Million) $195 $275 $330 $480
Net Fuel Savings (Annual MMBtu) 2,600,000 4,000,000 4,049,000 4,900,000
Renewable Energy Generation (Annual GWh) 102 103 105 106
Jobs Created and Retained per Year2 2,500 3,100 3,700 3,700
NOx Emissions Reductions (Annual Tons) 1,280 1,750 2,060 2,610
SO2 Emissions Reductions (Annual Tons) 2,320 3,170 3,800 4,790
CO2 Emissions Reductions (Annual Tons) 1,000,000 1,400,000 1,600,000 2,035,000
Equivalent number of cars removed from NY roadways. 200,000 275,000 320,000 405,000 1 Curtailable MW have decreased due to a reassessment of the impact of the Enabling Technologies program. MWs enabled under the SBC2 program Enabling Technologies for Price Responsive Load were not required to persist beyond the period of the contract. As such, the available MWs have steadily declined since the program’s close. 2 Figures in this row represent the average number of jobs created and retained through year-end. Results from 2004 and 2005 have been restated based on new analysis conducted in 2006. 3 Due to the addition of 2005 and 2006 CFL energy savings and 2006 appliance savings from the ENERGY STAR Products program, the electricity savings and demand reductions for 3rd quarter 2007 show a significant increase from year-end 2006. Year-end savings for 2005 and 2006 were not back-adjusted to reflect these additional savings. The gains in savings also impact bill savings, gas and oil savings, and emissions reductions.
Portfolio-Level Reporting
2-6
2.3 Solicitations Update
Table 2-4 shows Requests for Proposals (RFPs) and Program Opportunity Notices (PONs) released during the third quarter of 2007. Only new solicitations released in the third quarter are included. Additional solicitations released prior to the third quarter could still be open.
Table 2-4. Solicitations Issued in 3rd Quarter 2007
Solicitation Number Solicitation Name Solicitation
Release Date Solicitation
Closing Date
Commercial and Industrial Program Area
PON 1060 Loan Fund Incentives 8/27/07 7/31/09
R&D Program Area
PON 1141 Environmental Monitoring, Evaluation, and Protection (EMEP) Program Ecosystem Research
8/27/07 10/1/07
PON 1164 Advanced Sensors and Controls for Building and Industrial Applications
7/23/07 10/3/07
PON 1179 Environmental Monitoring, Evaluation, and Protection (EMEP) Program Air Quality Research
9/17/07 11/06/07
3-1
3
Commercial/Industrial Programs
3.1 Commercial/Industrial Evaluation Activities
3.1.1 Completed Evaluation Activities
One major evaluation study, focusing on non-participant market effects and spillover, was completed this quarter. Results of this study are summarized in Section 3.2.3. Results were used to update net-to-gross ratios for Enhanced Commercial/Industrial Performance, FlexTech Technical Assistance, Small Commercial Lighting, and the Loan Fund.
3.1.2 Evaluation Activities in Progress and Planned
Several major evaluations are underway in the C/I sector. Results from phase one of the New York City process and market evaluation, and High Performance Buildings market characterization and assessment are likely to be included in the March 2008 annual evaluation report. Results from the following additional studies will be reported out as these efforts are completed: review of gross and net savings from the 25 largest energy-saving projects; prospective benefits study for the High Performance New Buildings Program; evaluation of savings from rate analysis and aggregation studies; Peak Load Management Program market characterization and assessment; ECIPP process evaluation; and Loan Fund process evaluation.
3.2 Summary of C/I Evaluation Results
3.2.1 Progress Toward Non-Energy Goals
Within the C/I program area, 12 different five-year goals have been set for metrics other than energy and peak demand savings. These metrics capture progress in key areas such as the number of customers served, allies participating, and dollars leveraged. After 15 months of the five-year measurement period, progress is tracking as expected on the majority of these goals.
3.2.2 Energy, Peak Demand, and Fuel Savings
Table 3-1 shows the electricity savings achieved by the Commercial/Industrial programs as well as progress toward the five-year goals that have been established for select programs. Table 3-2 shows peak
Commercial/Industrial Programs
3-2
demand savings and progress toward several program-specific goals in that area. Table 3-3 shows other fuel savings.
Table 3-1. C/I Program Cumulative Annual Electricity Savings through September 30, 2007 and Progress toward Five-Year Goal
Energy Savings (GWh)
Savings Achieved through Program
June 30, 2006a
September 30, 2007
Five-Year Goal through June 30,
2011
Progress Toward Five-
Year Goal (% achieved)
Peak Load Management: Permanent ConEdison
106.4a 61.9a
138.0 87.3
107 55
30% 46%
Enhanced Commercial and Industrial Performance Program ConEdison
730.6
224.1
932.9
251.3
320
N/A
63%
N/A
Business Partners Program ConEdison
54.1 4.3
66.5 7.4
80 N/A
16% N/A
Loan Fund and Financing ConEdison
49.6 0.5
68.7 17.8
N/A N/A
N/A N/A
High Performance New Buildings ConEdison
223.2 48.2
327.6 81.0
210 N/A
50% N/A
Flex Tech Technical Assistance ConEdison
644.1 115.2
896.7 242.1
400 N/A
63% N/A
Overlap Removed 126.7 173.7 N/A N/A
ConEdison C/I Total 454.3 686.8 N/A N/A
Statewide C/I Total 1,681.3 2,256.8 N/A N/A
Note: N/A means not applicable (i.e., a goal has not been set for this program). a Savings reported previously included projects funded through the ConEdison Power Savings Partners Program. These savings have been removed to more accurately reflect accomplishments.
Summary of C/I Evaluation Results
3-3
Table 3-2. C/I Program Cumulative Peak Demand Savings through September 30, 2007 and Progress toward Five-Year Goal
Peak Demand Savings (MW)
Savings Achieved through Program June 30,
2006a September
30, 2007
Five-Year Goal through June 30,
2011
Progress Toward Five-
Year Goal (% achieved)
Peak Load Management: Permanent ConEdison
42.5a 27.4a
52.9 35.8
60 45
17% 19%
Peak Load Management: Callable ConEdison
421.1a 188.3a
437.3 197.9
240 125
7% 8%
Enhanced Commercial and Industrial Performance Program ConEdison
132.5
54.7
160.0
62.1
50
N/A
55%
N/A
Business Partners Program ConEdison
11.8 1.0
15.9 2.0
16 N/A
25% N/A
Loan Fund and Financing ConEdison
14.3 0.5
43.4 16.0
N/A N/A
N/A N/A
High Performance New Buildings ConEdison
45.5 15.9
75.2 24.8
24 N/A
124% N/A
Flex Tech Technical Assistance ConEdison
120.9 30.6
167.6 45.3
80 N/A
58% N/A
Flex Tech Technical Assistance: Callable 10.2 11.7 N/A N/A
Overlap Removed 24.5 39.1 N/A N/A
ConEdison C/I Total 318.4 384.0 N/A N/A
Statewide C/I Total 774.4 925.0 N/A N/A
Note: N/A means not applicable (i.e., a goal has not been set for this program). a Savings reported previously included projects funded through the ConEdison Power Savings Partners Program. These savings have been removed to more accurately reflect accomplishments.
Commercial/Industrial Programs
3-4
Table 3-3. C/I Program Cumulative Annual Fuel Savings through September 30, 2007
Fuel Savings (MMBtu)
Savings Achieved through Program
June 30, 2006 September 30, 2007
Enhanced Commercial and Industrial Performance Program ConEdison
3,252 420
5,409 651
Loan Fund and Financing ConEdison
137,239 4,941
704,986 52,874
Flex Tech Technical Assistance1 ConEdison
3,164,000 800,846
3,508,920 947,408
Overlap Removed 158,200 212,509
ConEdison C/I Total 806,207 1,000,934
Statewide C/I Total 3,146,291 4,006,447
Note: No one-year goals for fuel savings were established. 1 The methodology to assess impacts focuses on developing samples based on electricity savings, rather than fuel, resulting in a less than optimal sample for fuel-savings projects and fluctuation over time in the calculated impacts. Also, the program recommends on-site generation, which would result in an increase in fuel use, offsetting fuel reductions achieved.
3.2.3 C/I Existing Buildings Non-Participant Market Effects Study
The Summit Blue Market Characterization, Assessment, and Causality (MCAC) evaluation team last examined non-participant spillover in 2005. The evaluation conducted in 2007 reassessed this estimate and examined broad market effects resulting from NYSERDA’s New York Energy $martSM Programs with a specific emphasis placed on the NEMA Premium® motors market. Thus, the current evaluation consisted primarily of causality/attribution work that focused on identifying the impacts of program interventions beyond what would have happened without the program.
Research Approach
The research approach used by the MCAC Team to conduct the C/I market effects evaluation consisted of planning meetings with NYSERDA evaluation and program staff and the Premium-Efficiency Motors Program implementation contractor; a review of secondary data sources; telephone interviews with thought leaders in the energy efficiency arena to discuss market effects evaluation techniques; a review of NYSERDA’s portfolio-, sector-, and program-level Logic Model Reports; primary data collection via telephone surveys with non-participating C/I end-use customers; primary data collection via telephone surveys and Delphi panels with motor vendors and manufacturers; and an analysis of 2005 NEMA motor shipment data by state1.
This approach also examined a variety of primary and secondary data sources to assess impacts attributable to the New York Energy $martSM Program not just in terms of energy savings and peak demand reduction, but also in terms of other progress indicators, including skills, attitudes, behaviors,
1 The 2005 data are the latest data available from NEMA.
Summary of C/I Evaluation Results
3-5
product offerings, and policies.2 These other impacts are termed market effects because they are expected to persist well beyond the natural life-cycle of the New York Energy $martSM Program, thereby affecting market dynamics and decision-making by actors who participated in the NYSERDA program offerings as well as those who did not.
Market Assessment and Non-Participant Spillover - Findings
Results for the market assessment and attribution (i.e., non-participant spillover) evaluations were based on surveys conducted with non-participating end-use customers. Select findings from the market assessment and non-participant spillover components of the MCAC evaluation included:
• Non-participant end-use customers reported a general awareness of NYSERDA’s presence in the marketplace, a situation likely related to NYSERDA’s program promotion and outreach activities as well as other external influences, including fluctuating energy prices, broad economic conditions, and perceived environmental considerations among others. Similar to prior research findings, market actors tend to be more familiar with the overarching New York Energy $martSM Program than with specific program offerings.
• Electric utilities, NYSERDA, and the New York Energy $martSM Program were perceived as the most credible sources providing information or services related to energy efficiency services and technologies. These results confirm prior research findings showing that NYSERDA’s involvement in the market provides credibility to help market actors present and gain approval on efforts to incorporate energy efficiency measures into new equipment installations and business planning activities. The results also imply a possible opportunity for NYSERDA to develop strategic marketing and implementation relationships with electric utilities across the State to generate increased market awareness of energy efficiency opportunities, and possibly greater market uptake of NYSERDA program offerings.
• Most organizations reported that the importance of energy efficiency considerations in their selection of energy-using systems and equipment had increased over the past five years primarily due to three market level trends: (1) a desire to mitigate the impact of rising energy costs; (2) a desire to lessen their organizations’ environmental impacts and (3) a growing market awareness of energy efficiency opportunities. Nonetheless, additional untapped energy efficiency opportunities likely exist, and efforts to overcome key market barriers in terms of lack of experience and performance uncertainties with high efficiency measures and equipment should be continued. Furthermore, targeted efforts to disseminate knowledge to key decision-makers able to influence organizational purchasing processes also should be continued.
• Significant barriers to further implementation of energy-efficient measures, such as availability of equipment and uncertainty about equipment reliability, are being reduced as key market actors become increasingly familiar with energy efficiency measures and equipment; however, first/incremental cost remains a perceived impediment, and should remain a focus of program intervention strategies going forward.
2 To view the complete list of relevant progress indicators see: Program Theory and Logic Model Evaluation Contractor Team, NYSERDA Commercial and Industrial Sector Level Program Logic, Final, July 23, 2007.
Commercial/Industrial Programs
3-6
• More than one-quarter of the end-use customers3 surveyed indicated that the New York Energy $martSM Program had influenced them to increase the efficiency of measures or equipment installed in their projects. Given these findings, as well as the general awareness of NYSERDA’s presence in the marketplace, the non-participant spillover analysis provides evidence that the New York Energy $martSM Program is impacting the overall market beyond those energy savings measured at participating projects.
• Given the uncertainty in the size of the non-participant renovation/equipment-replacement market, the MCAC analysis provides a broad range of non-participant spillover estimates attributable to the New York Energy $martSM Program. Cumulative annual non-participant spillover savings range from a low of 89 GWh to a high of 394 GWh, which corresponds to 5% to 23% of the total gross savings from NYSERDA’s commercial and industrial programs, i.e., 1,670 GWh4 per year, with a reasonable best estimate value judged by the MCAC Team to be 15% (258 GWh) of the total gross savings.5
The non-participant spillover estimate is applied to the following programs: Enhanced CIPP, Technical Assistance, Loan Fund, and Small Commercial Lighting. This spillover value does not apply to the New Construction Program since the equipment-replacement spillover savings do not apply to new construction projects. In addition, Commercial HVAC and Premium Efficiency Motors are not included due to the more purely market transformational nature of the two programs than the other C/I programs, and since the estimated spillover values calculated for the two programs in prior MCAC evaluations accounted for non-participant effects.
Market Effects in the NEMA Premium® Motors Market – Findings
NYSERDA’s program offerings by design include both resource acquisition and market transformation strategies that lead to substantial impacts that are measured not just in terms of energy savings and peak demand reduction, but also in terms of other progress indicators, including skills, attitudes, behaviors, product offerings, and policies. These other impacts are termed market effects because they are expected to persist well beyond the natural life-cycle of the New York Energy $martSM Program, thereby affecting market dynamics and decision-making by actors who participated in the NYSERDA program offerings as well as those who did not. The current evaluation assessed and quantified the magnitude of these market effects in the NEMA Premium® motors market, through telephone surveys and Delphi panels, with motor vendors and manufacturers as well as analyses of 2005 NEMA motor shipment data by state. Select findings from the market effects component of the evaluation include:
• A broad awareness of NYSERDA program offerings exists within the motor vendor community and vendors are actively engaged in selling the products promoted by the NYSERDA programs. Many vendors credit NYSERDA programs, among other factors, with helping to develop the market for NEMA Premium® motors and advanced motor controls.
3 Each of whom were non-participants, eligible for the New York Energy $martSM Program, who had installed energy-using equipment within the past two years. 4 Realized gross savings values were taken from the New York Energy $martSM Program Evaluation and Status Report, March 2007. 5 It is important to note that the spillover percentages here are not directly comparable to those presented in 2005 due to NYSERDA’s adoption of a revised net-to-gross formula in 2006. This change requires that non-participant spillover be calculated on gross program savings as opposed to net program savings. For comparison purposes, the previous best estimate of non-participant spillover (14%) would actually be 10% using the new methodology based on gross program savings.
Peak Load Management Program (PLMP)
3-7
• The majority of motor vendors reported broad increases in their customers’ awareness of and familiarity with NEMA Premium® motors and advanced motor controls as well as the corresponding market demand, over the past five years, for these types of products. The vendors felt that these trends had in turn driven motor manufacturers to expand their available product lines and influenced the number of vendors/contractors offering NEMA Premium® motors to the market.
• Overall, motor vendors estimated that impacts from NYSERDA’s programs had doubled the market share of NEMA Premium® motors from 12% (vendor estimate in the absence of NYSERDA programs) to 24% (vendor estimate of current market share). The market share estimate provided by vendors suggests that a goal of NYSERDA’s Premium-Efficiency Motors Program to increase the market share of NEMA Premium® motors to at least 19% has been exceeded and that this would not have been the case in the absence of NYSERDA’s programs.
• Motor vendors reported significant remaining market opportunities for specific end-use applications involving NEMA Premium® motors and advanced motor controls. Vendors noted that the single greatest remaining market opportunity for both NEMA Premium® motors and advanced motor controls exists in the compressor market with other opportunities present, albeit to a somewhat lesser extent, in HVAC equipment applications and pumping applications.
• Motor vendors reported that rising energy costs are the primary factor driving increased sales of NEMA Premium® motors and advanced motor controls, with increasing market awareness of these technologies, as well as NYSERDA’s program offerings also contributing to increased adoption. The majority of vendors indicated that they expect sales of NEMA Premium® motors to increase in the coming year; however, their sales expectations decreased noticeably when asked to consider a market without NYSERDA’s presence.
In general, motor manufacturers held similar views of the market as those reported by the motor vendors. A noticeable exception is that all manufacturer respondents stated that their organizations’ sales of NEMA Premium® motors in New York would be the same over the next year even if NYSERDA’s Premium-Efficiency Motors Program was discontinued. Given that manufacturer representatives are often key actors affecting ongoing market dynamics, it is important that NYSERDA expand existing outreach activities to motor manufacturers (and vendors) to keep them well informed about program features and changes as the available program offerings evolve over time. Doing so should help increase motor manufacturer and vendor satisfaction with, and favorable opinion of, available program offerings; thereby creating additional sales agents to assist with program marketing efforts. In addition, successfully engaging motor manufacturers and vendors in available program offerings will help NYSERDA better meet its goals of promoting competitive markets for energy efficiency products and services as well as expanding the delivery channels and other market infrastructure required to generate additional market uptake of energy-efficient technologies and practices.
3.3 Peak Load Management Program (PLMP)
3.3.1 Progress Toward Goals
As shown in Table 3-4, the Peak Load Management Program has a goal to assist 750 customers in five years. Thus far, the program has assisted 161 customers, and has achieved approximately 20% of its five-year goal.
Commercial/Industrial Programs
3-8
Table 3-4. Peak Load Management Program – Goal and Achievement
Activity Program Goal
(July 1, 2006 through June 30, 2011)
Achieved July 1, 2006 through September 30, 2007
% of Goal Achieved
Customers receiving assistance 750 161 21%
3.3.2 Energy, Peak Demand and Fuel Savings
Table 3-5 shows the cumulative annual energy and peak demand savings from the PLMP. A realization rate and net-to-gross ratio are applied to adjust the program reported savings based on the most recent Measurement and Verification (M&V) and Attribution evaluation studies. Net savings in the rightmost column are the total savings being claimed by the program after these evaluation activities.
Table 3-5. PLMP Cumulative Annual Energy and Peak Demand Savings (through September 2007)
Program Reported Savings
M&V Realiza-tion rate
Adjusted Gross
Savings
Freerider-ship Spillover
Net-to-Gross Ratio1
Net Savings
DEGI (MW) 91.8 0.86 78.9 24% 25% 0.95 75.0
LC/S (MW) 153.7 0.92 141.4 24% 25% 0.95 134.4
PDRE ( MW) 45.8 0.94 43.1 25% 37% 1.03 44.3
Cooling Recom-missioning (MW) 8.6 1.0 8.6 0% 0% 1.0 8.6
IM (MW) 244.3 0.85 207.7 10% 22% 1.1 228.0
Total MW 544.2 N/A 479.7 N/A N/A N/A 490.2
PDRE (MWh) 110,281 1.0 110,281 25% 37% 1.03 113,314
Cooling Recom-missioning (MWh) 24,700 1.0 24,700 0% 0% 1.0 24,700
Total MWh 134,981 N/A 134,891 N/A N/A N/A 138,014 1 Net-to-Gross Ratio = (1-Freeridership) * (1+Spillover). N/A – Not Applicable
3.4 Enhanced Commercial and Industrial Performance Program (ECIPP)
3.4.1 Progress Toward Goals
Table 3-6 shows the two five-year, non-energy goals for ECIPP and progress to date. Progress on both goals has reached the expected level 15 months into the five-year measurement period.
Enhanced Commercial and Industrial Performance Program (ECIPP)
3-9
Table 3-6. Enhanced Commercial and Industrial Performance Program – Goals and Achievements
Activity Program Goals
(July 1, 2006 through June 30, 2011)
Achieved July 1, 2006 through September 30,
20071 % of Goal Achieved
Leveraged Funds ($ million) $400-450 $115 29%
Customer Projects 3,300-3,500 625 19% 1 Metrics from previous quarter were brought forward. Third quarter metrics are still being examined.
3.4.2 Energy, Peak Demand and Fuel Savings
Table 3-7 shows the cumulative annual energy and peak demand savings from the ECIPP. A realization rate and net-to-gross ratio are applied to adjust the program-reported savings based on the most recent Measurement and Verification and Attribution evaluation studies. Net savings in the rightmost column are the total savings being claimed by the program after these evaluation activities.
The market effects study discussed in Section 3.2.3 included a reassessment of non-participant spillover attributable to several of the C/I existing buildings programs, including all elements of ECIPP. As a result of this study, the overall spillover value and net-to-gross ratios were increased by 1% for the Commercial/Industrial Performance and Smart Equipment Choices program elements. These latest results are incorporated into Table 3-7.
Table 3-7. ECIPP Cumulative Annual Energy and Peak Demand Savings (Through September 2007)
Program Reported Savings
Realiza-tion Rate
Adjusted Gross
Savings
Freerider-ship Spillover
Net-to-Gross Ratio
Net Savings
Commercial/Industrial Performance Program
MWh/year 800,236 1.01 808,238 31% 45% 1.05a 848,650
MW On-Peak 176.1 0.77 135.6 31% 45% 1.05a 142.4
Smart Equipment Choices
MWh/year 125,822 0.93 117,015 51% 46% 0.72b 84,251
MW On-Peak 26.3 0.93 24.5 51% 46% 0.72b 17.6
MMBtu/year 7,013 1.0 7,013 51% 46% 0.72b 5,049
Enhanced Commercial/Industrial Performance Program (ECIPP) - Total
MWh/year 926,058 N/A 925,253 N/A N/A N/A 932,901
MW On-Peak 202.5 N/A 160.1 N/A N/A N/A 160.0
MMBtu/year 7,013 N/A 7,013 N/A N/A N/A 5,049
a Net-to-Gross Ratio = 1-Freeridership + Spillover (a weighted average of the NTG ratios estimated in the previous MCAC analysis and the current analysis is shown here). b Net-to-Gross Ratio = (1-Freeridership) * (1+Spillover). N/A – Not Applicable
Commercial/Industrial Programs
3-10
3.5 New York Energy $martSM Business Partners
3.5.1 Progress Toward Goals
Table 3-8 shows the Business Partners Program goal to sign up 1,500 partners over five years. Although 746 allies are currently participating in Small Commercial Lighting, 71 new allies have signed up since July 1, 2006. Program staff expects an increase in allies as the core services and program elements ramp up.
Table 3-8. New York Energy $martSM Business Partners Program – Goal and Achievement
Activity Program Goals
(July 1, 2006 through June 30, 2011)
Achieved July 1, 2006 through September 30,
2007 % of Goal Achieved
Business Partners (signed up) 1,500 71 5%
3.5.2 Energy, Peak Demand and Fuel Savings
Table 3-9 shows the cumulative annual energy and peak demand savings from the Business Partners Program. A realization rate and net-to-gross ratio are applied to adjust the program-reported savings, based on the most recent Measurement and Verification and Attribution evaluation studies. Net savings in the rightmost column are the total savings being claimed by the program after these evaluation activities.
The market effects study discussed in Section 3.2.3 included a reassessment of non-participant spillover attributable to several of the C/I programs, including Small Commercial Lighting. As a result of this study, the overall spillover value and net-to-gross ratio were increased by 1%. These latest results are incorporated into Table 3-9.
Table 3-9. New York Energy $martSM Business Partners Cumulative Annual Energy and Peak Demand Savings (through September 2007)
Program-Reported Savings
Realization Rate
Adjusted Gross
Savings Freeridership Spillover
Net-to-Gross Ratio1
Net Savings
Small Commercial Lighting
MWh/year 40,947 0.94 38,490 39% 80% 1.10 42,339
MW On-Peak
10.6 1.0 10.6 39% 80% 1.10 11.6
Premium-Efficiency Motors2
MWh/year 9,885 1.0 9,885 67% 168% 0.88 8,776
MW On-Peak
1.8 1.0 1.8 67% 113% 0.70 1.3
Commercial HVAC3
MWh/ year
6,767 N/A 6,767 N/A N/A N/A 6,767
New York Energy $martSM Loan Fund and Financing Program
3-11
Program-Reported Savings
Realization Rate
Adjusted Gross
Savings Freeridership Spillover
Net-to-Gross Ratio1
Net Savings
MW On-Peak
2.0 N/A 2.0 N/A N/A N/A 2.0
Hospitality Lighting
MWh/ year
8,660 Not Evaluated
8,660 Not Evaluated
Not Evaluated
Not Evaluated
8,660
MW On-Peak
0.9 Not Evaluated
0.9 Not Evaluated
Not Evaluated
Not Evaluated
0.9
Total Business Partners
MWh/ year
66,259 N/A 63,802 N/A N/A N/A 66,542
MW On-Peak
15.3 N/A 15.3 N/A N/A N/A 15.8
1 Net-to-Gross Ratio = (1-Freeridership) * (1+Spillover). 2 Savings from the prior motor incentive program have been held constant since last year. Savings achieved in 2006 from the new motor management program and the STAC 100 Motors program, in the amount of 296,202 kWh and 48 kW, have been added in the Net Savings column. 3 Savings for the Commercial HVAC portion of the program have been reduced as of 4th Quarter 2006. This approach was taken due to the known short-term nature of savings from advanced diagnostics and commissioning, which were part of the program. N/A – not applicable
3.6 New York Energy $martSM Loan Fund and Financing Program
3.6.1 Progress Toward Goals
Three longer-term non-energy goals have been set for the Loan Fund and Financing Program. These five-year goals and progress are shown in Table 3-10. The Loan Fund will likely exceed its five-year goals for the number of participating lenders and the leveraged loan amount. Progress on the goal for the number of customers receiving assistance is on track at this point.
Commercial/Industrial Programs
3-12
Table 3-10. New York Energy $martSM Loan Fund and Financing Program – Near-Term Goals and Achievements for Commercial/Industrial Projects
Activity
Program Goals (July 1, 2006
through June 30, 2011)
Achieved July 1, 2006 through September 30,
2007
% of Goal Achieved
Customers receiving assistance (closed commercial/industrial loans) 500 131 26%
Participating lenders (signed participation agreements) 75 54 73%
Leveraged loan amount (for closed commercial/industrial loans) $60 million $44.2 74%
3.6.2 Energy, Peak Demand and Fuel Savings
Table 3-11 shows the cumulative annual energy and peak demand savings from the Loan Fund and Financing Program. A realization rate and net-to-gross ratio are applied to adjust the program reported savings based on the most recent Measurement and Verification and Attribution evaluation studies. Net savings in the rightmost column are the total savings being claimed by the program after these evaluation activities.
The market effects study discussed in Section 3.2.3 included a reassessment of non-participant spillover attributable to several of the C/I existing buildings programs, including the Loan Fund. As a result of this study, the overall spillover value and net-to-gross ratio were increased by 1% for the Loan Fund. These latest results are incorporated into Table 3-11.
Table 3-11. Loan Fund Cumulative Annual Energy and Peak Demand Savings (through June 2007)
Program-Reported Savings1
Realiza-tion Rate
Adjusted Gross
Savings
Freerider-ship Spillover Net-to-Gross
Ratio2 Net
Savings
MWh/year 87,462 0.81a 73,901 27% 20% 0.93 68,728
MW On-Peak 29.3 1.73a 46.7 27% 20% 0.93 43.4
MMBtu 476,610 1.59 758,050 27% 20% 0.93 704,986 1 Due to coding issues in the program database, presented here are savings through 2nd Quarter 2007. 2 Net-to-Gross Ratio = 1-Freeridership+Spillover. a The realization rates calculated only apply to the custom measure kWh and kW savings. Savings arising from pre-qualified measures have a realization rate of 1.0.
3.7 Energy Smart Focus Program
3.7.1 Progress Toward Goals
Table 3-12 shows the Energy Smart Focus Program five-year goal for participants receiving assistance. The Program has achieved 3% of its goal. However, only the Energy Smart Schools Program element existed prior to July 2006, and services to other sectors are currently ramping up.
High Performance New Buildings Program
3-13
Table 3-12. Energy Smart Focus Program – Goal and Achievement
Activity Program Goals
(July 1, 2006 through June 30, 2011)
Achieved July 1, 2006 through September 30, 2007
% of Goal Achieved
Participants Receiving Assistance 21,000 690 3%
3.7.2 Energy, Peak Demand and Fuel Savings
Energy Smart Focus is primarily a sector-based energy information and services program. Services provided vary by sector, but ultimately many customers will elect to participate in other New York Energy $martSM programs. Energy and demand savings that may be attributable to the Focus Program are tracked and reported under the other New York Energy $martSM programs.
3.8 High Performance New Buildings Program
3.8.1 Progress Toward Goals
Three long-term non-energy goals have been set for the High Performance New Buildings Program. Table 3-13 shows these five-year goals and progress to date. With progress on all goals falling between 18% and 27%, the Program progress is tracking as expected fifteen months into the five-year measurement period.
Table 3-13. High Performance New Buildings Program – Near-Term Goals and Achievements
Activity
Program Goals (July 1, 2006
through June 30, 2011)
Achieved July 1, 2006 through September 30,
2007 % of Goal Achieved
Customers receiving assistance (completed projects) 750 136 18%
Construction market affected (square feet) 75 Million 16.7 Million 22%
Participating A&E firms (completed projects) 800 217 27%
3.8.2 Energy, Peak Demand and Fuel Savings
Table 3-14 shows the cumulative annual energy and peak demand savings from the High Performance New Buildings Program. A realization rate and net-to-gross ratio are applied to adjust the program reported savings based on the most recent Measurement and Verification and Attribution evaluation studies. Net savings in the rightmost column are the total savings being claimed by the program after these evaluation activities.
Commercial/Industrial Programs
3-14
Table 3-14. High Performance New Buildings Cumulative Annual Energy and Peak Demand Savings (through September 2007)
Program-Reported Savings
Realiz-ation Rate
Adjusted Gross
Savings
Freerider-ship Spillover
Net-to-Gross Ratio1
Net Savings
MWh/year 253,345 1.06 268,546 40% 85% 1.22 327,626
MW On-Peak 58.1 1.06 61.6 40% 85% 1.22 75.2
1 Net-to-Gross Ratio = 1-Freeridership+Spillover (a weighted average of the NTG ratios estimated in the previous MCAC analysis and this current analysis is shown here).
3.9 FlexTech Technical Assistance Program
3.9.1 Progress Toward Goals
Shown in Table 3-15 is the FlexTech Technical Assistance goal and progress in terms of the number of customers served. With 19% of its five-year goal achieved, the Program is tracking as expected 15 months into the measurement period.
Table 3-15. FlexTech Technical Assistance Program – Goal and Achievement
Activity Program Goal
(July 1, 2006 through June 30, 2011)
Achieved July 1, 2006 through September
30, 2007
% of Goal Achieved
Customers receiving assistance (approved proposals) 3,000 575 19%
3.9.2 Energy, Peak Demand and Fuel Savings
Table 3-16 shows the cumulative annual energy and peak demand savings from the FlexTech Technical Assistance Program. The adjustments resulting from the measurement and verification evaluation study are applied within the program-reported figure. A net-to-gross ratio is applied to adjust the program-reported savings based on the most recent Attribution evaluation study. Net savings in the rightmost column are the total savings being claimed by the program after these evaluation activities.
The market effects study discussed in Section 3.2.3 included a reassessment of non-participant spillover attributable to several of the C/I existing buildings programs, including FlexTech Technical Assistance. This study recommended a 1% increase in the non-participant spillover value being used for the program. However, due to rounding, applying the 1% additional spillover did not have an overall effect on the net-to-gross ratio. Therefore, the adjustment factors shown in Table 3-16 are unchanged from last quarter.
FlexTech Technical Assistance Program
3-15
Table 3-16. FlexTech Technical Assistance Program Cumulative Annual Energy and Peak Demand Savings (through September 2007)
Program-Reported Savings
Realization Rate
Adjusted Gross
Savings
Freerider-ship Spillover
Net-to-Gross Ratio1
Net Savings
MWh/ year 786,600 1.0 786,600 25% 48% 1.14 896,724
MW On-Peak 147.1 1.0 147.1 25% 48% 1.14 167.6
MW Enabled 10.3 1.0 10.3 25% 48% 1.14 11.7
MMBtu 3,078,000 1.0 3,078,000 25% 48% 1.14 3,508,920 1 Net-to-Gross Ratio = 1-Freeridership+Spillover (a weighted average of the NTG ratios estimated in the previous MCAC analysis and this current analysis is shown here).
4-1
4
Residential and Low-Income Programs
4.1 Residential and Low-Income Evaluation Activities
4.1.1 Completed Evaluation Activities
During the third quarter, sector-level program theory and logic models were completed for both the Residential and Low-Income areas. These logic models can be found in Appendix A.
4.1.2 Evaluation Activities in Progress and Planned
Several major evaluations are underway in the Residential and Low-Income sectors. Results from the Small Homes Program market characterization and assessment, the prospective benefits analysis of the Home Performance with ENERGY STAR Program, and the Multifamily Building Performance Program process evaluation will likely be included in the March 2008 annual evaluation report. Results from the evaluation of ENERGY STAR product sales attributable to the New York Energy $martSM programs, arrearage reduction resulting from the EmPower Program, Market Support and Outreach process evaluation, and Home Performance process evaluation will be reported out when available.
4.2 Summary of Residential and Low-Income Evaluation Results
4.2.1 Progress Toward Non-Energy Goals
Twenty-six long-term goals have been set for important non-energy metrics in the Residential and Low-Income area, including the number of customers participating, outreach efforts and people affected, and dollars leveraged. Fifteen months into the five-year measurement period, progress is tracking as expected on the majority of these goals.
4.2.2 Energy, Peak Demand, and Fuel Savings
Table 4-1 shows Residential and Low-Income program electric savings through September 30, 2007 and progress toward the five-year goals. Table 4-2 and Table 4-3 show peak demand reductions and fuel savings, respectively. Table 4-3 also includes progress toward five-year fuel savings goals.
Residential and Low-Income Programs
4-2
Table 4-1. Residential and Low-Income Program Cumulative Annual Electricity Savings through September 30, 2007 and Progress toward Five-Year Goals
Energy Savings (GWh)
Savings Achieved through Program
June 30, 2006
September 30, 2007
Five-Year Goal through June 30, 2011
Progress Toward
Five-Year Goal
(% achieved)
Single Family Home Performance Program: Existing Homes1 ConEdison
13.5
0.2
16.2
0.3
26.1
N/A
10%
N/A
Single Family Home Performance Program: New Homes ConEdison
7.3
0.7
13.3
0.8
8.9
N/A
67%
N/A
Multifamily Building Performance Program: Existing Buildings2 ConEdison
31.0
19.0
38.5
24.9
249.5
N/A
3%
N/A
Multifamily Building Performance Program: New Buildings ConEdison
0
0
0
0
24
N/A
0%
N/A
Market Support Program ConEdison
539.1a 305.2
647.0 359.4
200 N/A
54% N/A
EmPower New York ConEdison
20.1 1.6
32.6 3.0
51.1 N/A
24% N/A
ConEdison Residential & Low-Income Total 326.7 388.5 N/A N/A
Statewide Residential & Low-Income Total 610.9 747.6 N/A N/A
a This baseline savings figure does not match the 2nd quarter 2006 published value. The impacts for Energy Star Products are derived annually from market data, and the 2nd quarter savings value was estimated retrospectively to provide a more accurate baseline for measuring progress. 1 Savings for the low-income Assisted Home Performance Program (6.0 GWh) are included in this row. 2 Savings for the low-income Assisted Multifamily Program (20.6 GWh) are included in this row, the remainder are savings from the closed Residential Comprehensive Energy and Direct Install programs. N/A – Not Applicable
Summary of Residential and Low-Income Evaluation Results
4-3
Table 4-2. Residential and Low-Income Program Cumulative Peak Demand Savings through September 30, 2007
Demand Savings (MW)
Savings Achieved through Program
June 30, 2006 September 30, 2007
Single Family Home Performance Program: Existing Homes1 ConEdison
2.0 0.0
2.3 0.0
Single Family Home Performance Program: New Homes ConEdison
0.9 0.2
3.6 0.3
Multifamily Building Performance Program: Existing Buildings2 ConEdison
3.9 1.7
26.1a 2.7
Multifamily Building Performance Program: New Buildings ConEdison
N/A N/A
0 0
Market Support Program ConEdison
104.3 56.4
121.6 69.0
EmPower New York ConEdison
2.5 0.0
4.6 0.6
ConEdison Residential & Low-Income Total 58.3 72.7
Statewide Residential & Low-Income Total 113.7 158.3
Note: No goals were set for peak demand savings. 1 Savings for the low-income Assisted Home Performance Program are included in this row. They represent 0.9 MW of these savings. 2 Savings for the low-income Assisted Multifamily Program are included in this row. They represent 23.9 MW of these savings. a During the third quarter of 2007 a large project with Rochester Housing Authority, with 2,400 units in 200 buildings was completed. N/A – Not Applicable
Table 4-3. Residential and Low-Income Program Cumulative Annual Fuel Savings through September 30, 2007 and Progress toward Five-Year Goals
Fuel Savings (MMBtu)
Savings Achieved through Program
June 30, 2006 September 30, 2007
Five-Year Goal through June 30, 2011
Progress Toward
Five-Year Goal
(% achieved)
Single Family Home Performance Program: Existing Homes1 ConEdison
454,958a
8,599
682,638
12,970
1,199,000
N/A
19%
N/A
Single Family Home Performance Program: New Homes ConEdison
376,103b
30,088
523,143
31,389
518,500
N/A
28%
N/A
Residential and Low-Income Programs
4-4
Fuel Savings (MMBtu)
Savings Achieved through Program
June 30, 2006 September 30, 2007
Five-Year Goal through June 30, 2011
Progress Toward
Five-Year Goal
(% achieved)
Multifamily Building Performance Program: Existing Buildings2 ConEdison
43,932
12,581
172,145
63,693
6,014,500
N/A
2%
N/A
Multifamily Building Performance Program: New Buildings ConEdison
N/A
N/A
0 0
649,000
N/A
0%
N/A
Market Support Program ConEdison
341,920 184,945
374,163 202,385
N/A N/A
N/A N/A
EmPower New York ConEdison
59,341 0
118,259 123
108,500 N/A
54% N/A
ConEdison Residential & Low-Income Total 236,212 310,560 N/A N/A
Statewide Residential & Low-Income Total 1,276,254 1,870,348 N/A N/A 1 Energy savings for the low-income Assisted Home Performance Program are included in this row. They represent 252,576 MMBtu of these savings. 2 Energy savings for the low-income Assisted Multifamily Program are included in this row. They represent 172,145 MMBtu of these savings. a This value does not match an earlier published value due to changes made to the program tracking database in response to evaluation completed by the M&V contractor. b This value does not match earlier published values as the realization rate for MMBtu was reassessed during this period to a lower level and applied retroactively in order to accurately reflect progress made during the year. N/A – Not Applicable
4.3 Single Family Home Performance Program
4.3.1 Progress Toward Goals
As shown in Table 4-4, several long-term production goals have been set for the Single Family Home Performance Program. Progress on three of the four goals is tracking as expected 15 months into the five-year measurement period. Regarding the goal for new low-income ENERGY STAR labeled homes, program staff anticipates that the majority of the assisted ENERGY STAR homes will be manufactured housing with more than one tenant (e.g., duplex, 4-family homes, etc.). Staff is working with organizations, such as the Manufactured Housing Authority, to develop codes for these ENERGY STAR homes. Thus, progress on the goal for new low-income ENERGY STAR homes built is expected to increase soon.
Single Family Home Performance Program
4-5
Table 4-4. Single Family Home Performance Program – Goals and Achievements
Activity Program Goals
(July 1, 2006 through June 30, 2011)
Achieved July 1, 2006 through
September 30, 2007
% of Goal Achieved
New York ENERGY STAR Labeled Homes Initiative
New ENERGY STAR Labeled Homes built 10,750 2,787 27%
New low-income ENERGY STAR Labeled Homes built 4,000 6 <1%
Home Performance with ENERGY STAR Initiative
Existing homes served (receiving treatment) 16,125 3,210 20%
Existing low-income homes served (receiving treatment) 10,500 1,681 16%
4.3.2 Energy, Peak Demand and Fuel Savings
Table 4-5 shows the cumulative annual energy and peak demand savings from the Single Family Home Performance Program. A realization rate and net-to-gross ratio are applied to adjust the program-reported savings based on the most recent Measurement and Verification and Attribution evaluation studies. Net savings in the rightmost column are the total savings being claimed by the program after these evaluation activities.
Residential and Low-Income Programs
4-6
Table 4-5. Single Family Home Performance Program Cumulative Annual Energy and Peak Demand Savings (Through September 2007)
Program-Reported Savings
Realization Rate
Adjusted Gross
Savings Freeridership Spillover
Net-to-Gross Ratio1
Net Savings
New York ENERGY STAR Labeled Homes Initiative
MWh/year 10,315 1.01 11,347 28% 47.6% 1.17 13,276
MW On-Peak
1.3 2.32 3.1 28% 47.6% 1.17 3.6
MMBtu 604,231 0.74 447,131 28% 47.6% 1.17 523,143
Home Performance with ENERGY STAR2
MWh/year 14,497 1.0 14,497 26% 41% 1.12 16,237
MW On-Peak
2.0 1.04 2.1 26% 41% 1.12 2.3
MMBtu 708,719 0.86 609,498 26% 41% 1.12 682,638
Single Family Home Performance Program – Total
MWh/year 24,813 N/A 25,844 N/A N/A N/A 29,513
MW On-Peak
3.3 N/A 5.1 N/A N/A N/A 5.9
MMBtu 1,312,950 N/A 1,056,629 N/A N/A N/A 1,205,781 1 Net-to-Gross Ratio = 1-Freeridership+Spillover (a weighted average of the NTG ratios, estimated in the previous MCAC analysis and this current analysis, is shown here). 2 Savings for the low-income Assisted Home Performance Program are included in these figures. They represent approximately 6,000 MWh, 0.9 MW, and 252,576 MMBtu of these savings. N/A – Not Applicable
4.4 Multifamily Building Performance Program
4.4.1 Progress Toward Goals
As shown in Table 4-6, several long-term non-energy goals have been set for the Multifamily Building Performance Program. Progress toward these goals has been slow since program staff has focused on designing and contracting for the new combined program. Also, given the long timeframe necessary to complete multifamily projects, savings are expected to ramp up over time. However, projects originally begun under the Assisted Multifamily Program continue to be completed. Section 4.4.3 describes several interim progress indicators.
Multifamily Building Performance Program
4-7
Table 4-6. Multifamily Building Performance Program – Goals and Achievements
Activity
Program Goals
(July 1, 2006 through
June 30, 2011)
Achieved July 1, 2006 through
September 30, 2007
% of Goal Achieved
Number of existing market rate multifamily units receiving energy efficiency services (completed projects) 39,000 0 0%
Number of new market-rate multifamily units receiving energy efficiency services 7,500 0 0%
Tenant energy savings per year (at $250/unit) $34,875,000 0 0%
Number of existing low-income multifamily units receiving energy efficiency services (completed projects) 148,200 9,393 6%
Number of new low-income multifamily units receiving energy efficiency services 12,700 0 0%
Low-income tenant energy savings per year (at $195/unit) $31,375,500 $1,831,635 6%
4.4.2 Energy, Peak Demand and Fuel Savings
Table 4-7 shows the cumulative annual energy and peak demand savings from the Multifamily Building Performance Program. A realization rate and net-to-gross ratio are applied to adjust the program-reported savings based on the most recent Measurement and Verification and Attribution evaluation studies. Net savings in the rightmost column are the total savings being claimed by the program after these evaluation activities.
Table 4-7. Multifamily Building Performance Program Cumulative Annual Energy and Peak Demand Savings (Through September 2007)
Program-Reported Savings
Realization Rate
Adjusted Gross
Savings
Free-ridership Spillover
Net-to-Gross Ratio1
Net Savings
Assisted Multifamily Program (AMP)
MWh/year 25,320 0.97 24,560 27% 15% 0.84 20,618
MW On-Peak
22.6 1.26 28.5 27% 15% 0.84 23.9
MMBtu 205,056 1.0 205,056 27% 15% 0.84 172,145
Comprehensive Energy Management (CEM) Program
MWh/year 5,712 0.97 5,541 2% 18% 1.16 6,408
MW On-Peak
0.3 1.77 0.5 2% 18% 1.16 0.6
Low-income Direct Installation
MWh/year 11,494 1.0 11,494 Not Evaluated
Not Evaluated
Not Evaluated
11,494
MW On-Peak
1.6 1.0 1.6 Not Evaluated
Not Evaluated
Not Evaluated
1.6
Residential and Low-Income Programs
4-8
Program-Reported Savings
Realization Rate
Adjusted Gross
Savings
Free-ridership Spillover
Net-to-Gross Ratio1
Net Savings
Multifamily Building Performance Program – Total
MWh/year 42,406 N/A 41,595 N/A N/A N/A 38,520
MW On-Peak
24.5 N/A 30.6 N/A N/A N/A 26.1
MMBtu 205,056 N/A 205,056 N/A N/A N/A 172,145
1 Net-to-Gross Ratio = (1-Freeridership) * (1+Spillover). N/A – Not Applicable
4.4.3 Other Evaluation Findings
Given that the timeline for completing projects is at least a year, there are no projects reporting savings under the new Multifamily Building Performance Program. Table 4-8 shows the number of housing units involved in each point of the pipeline for participation in the Program.
Table 4-8. Number of Units Participating According to Status
Status Number of housing units
Existing Buildings New Construction
Application Submitted 4,493 550
Participation Agreement Signed 67,337 1,898
Design 75% Complete N/A 242
Totals 71,830 2,690
4.5 Market Support Program
4.5.1 Progress Toward Goals
Four long-term non-energy goals have been set for the Market Support Program. Table 4-9 shows these goals and progress to date. Good progress is being made on all goals. The number of new independent retailers signed up has already significantly exceeded the five-year goal (193%). This goal may be rexamined, and the Program is now placing greater emphasis on maintaining these existing partnerships with independent retailers and signing up new big-box retailers. Furthermore, the number of participating retailers may fluctuate, based on their interest and performance in the Program.
Market Support Program
4-9
Table 4-9. Market Support Program – Goals and Achievements
Activity
Program Goals (July 1, 2006
through June 30, 2011)
Achieved July 1, 2006 through September 30,
2007 % of Goal Achieved
New manufacturing partners signed up 20 12 60%
New retail partners (independent) signed up 100 193 193%
New retail partners (big box, mass merchandisers) signed up 6 4 67%
ENERGY STAR market share increase on targeted products (on average, across products)
25% 6% 24%
4.5.2 Energy, Peak Demand and Fuel Savings
Table 4-10 shows the cumulative annual energy and peak demand savings from the Market Support Program. A realization rate and net-to-gross ratio are applied to adjust the program-reported savings based on the most recent Measurement and Verification and Attribution evaluation studies. Net savings in the rightmost column are the total savings being claimed by the program after these evaluation activities.
Residential and Low-Income Programs
4-10
Table 4-10. Market Support Program Cumulative Annual Energy and Peak Demand Savings (Through September 2007)
Program-Reported Savings
Realiza-tion Rate
Adjusted Gross
Savings
Free-ridership Spillover
Net-to-Gross Ratio1
Net Savings
ENERGY STAR Products and Marketing (2006)
MWh/year 604,867
MW On-Peak 107.4
MMBtu
Not applicable2
357,854
Keep Cool
MWh/year 5,159 1.0 5,159 18% 15% 0.94 4,865
MW On-Peak 8.8 1.0 8.8 18% 15% 0.94 8.3
Bulk Purchase
MWh/year 19,451 2.03 39,486 10% 5% 0.95 37,314
MW On-Peak 3.9 1.62 6.3 10% 5% 0.95 6.0
MMBtu 24,307 0.71 17,258 10% 5% 0.95 16,309
Market Support Program – Total
MWh/year N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 647,046
MW On-Peak N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 121.6
MMBtu N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 374,163 1 Net-to-Gross Ratio = (1-Freeridership) * (1+Spillover). 2 The net savings attributable to the ENERGY STAR Products and Marketing Program are determined based on market research by the MCAC team. Thus, there are no program-reported savings, realization rate, or net-to-gross adjustments. N/A – Not Applicable
4.6 Communities and Education Program
4.6.1 Progress Toward Goals
As shown in Table 4-11, six long-term non-energy goals have been set for the Communities and Education Program. The Program is generally progressing toward these goals as expected.
EmPower New YorkSM
4-11
Table 4-11. Communities and Education Program – Goals and Achievements
Activity
Program Goals(July 1, 2006
through June 30, 2011)
Achieved July 1, 2006 through September 30,
2007
% of Goal Achieved
Teachers trained 5,000 789 16%
Students reached 150,000 31,256 21%
Community events held statewide 1,000 351 35%
Recruiting seminars held statewide 500 18 4%
Home performance contractors, technicians, builders and raters recruited for the Single Family Home Performance Program
800 127 16%
Building analysts, designers, energy consultants, equipment installers, etc. recruited for Multifamily Building Performance Program
100 68 68%
4.7 EmPower New YorkSM
4.7.1 Progress Toward Goals
As shown in Table 4-12, one long-term non-energy goal has been set for the EmPower Program. The Program is making good progress, having achieved 33% of its five-year goal 15 months into the measurement period.
Table 4-12. EmPower New YorkSM Program – Goal and Achievement
Activity
Program Goal (July 1, 2006
through June 30, 2011)
Achieved July 1, 2006 through September 30,
2007
% of Goal Achieved
Households served (completed) 31,500 10,505 33%
4.7.2 Energy, Peak Demand and Fuel Savings
Table 4-13 shows the cumulative annual energy and peak demand savings from the EmPower Program. A realization rate is applied to adjust the program-reported savings based on the most recent Measurement and Verification evaluation studies. These programs have not undergone any attribution evaluation, so no adjustment is made for net-to-gross.
Residential and Low-Income Programs
4-12
Table 4-13. EmPower New YorkSM Program Cumulative Annual Energy and Peak Demand Savings (Through September 2007)
Program Reported
Savings Realization
Rate Adjusted Gross
Savings Net-to-Gross
Ratio Net Savings
EmPower New York
MWh/year 30,022 0.81 24,318 Not evaluated 24,318
MW On-Peak 3.3 1.0 3.3 Not evaluated 3.3
MMBtu 118,259 1.0 118,259 Not evaluated 118,259
Weatherization Network Initiative
MWh/year 8,242 1.0 8,242 Not evaluated 8,242
MW On-Peak 1.3 1.0 1.3 Not evaluated 1.3
Total
MWh/year 38,264 N/A 32,560 Not evaluated 32,560
MW On-Peak 4.6 N/A 4.6 Not evaluated 4.6
MMBtu 118,259 N/A 118,259 Not evaluated 118,259
N/A – Not Applicable
4.8 Buying Strategies and Energy Awareness Program
4.8.1 Progress Toward Goals
Several long-term non-energy goals have been set for the Buying Strategies and Energy Awareness Program. These five-year goals and progress are shown in Table 4-14. Overall, the Program is making good progress toward these goals.
Table 4-14. Buying Strategies and Energy Awareness Program – Goals and Achievements
Activity
Program Goals(July 1, 2006
through June 30, 2011)
Achieved July 1, 2006 through September 30,
2007
% of Goal Achieved
Funds leveraged through Buying Strategies initiative $20 million $2.5-3.2 million 15%
Additional low-income individuals reached via newsletters, weekly newspapers, etc. (readership) 5 million 240,000 5%
Additional low-income individuals reached via seminars and workshops (attendees) 15,000 4,164 28%
Additional contractors and other partners recruited in low-income districts 50 9 18%
Additional students reached in schools serving low-income populations (number of individuals given educational materials)
100,000 20,837 21%
5-1
5
Research and Development Programs
5.1 Research & Development (R&D) Program Evaluation Activities
5.1.1 Completed Evaluation Activities
During the third quarter, program theory and logic models have been completed for the R&D sector and for the following five programs/areas. These logic models can be found in Appendix A.
• Clean Energy Infrastructure
• Distributed Energy Resources
• Demand Response and Innovative Rate Research
• Electric Transportation
• Industrial and Municipal Process Efficiency
5.1.2 Evaluation Activities in Progress and Planned
Several major evaluations are underway for the R&D programs. Results from the PV process evaluation and the first phase of the R&D impact evaluation will likely be included in the March 2008 annual evaluation report. Results from the evaluation of gross and net savings from the 25 largest energy-saving projects and the second phase of the R&D impact evaluation will be reported out as these efforts are completed.
5.2 Summary of R&D Evaluation Results
5.2.1 Progress Toward Non-Energy Goals
Almost 40 long-term non-energy goals have been set for the R&D portfolio. These diverse goals address important metrics such as solicitations released, projects funded, information dissemination, co-funding, and technology transfer. Fifteen months into the assessment period, programs are tracking well in terms of making progress toward these longer-term non-energy goals. As appropriate, a percentage is given
Research and Development Programs
5-2
within the goals tables included in this section to denote progress for quantitative goals and explanations are provided on progress toward more qualitative goals.
5.2.2 Energy, Peak Demand, Fuel Savings, and Clean Generation
Table 5-1 shows the energy savings and renewable energy production achieved by the R&D portfolio through September 30, 2007. Table 5-2 highlights demand reduction achievements, and Table 5-3 shows impacts for other fuels such as natural gas and oil. These tables also show the change over time since June 30, 2006.
Table 5-1. R&D Program Electricity Savings and Clean Generation through September 30, 2007
Energy Savings (GWh)
Savings Achieved through Program
June 30, 2006 September 30, 2007
DG-CHP Demonstration Program ConEdison
82.7 42.0
111.9 50.4
Renewable Energy Production ConEdison
103.8 0.5
106.3 0.8
Overlap Removed 6.6 8.9
ConEdison R&D Total 42.5 51.2
Statewide R&D Total 179.9 209.2
Table 5-2. R&D Program Cumulative Peak Demand Savings through September 30, 2007
Demand Savings (MW)
Savings Achieved through Program
June 30, 2006 September 30, 2007
DG-CHP Demonstration Program ConEdison
18.1 8.5
24.5 11.1
Demand Response and Innovative Rate Research ConEdison
137.2 68.6
99.0a 21.0
Renewable Energy Production ConEdison
8.1 0.4
9.1 0.4
Overlap Removed 1.3 1.7
ConEdison R&D Total 77.4 32.5
Statewide R&D Total 162.1 130.8
a MWs enabled under the SBC2 program Enabling Technologies for Price Responsive Load were not required to persist beyond the period of the contract. As such, the available MWs have steadily declined since the program’s close.
Public Benefit Power Transmission and Distribution Research
5-3
Table 5-3. R&D Program Cumulative Annual Fuel Savings through September 30, 2007
Fuel Savings (MMBtu)
Savings Achieved through Program
June 30, 2006 September 30. 2007
DG-CHP Demonstration Program1 ConEdison
-571,310 -266,937
-980,032 -443,074
ConEdison R&D Total -266,937 -443,074
Statewide R&D Total -571,310 -980,032 1 Because the electricity saved by the DG/CHP projects replaces electricity formerly purchased from the grid, the program has reduced fuel used at central generating stations, for a net decrease statewide due to greater efficiency of the DG/CHP systems at sites where imported fuel is used. The fuel avoided at the central generating plant is determined from the electricity generated by the DG/CHP installations. Furthermore, at additional projects such as wastewater treatment plants, electricity generation is powered fully or partially by digester gas produced on site. Such fuel switching achieves natural gas conservation above and beyond what is achieved through efficiency alone.
5.3 Public Benefit Power Transmission and Distribution Research
5.3.1 Progress Toward Goals
Two long-term goals have been set for the Public Benefit Power Transmission and Distribution Program. These goals and progress are described in Table 5-4.
Table 5-4. Public Benefit Power Transmission and Distribution Research Program – Goals and Achievements
5.4 Clean Energy Infrastructure
5.4.1 Progress Toward Goals
Several long-term non-energy goals have been set for the Clean Energy Infrastructure Program. These five-year goals, as well as progress, are shown in Table 5-5.
Activity Program Goals (July 1, 2006 through June 30, 2011) Achieved July 1, 2006 through September 30, 2007
Issue annual solicitations 12 or more projects resulting in progress toward program objectives
Solicitation (PON 1102) was issued in Q1 of 2007 announcing the availability of $5 million and inviting proposals with two rounds of due dates (May 1, 2007 and November 1, 2007). In Round 1, 13 projects were selected to receive SBC funding. The due date for Round 2 proposals was November 1, 2007.
Technology transfer Identify successful projects, undertake specific outreach and knowledge transfer activities aimed at utilities
This is an on-going activity. Upon completion of projects, NYSERDA will assess the outcome of the various projects that have commenced recently, and undertake specific outreach and knowledge transfer activities aimed at utilities, as appropriate. Greater detail will be provided as projects near completion and outreach can commence.
Research and Development Programs
5-4
Table 5-5. Clean Energy Infrastructure Program – Goals and Achievements
Activity Program Goals (July 1, 2006 through June 30, 2011)
Achieved July 1, 2006 through
September 30, 2007
% of Goal Achieved
Education, Consumer Awareness and Market Development
New accredited training institutions 3 0 0%
New certification exams 5 1 20%
Training workshops 25
Self-sustaining accredited training and certification programs for clean energy
technologies in addition to PV 13 52%
Renewable Resource Applications
Stakeholder workshops 7 3 43%
Competitive research solicitations 5
Reduction of knowledge and technical barriers currently affecting installation and operation of wholesale and end-use
clean energy technologies 6 120%
Clean Energy Technology Manufacturing and Business Development
Companies expanding renewable business networks
25 6 24%
Companies expanding manufacturing 10
Increase the number of companies developing and manufacturing clean energy technologies, and serving the clean energy businesses in New York 2 20%
5.4.2 Clean Energy Generation
Table 5-6 shows the cumulative annual clean generation from the Clean Energy Infrastructure Program. A realization rate and net-to-gross ratio are applied to adjust the program-reported savings based on the most recent Measurement and Verification and Attribution evaluation studies. Net savings in the rightmost column are the total savings being claimed by the program after these evaluation activities.
Clean Energy Infrastructure
5-5
Table 5-6. Clean Energy Infrastructure Program Cumulative Annual Clean Generation (Through September 2007)
Program-Reported Savings
Realization Rate Adjusted
Gross Energy Generations
Net-to-Gross Ratio
Net Energy Generation
End Use Renewables
MWh/year 6,064 1.04 6,307 1.0 6,307
MW On-Peak 3.4 0.85 2.9 1.0 2.9
Wholesale Renewables
MWh/year 99,995 1.0 99,995 1.0 99,995
MW On-Peak 6.2 1.0 6.2 1.0 6.2
Clean Energy Totals
MWh/year 106,059 N/A 106,302 N/A 106,302
MW On-Peak 9.6 N/A 9.1 N/A 9.1
N/A – Not Applicable
5.4.3 Other Evaluation Findings
Analysis of PV System Size and Cost
Table 5-7 highlights some key information from PON 716 on photovoltaic (PV) system size and cost. In total, 698 systems have been installed and an additional 198 systems are in progress. Residential systems are generally half the size of systems in the commercial and industrial sectors. However, average system cost (per KW-DC) is similar across the sectors.
Table 5-7. PV System Size and Cost Summary1
Status Sector Number of
Systems
Average Size
(kW DC)
Average Cost Before Incentive($ per kW DC)
Minimum Cost ($ per kW DC)
Maximum Cost ($ per kW DC)
Completed Residential 634 5.15 $8,695 $5,174 $26,233a
Completed Industrial 4 10.75 $9,073 $8,310 $9,893
Completed Commercial 60 10.77 $8,654 $6,398 $15,686
Subtotal (completed systems) - 698 - $8,807 - -
In Process Residential 162 6.2 $9,015 $6,645 $32,305
In Process Commercial 36 18.81 $9,777 $6,348 $18,844
Total (all systems) - 896 10.42 $9,040 - -
1 Through October 24, 2007. a This relatively high-cost project was a 17.14 KW building-integrated PV system installed on a multifamily building in New York City.
Research and Development Programs
5-6
5.5 Power Systems Product Development
5.5.1 Progress Toward Goals
Several long-term non-energy goals have been set for the Power Systems Product Development Program. Goals and accomplishments are shown in Table 5-8.
Table 5-8. Power Systems Product Development Program – Goals and Achievements
Activity Program Goals (July
1, 2006 through June 30, 2011)
Achieved July 1, 2006 through September 30, 2007 % of Goal Achieved
Product development contracts awarded 75
15 (additional proposals received
but not yet evaluated) 20%
New products commercially launched since July 1, 2006 5
1 (Gaia Power Tower)
20%
Cumulative sales ($) $50 million $1 million in 2006a (Gaia Power Tower) 2%
Successful new product field tests and demonstrations 15
3 (others waiting to resolve interconnect problems)
20%
Projects successfully completing milestones 25 8 32%
Assessments and studies of new technologies completed 20
5 (Added SRI assessments)
25%
a 2007 sales figures not yet available. Additionally, $6 million in product sales by Plug Power in 2006 from products launched prior to July 1, 2006.
5.6 DG-CHP Demonstration
5.6.1 Progress Toward Goals
Several long-term non-energy goals have been set for the DG-CHP Program. These five-year goals and progress are shown in Table 5-9.
DG-CHP Demonstration
5-7
Table 5-9. DG-CHP Demonstration Program – Goals and Achievements
Activity Program Goals
(July 1, 2006 through June 30, 2011)
Achieved July 1, 2006 through September 30, 2007 % of Goal Achieved
Issue annual solicitations and incentive offers
Fund 50 or more CHP demonstrations with a cumulative capacity of 100 MW and associated efficiency and environmental benefits, and with 50 MW downstate.
PON 1043 was issued in June 2006. Thirty-four proposals were received on August 22, 2006. Six CHP demontration projects are in process of being contracted and are expected to have an installed capacity of 32 MW (of which 2 MW is downstate). PON 1178 was issued in October 2007 with proposals due January 24, 2008.
12% (Number of projects)
Technology transfer
Conduct technology transfer and outreach activities to broaden acceptance of DG and CHP. Hold annual workshops and publish at least 10 final reports per year.
Currently, site-specific performance data is posted on http://chp.nyserda.org for 28 projects.
N/A
5.6.2 Energy, Peak Demand and Fuel Savings
Table 5-10 shows the cumulative annual energy and peak demand savings from the DG-CHP Program. A realization rate and net-to-gross ratio are applied to adjust the program-reported savings based on the most recent Measurement and Verification and Attribution evaluation studies. Net savings in the rightmost column are the total savings being claimed by the program after these evaluation activities.
Research and Development Programs
5-8
Table 5-10. DG-CHP Program Cumulative Annual Energy and Peak Demand Savings (Through September 2007)
Program-Reported Savings
Realization Rate
Adjusted Gross
Savings
Freerider-ship Spillover
Net-to-Gross Ratio1
Net Savings
MWh/year 115,670 0.90 104,450 15% 26% 1.07 111,866
MW 23.2 0.98 22.9 15% 26% 1.07 24.5
MMBtu/year2 -1,041,027 0.88 -915,062 15% 26% 1.07 -980,032 1 Net-to-Gross Ratio = (1-Freeridership) * (1+Spillover). 2 Because the electricity saved by the DG/CHP projects replaces electricity formerly purchased from the grid, the program has reduced fuel used at central generating stations, for a net decrease statewide due to greater efficiency of the DG/CHP systems at sites where imported fuel is used. The fuel avoided at the central generating plant is determined from the electricity generated by the DG/CHP installations. Furthermore, at additional projects such as waste water treatment plants, electricity generation is powered fully or partially by digester gas produced on site. Such fuel switching achieves natural gas conservation above and beyond what is achieved through efficiency alone.
5.7 Demand Response and Innovative Rate Research
5.7.1 Progress Toward Goals
Two long-term non-energy goals have been set for the Demand Response and Innovative Rate Research Program. These five-year goals and progress are shown in Table 5-11.
Demand Response and Innovative Rate Research
5-9
Table 5-11. Demand Response and Innovative Rate Research Program – Goals and Achievements
Activity
Program Goals (July 1, 2006
through June 30, 2011
Achieved July 1, 2006 through September 30, 2007
% of Goal Achieved
Increase small customer participation in wholesale and local demand response programs (MW)
100 MW
One MW enabled.
In this first year, the program is still ramping up to meet long terms goals of demonstrating enabling load shed technologies. Demonstration of an advanced, remotely activated, load shed ballast was completed at the Con Edison Rye facility. Additional demonstration projects have been funded at five different types of commercial or institutional buildings. The Association for Energy Affordability (AEA) conducted focus groups with Packaged Terminal Air Conditioning (PTAC) manufacturers to encourage incorporation of enabling controls for fleet management of PTAC units – a contributor to New York City peak load requirements. Innoventive Power demonstrated tools to identify demand response opportunities in schools and other building types.
1% of MW goal
Increase the number of multifamily apartment units participating in real-time and other time-sensitive electric rate pilots
3,000 apartment units
A feasibility study was initiated to compare various time-based rates (including ConEd Rider M) in two all-electric multi-family developments (3,100 apartment units, 20MW peak demand) Initiated a demonstration of load management technologies and of time-of-use rate at Georgetown Mews (37 buildings, 930 apartment units, 2,000 KW peak load). Technologies include submetering, fleet-managed window air conditioning, energy information display and heating. The site will also pilot test a time-sensitive rate.
13% (with the 930 units
participating in the
demonstration)
5.7.2 Energy, Peak Demand and Fuel Savings
Table 5-12 shows the cumulative annual energy and peak demand savings from the Demand Response and Innovative Rate Research Program. A realization rate and net-to-gross ratio are applied to adjust the program reported savings-based on the most recent Measurement and Verification and Attribution evaluation studies. Net savings in the rightmost column are the total savings being claimed by the program after these evaluation activities.
Enabling Technology was a research and development program that sought innovative ways of aggregating, dispatching and reporting demand response. Projects were selected in part for their ability to demonstrate and commercialize new methods of aggregating load. The program did not require maintenance of the enabled demand reduction. Enabled demand reduction is a potential quantity that may or may not translate into curtailed load in response to a New York Independent System Operator call for emergency resources. These factors contribute to the low realization rate (0.50) shown in Table 5-12.
Research and Development Programs
5-10
Table 5-12. Demand Response and Innovative Rate Research Program Cumulative Annual Energy and Peak Demand Savings (Through September 2007)
Program-Reported Savings
Realization Rate
Adjusted Gross
Savings
Net-to-Gross Ratio Net Savings
Enabled MW 208.3 0.50 104.2 0.95 99.0
5.8 Electric Transportation
5.8.1 Progress Toward Goals
As shown in Table 5-13, five non-energy metrics are being monitored for the Electric Transportation Program.
Table 5-13. Electric Transportation Program – Achievements
Activity Achieved July 1, 2006 through September 30, 2007
Solicitations released 2
Proposals reviewed 21 (additional proposal not yet reviewed)
Projects funded 5
Funding $800,000
Co-funding $900,000
5.9 Environmental Monitoring, Evaluation, and Protection (EMEP)
5.9.1 Progress Toward Goals
Several long-term goals have been set for the Environmental Monitoring, Evaluation and Protection Program. These five-year goals and progress are shown in Table 5-14. The Program is making good progress on all goals.
Environmental Monitoring, Evaluation, and Protection (EMEP)
5-11
Table 5-14. Environmental Monitoring, Evaluation, and Protection Program – Goals and Achievements
Activity Program Goals
(July 1, 2006 through June 30, 2011
Achieved July 1, 2006 through September 30, 2007 % of Goal Achieved
Develop detailed multi-year EMEP research plan with input from policymakers, scientists, and stakeholders
Update research plan as needed to ensure relevancy
One planning meeting was held with the EMEP advisors, and three other major research planning meetings were held to assist in plan development. All of the attendees at the planning meetings were state or nationally recognized experts from the policy and scientific communities. NYSERDA contracted with the New York Academy of Sciences to assist in the development of the research plan, which was finalized and released in September 2007.
N/A
Develop, contract, and manage research projects aimed at priority energy-related environmental research areas
Issue 6 to 10 solicitations Contract 40 projects Leverage $20 million into New York, help build a knowledge-based research infrastructure in New York.
Three contractors were selected for the EMEP Outreach and Technical Assistance PON. Six solicitations have been issued that included EMEP funding (focusing on sequestration, impacts of renewable energy, ecosystems, and air quality). Ten projects have been contracted.
60-100% of solicitation goal
25% of goal for projects contracted
Sponsor workshops, conferences, and seminars 5 to 10
EMEP co-sponsored a workshop on the creation of a soil-monitoring network in the Northeast. EMEP hosted a seminar (and “Webinar”) for multiple agency staff on recent findings from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change with IPCC member Dr. Cynthia Rosenzweig. EMEP sponsored the Adirondack Research Consortium conference in Tupper Lake. EMEP co-sponsored a conference on climate change at MIT’s Endicott House.
40-80%
Provide Web-based EMEP data and information
200,000 total customer “visits,” inquiries, and
downloads to the EMEP Web page
During this period, hits on EMEP Web sites totaled over 135,000 and downloads totaled more than 17,000.
76%
Research and Development Programs
5-12
Activity Program Goals
(July 1, 2006 through June 30, 2011
Achieved July 1, 2006 through September 30, 2007 % of Goal Achieved
Publish NYSERDA research reports 40
Nine research reports and five executive summaries were published
23%
Publish peer-reviewed journal articles 100
17 articles were published in the area of Air Quality/Health Effects, and 10 articles were published in the area of Ecosystems.
27%
Provide briefings to decision makers 15
Sponsored a meeting with policymakers concerning wind and wildlife. Briefed the new Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) Climate Change Program Director on EMEP program activities, and arranged for a briefing to DEC staff on carbonaceous fine particle issues in New York and the Region.
20%
5.10 Industrial Research, Development and Demonstration
5.10.1 Progress Toward Goals
Long-term goals have been set for the Industrial Research, Development, and Demonstration Program in three areas. These five-year goals and progress are shown in Table 5-15.
Municipal Water and Wastewater Efficiency
5-13
Table 5-15. Industrial Research, Development and Demonstration Program – Near-Term Goals and Achievements
Activity Program Goals
(July 1, 2006 through June 30, 2011)
Achieved from July 1, 2006 through September 30, 2007
% of Goal Achieved
Issue annual solicitations Fund 30 to 40 cost-shared demonstrations
PON 998 was issued with two rounds of due dates (June 8, and October 5, 2006), with total funding of $4 million. In Round One, NYSERDA selected six projects to receive SBC funding. In Round Two, NYSERDA selected five projects to receive SBC funding. PON 1130 was issued with three rounds of due dates (March 28, July 16, and November 8, 2007), with total funding exceeding $5.7 million. In Round One, NYSERDA selected six projects to receive SBC funding. In Round Two, NYSERDA selected five projects to receive SBC funding. Due date for Round Three proposals is November 8, 2007.
55-73%
Technology transfer
Conduct technology transfer and outreach activities to broaden the acceptance of successful technologies and technical approaches via participation in at least two workshops. Publish at least six final reports per year.
This is an on-going activity. NYSERDA has received indications that several contractors have performed some measure of technology transfer in the form of publication of papers and public speaking engagements at workshops. Greater detail will be provided in the next quarterly report.
N/A
Program metrics
Industrial Process and Productivity Improvement (IPPI) projects supported during the SBC III period are expected to result in cumulative energy savings of $5 million, and project-related incremental sales of $10 million.
Projects are being contracted with requirements for documentation of performance metrics. Projects have not yet been completed; therefore, metrics cannot be ascertained at this time.
N/A
5.11 Municipal Water and Wastewater Efficiency
5.11.1 Progress Toward Goals
Several long-term goals have been set for the Municipal Water and Wastewater Efficiency Program. These five-year goals and progress are shown in Table 5-16. The Program is making good progress on all goals.
Research and Development Programs
5-14
Table 5-16. Municipal Water and Wastewater Efficiency Program – Goals and Achievements
Activity Program Goals
(July 1, 2006 through June 30, 2011
Achieved July 1, 2006 through September 30, 2007 % of Goal Achieved
Issue annual solicitation
Select and fund 25 or more projects.
Provide assistance to a minimum of 25 municipal
wastewater and water treatment facilities.
PON 1040 was issued, and 17 proposals were received, requesting approximately $3.9 million in NYSERDA funding. Five projects were recommended for funding. Two will receive SBC municipal Water and Wastewater Efficiency Program funding. The other three will receive statutory or other funds.
20%
Technology transfer
Provide critical information on ways to optimize energy use at municipal wastewater
and water treatment facilities. Provide information to 1,000 treatment facilities in New
York.
NYSERDA sponsored an energy management training session that targeted the municipal wastewater treatment sector, which was co-developed by EPRI and the New York Water Environment Association (NYWEA). Approximately 70 individuals attended, including plant operators, municipal officials, regulators, consultants, and engineers. Additionally, in conjunction with NYWEA and the Energy Smart Focus Contractor, NYSERDA is developing an energy management Webinar series and an issue of Clearwaters (published by NYWEA) that will focus solely on energy management. Energy management presentations were given at six New York State Environmental Facilities Corporation (EFC)-facilitated Co-Funding Committee conferences and at three DEC-sponsored training sessions for local elected officials. A presentation also was given as part of a Webcast hosted by the Comptroller’s Office. At least 200 individuals attended these presentations. Final Reports from the two submetering projects are available online. An Energy Smart Focus contractor was selected and the contract has been finalized.
33%
Energy and cost savings $2-3 million per year See paragraph below for explanation of progress.
Technical Assistance 30
Seven new projects were funded, totaling $80,000; and six projects, representing $120,000 were completed.
43%
Next Generation and Emerging Technologies
5-15
5.11.2 Energy, Peak Demand and Fuel Savings
As projects are completed (taking an average of seven years in this sector), the savings are expected to amount to more than 73,000 MWh of electricity and 11.9 MW of peak demand reduction, resulting in a savings of $8.7M for the participating municipalities. Furthermore, existing technology transfer and outreach programs have resulted in additional energy savings and non-energy benefits. Continuation of the Initiative’s existing programs, in conjunction with those under development, is expected to add even more energy savings and demand reductions than are currently anticipated within the sector.
5.12 Next Generation and Emerging Technologies
5.12.1 Progress Toward Goals
Several long-term goals have been set for the Next Generation and Emerging Technologies Program. These five-year goals and progress are shown in Table 5-17.
Research and Development Programs
5-16
Table 5-17. Next Generation and Emerging Technologies Program – Goals and Achievements
Activity Program Goals
(July 1, 2006 through June 30, 2011)
Achieved July 1, 2006 through September 30, 2007 % of Goal Achieved
Advanced Building Program Two solicitations Two or more demonstration test beds
Four solicitations completed. Eleven projects contracted (six product development/five demonstrations). RFP 1032 Reference Design Guidebook: This project (1) identified incremental measures needed to raise energy performance of new residential construction. Final report submitted in October. PON 1062 Advanced Building Envelopes and Energy Systems: These projects (2) monitored/demonstrated advanced building systems that substantially reduce central air conditioning loads. PON 1126 Next Generation Technologies for Residential Buildings: Under Round One, 11 proposals were received and seven projects were selected with total funding of $795,000. Under Round Two, eight proposals were received with total requested funding of $1.3 million. These projects will develop/demonstrate technology to reduce AC KW loads , on-site power production, design strategies for reduced load and other energy efficient technologies development. PON 1096 Demonstration of High Performance Residential Homes: six project proposals were received and four projects were selected with total funding of $2.5million. These projects will demonstrate high performance homes.
>100%
Next Generation and Emerging Technologies
5-17
Activity Program Goals
(July 1, 2006 through June 30, 2011)
Achieved July 1, 2006 through September 30, 2007 % of Goal Achieved
Daylighting Applications
50-100 design assistance projects five daylighting implementations in buildings
Two contracts signed for daylighting technical consulting. One preliminary design assistance project has been completed. No activity on daylighting implementation in buildings to date. PON 1079 Daylight Technical Services, Training and Demonstrations: All five contracts have been signed, work underway. RFP 1068 Establishment of a Lighting Incubator Center to Support Lighting Start-up Companies in New York: Lighting technology greenhouse contract has been signed. Contract will be signed after the first executive board meeting in November 2007. PON 1122 Innovation in Lighting: New Products, Demonstrations, and Testing: three contracts have been signed, two are in negotiation.
N/A
Solar Thermal Applications Two solicitations Five demonstrations
One solicitation completed. PON 1085 – Solar Thermal Demonstrations: five signed contracts, four in negotiation. eight of the nine projects are demonstrations.
50% of the solicitations goal
100% of the demonstrations goal
Emerging Technologies Five solicitations 25 product development projects
Rounds One and Two completed for one solicitation. Fifteen product development projects underway. PON 1105 Next Generation Emerging Technologies: Under Round One, four contracts are signed, and five contracts are in negotiation. Under Round Two, 11 contracts are in negotiation.
20% of the solicitations goal
60% of the product development project
goal
Appendix A: Logic Models
This section includes nine logic models completed during the third quarter of 2007 by NYSERDA’s evaluation contractors. These logic models are for the following programs/areas:
• General Awareness Logic Model
• Residential Sector Logic Model
• Low-Income Sector Logic Model
• R&D Sector Logic Model
• Clean Energy Infrastructure Logic Model
• Distributed Energy Resources Logic Model
• Demand Response and Innovative Rate Research Logic Model
• Electric Transportation Logic Model
• Industrial and Municipal Process Efficiency Logic Model
A-1
Appendix A
A-2
Gen
eral
Aw
aren
ess L
ogic
Mod
el
(Pro
cess
)
Mes
sage
and
m
ater
ials
de
velo
pmen
t
Plan
ning
and
co
ordi
natio
n M
onito
ring,
qua
lity
cont
rol a
nd
eval
uatio
n A
ctiv
ities
Out
puts
Shor
t-T
erm
Out
com
es (1
-3 y
ears
)
Prog
ram
pla
ns c
oord
inat
ed
with
NY
Ene
rgy
$mar
t pr
ogra
ms
Mar
ketin
g m
essa
ges
deve
lope
dEd
ucat
iona
l mat
eria
l de
velo
ped
Key
Ext
erna
l Inf
luen
ces:
inve
stm
ent c
limat
e, p
oliti
cal p
riorit
ies,
ener
gy p
rices
, cod
es a
nd st
anda
rds,
activ
ities
of n
on-N
YSE
RD
A
effic
ienc
y an
d re
new
able
eff
orts
, fed
eral
ene
rgy
polic
ies i
nclu
ding
the
Fede
ral E
nerg
y Po
licy
Act
of 2
005
and
the
Fede
ral t
ax c
redi
ts o
f 200
6 an
d 20
07, w
eath
er a
nd it
s eff
ects
on
ener
gy b
ills,
and
com
petit
ion
with
all
mes
sage
s (m
essa
ge o
verlo
ad)
Ener
gy sa
ving
s, pe
ak d
eman
d re
duct
ion,
and
rela
ted
bill
redu
ctio
n,
envi
ronm
enta
l and
hea
lth b
enef
its
Impl
emen
tatio
n an
d su
ppor
t of c
ampa
igns
Med
ia b
uy c
ontra
cts,
ads,
pl
acem
ent,
reac
h, fr
eque
ncy,
m
essa
ges d
eliv
ered
Inpu
ts: F
unds
, sta
ff
expe
rienc
e, m
arke
t kno
wle
dge
and
appr
oach
to m
edia
and
ca
mpa
ign
Effe
ctiv
enes
s mon
itorin
g an
d ev
alua
tions
Incr
ease
d de
man
d fo
r ene
rgy
effic
ient
, dem
and
redu
ctio
n/sh
iftin
g an
d re
new
able
ene
rgy
actio
ns a
nd
equi
pmen
t
Con
sum
er a
war
enes
s and
un
ders
tand
ing
of w
hy to
mak
e ef
ficie
ncy,
load
shift
ing
and
rene
wab
le d
ecis
ions
Dec
isio
ns a
nd a
ctio
ns
rein
forc
ed
Act
ions
take
n to
incr
ease
ene
rgy
effic
ienc
y, sh
ift lo
ad a
nd a
dopt
re
new
able
ene
rgy
tech
nolo
gies
Posi
tive
exam
ples
and
wor
d-of
-m
outh
Inte
rmed
iate
and
L
ong-
Ter
m
Out
com
es(3
+ yr
s)
Con
sum
er a
war
enes
s and
un
ders
tand
ing
of h
ow to
take
ac
tions
for e
nerg
y ef
ficie
ncy,
lo
ad sh
iftin
g an
d re
new
able
en
ergy
ado
ptio
n
Appendix A
A-3
Res
iden
tial S
ecto
r L
ogic
Mod
el
Trai
ning
and
Te
chni
cal A
ssis
tanc
eR
ecru
iting
, Par
tner
ing
and
Col
labo
ratio
n
Dev
elop
ing
and
Impl
emen
ting
Prom
otio
nal/M
essa
ge
Cam
paig
ns a
nd
educ
atio
nal m
ater
ials
Act
iviti
es
Out
puts
Shor
t-T
erm
Out
com
es (1
-5 y
ears
)
Lon
g-T
erm
O
utco
mes
10+
yrs
Ret
aile
rs, m
anuf
actu
rers
, dis
tribu
tors
bu
ilder
s, co
ntra
ctor
s, co
mm
unity
co
ordi
nato
rs, b
uild
ing
perf
orm
ance
co
ntra
ctor
s, pa
ckag
ers,
and
key
educ
atio
n le
ader
s as p
artn
ers
Qua
lity
Ass
uran
ce
Rev
iew
and
m
onito
ring
Dev
elop
men
t and
pro
visi
on
of tr
aini
ng a
nd m
ater
ials
;W
ork
and
assi
st p
artn
ers
with
ava
ilabi
lity
and
prom
otio
n of
ene
rgy-
effic
ient
, ren
ewab
le a
nd lo
ad
man
agem
ent p
rodu
cts a
nd
serv
ices
Incr
ease
d av
aila
bilit
y an
d pr
oduc
t ran
ge fo
r hi
gh e
ffic
ienc
y, re
new
able
and
load
m
anag
emen
t pro
duct
s, bu
ildin
gs a
nd
serv
ices
(with
out N
YSE
RD
A su
pply
/mid
-m
arke
t ass
ista
nce)
Dat
a av
aila
ble
for r
evie
w; Q
A/
QC
revi
ews;
Fie
ld a
sses
smen
ts
of w
ork
and
train
ing;
ef
fect
iven
ess m
onito
ring;
PO
P us
e an
d pr
oper
labe
ling
Key
Ext
erna
l Inf
luen
ces:
inve
stm
ent c
limat
e, p
oliti
cal p
riorit
ies,
ener
gy p
rices
, cod
es a
nd st
anda
rds,
activ
ities
of n
on-N
YSE
RD
A e
ffic
ienc
y an
d re
new
able
eff
orts
, fed
eral
ene
rgy
polic
ies i
nclu
ding
the
Fede
ral E
nerg
y Po
licy
Act
of 2
005
and
the
Fede
ral t
ax c
redi
ts o
f 200
6 an
d 20
07, w
eath
er
and
its e
ffec
ts o
n en
ergy
bill
s, co
sts a
nd p
erfo
rman
ce o
f new
er, m
ore
effic
ient
tech
nolo
gies
, per
cept
ions
of t
he v
alue
of "
gree
n" b
uild
ings
and
LE
ED, a
ctiv
ities
of p
ublic
and
inst
itutio
nal p
urch
aser
s and
pro
ject
s, co
mpe
ting
prio
ritie
s for
tim
e an
d m
oney
, and
com
petit
ion
with
all
mes
sage
s (m
essa
ge o
verlo
ad)
Ret
aile
rs, m
anuf
actu
rers
, dis
tribu
tors
, hom
e bu
ilder
s, le
nder
s, an
d sc
hool
s rec
ogni
ze p
rofit
abili
ty/v
alue
of
prom
otin
g/ed
ucat
ing/
lend
ing
on h
igh
effic
ienc
y an
d re
new
able
pro
duct
s, bu
ildin
gs a
nd se
rvic
es (w
ithou
t N
YSE
RD
A su
pply
/mid
-mar
ket a
ssis
tanc
e)
Fina
ncia
l A
ssis
tanc
e
Proj
ects
ass
iste
d;C
oope
rativ
e ad
verti
sing
pl
aced
; Mar
ket s
hare
in
cent
ives
Inpu
ts: F
unds
, sta
ff, a
llies
, aw
aren
ess a
nd
cred
ibili
ty o
f EN
ERG
Y S
TAR
and
NY
SER
DA
, re
latio
nshi
ps w
ith k
ey st
akeh
olde
rs/m
arke
t act
ors
and
polic
y m
aker
s, an
d m
arke
t kno
wle
dge
Ad/
mes
sage
cam
paig
ns d
evel
oped
; m
edia
buy
s; G
et E
nerg
y $m
art
web
site
; On-
line
cam
paig
ns; S
peci
al
prom
otio
ns; E
duca
tiona
l mat
eria
l
Supp
ly, i
nfra
stru
ctur
e an
d de
man
d w
ork
toge
ther
to in
crea
se m
arke
t val
ues f
or
ENER
GY
STA
R la
bel,
hig
h ef
ficie
ncy,
re
new
able
and
load
man
agem
ent p
rodu
cts,
build
ings
, ser
vice
s; E
nerg
y co
nsci
ous s
ocie
ty
Qua
lifie
d m
arke
t act
ors;
In
crea
sed
avai
labi
lity
and
prod
uct r
ange
for h
igh
effic
ienc
y, re
new
able
and
load
m
anag
emen
t pro
duct
s, se
rvic
es a
nd o
ptio
ns
Incr
ease
d pr
opor
tion
of e
quip
men
t, ho
mes
and
serv
ices
pur
chas
ed a
re
ENER
GY
STA
R la
bele
d/hi
gh e
ffic
ienc
y eq
uipm
ent;C
omm
uniti
es a
nd
scho
ols m
ore
ener
gy e
ffic
ient
/ sus
tain
able
;En
ergy
savi
ngs,
peak
dem
and
redu
ctio
n, a
nd re
late
d bi
ll re
duct
ion,
en
viro
nmen
tal a
nd h
ealth
ben
efits
Ener
gy sa
ving
s, pe
ak d
eman
d re
duct
ion,
and
rela
ted
bill
redu
ctio
n, e
nviro
nmen
tal a
nd
heal
th b
enef
its
Incr
ease
d va
lid in
form
atio
n, k
now
ledg
e an
d pr
ogra
m-
supp
orte
d de
man
d fo
r EN
ERG
Y S
TAR
labe
led
and
high
eff
icie
ncy
prod
ucts
, hom
es, b
uild
ings
, ren
ewab
le
optio
ns, l
oad
man
agem
ent a
nd ra
te o
ptio
ns
Incr
ease
d de
man
d fo
r EN
ERG
Y S
TAR
la
bele
d, h
igh
effic
ienc
y, re
new
able
pr
oduc
ts, b
uild
ings
and
serv
ices
(with
out
NY
SER
DA
supp
ly/m
id-m
arke
t ass
ista
nce)
Inte
rmed
iate
-T
erm
Out
com
es(5
-10
yrs)
Incr
ease
d pu
rcha
ses o
f hi
gh e
ffic
ienc
y,
rene
wab
le a
nd lo
ad
man
agem
ent p
rodu
cts
and
serv
ices
Mai
ntai
n an
d in
crea
se
parti
cipa
tion
and
supp
ort
from
mar
ket i
nfra
stru
ctur
e ac
tors
Polic
y, p
lann
ing
and
com
mun
ity c
oord
inat
ion
and
deve
lopm
ent
Age
ncy,
pro
gram
, cu
rric
ulum
s and
com
mun
ity
com
mitt
ees,
plan
s and
po
licy;
Col
labo
ratio
n w
ith
othe
r eff
icie
ncy
and
dem
and
resp
onse
pro
gram
s and
or
gani
zatio
ns
Age
ncie
s cre
ate
polic
ies
cons
iste
nt w
ith/s
uppo
rting
en
ergy
eff
icie
ncy
and
rene
wab
le
ener
gy, c
omm
unity
cha
mpi
ons,
curr
icul
ums a
ppro
ved
and
prog
ram
s lev
erag
ed
Polic
ies,
com
mun
ity
cham
pion
s, cu
rric
ulum
s all
supp
ort e
ffic
ienc
y in
fras
truct
ure
*The
Gen
eral
Aw
aren
ess p
rogr
am, a
lthou
gh su
mm
ariz
ed w
ithin
this
resi
dent
ial
sect
or-le
vel l
ogic
dia
gram
pro
vide
s im
porta
nt in
form
atio
n an
d ed
ucat
ion
on e
nerg
yef
ficie
ncy
and
rene
wab
le e
nerg
y op
tions
to ta
rget
ed N
ew Y
ork
com
mer
cial
and
in
dust
rial m
arke
t act
ors a
s wel
l
Appendix A
A-4
Low
-Inc
ome
Sect
or L
ogic
Mod
el
Act
iviti
es
Out
puts
Shor
t-Ter
m
Out
com
es
Long
er-T
erm
O
utco
mes
Inpu
ts:
SBC
and
oth
er fu
nds,
staf
f ex
perie
nce,
con
tract
ors,
partn
er a
genc
ies
Age
ncy
Partn
erin
g,
Prog
ram
Info
rmat
ion
Rec
ruitm
ent/
Trai
ning
/ C
ertif
icat
ion
Polic
y c
hang
es a
t pa
rtner
ship
age
ncie
s to
pro
mot
e en
ergy
ef
ficie
ncy,
cha
nges
to
low
-inco
me
hous
ing
Ver
ifica
tion,
Q
A/Q
C
Inte
rmed
iate
- Te
rm
Out
com
es
Fiel
d as
sess
men
ts o
f co
ntra
ctor
wor
k,
conf
irmed
savi
ngs,
resu
lts c
omm
unic
ated
Dire
ct In
stal
ls/
Ener
gy S
ervi
ces/
Fina
ncia
l Ass
ista
nce
Ext
erna
l Inf
luen
ces:
Rul
es a
nd re
gula
tions
at s
tate
and
fede
ral h
ousi
ng a
genc
ies.
Oth
er st
ate
and
fede
ral e
nerg
y po
licie
s. A
genc
y st
ruct
ures
, leg
isla
ted
proc
esse
s. U
tility
reve
nue
de-c
oupl
ing.
Gen
eral
eco
nom
ic c
ondi
tions
and
ene
rgy
pric
es. C
osts
and
per
form
ance
of e
mer
ging
tech
nolo
gies
. Oth
er h
ouse
hold
exp
ense
s. W
eath
er
impa
cts.
Inte
rest
rate
s. M
aste
r ver
sus s
ub-m
eter
ing.
Per
cept
ions
of i
mpo
rtanc
e of
glo
bal c
limat
e ch
ange
. Div
ersi
ty a
nd d
ispe
rsio
n of
low
-inco
me
popu
latio
n ac
ross
Age
ncy
partn
ersh
ips
esta
blis
hed,
pro
gram
in
form
atio
n an
d as
sist
ance
av
aila
ble,
out
reac
h se
rvic
es
crea
ted
Dire
ct in
stal
ls, r
educ
ed
pric
e he
atin
g fu
el,
ince
ntiv
es/fi
nanc
ing
optio
ns a
vaila
ble
for
ener
gy e
ffic
ient
hou
sing
/m
easu
res
Hou
sing
dev
elop
ers,
ener
gy
serv
ices
con
tract
ors,
mid
-m
arke
t par
tner
s rec
ruite
d.
Trai
ning
and
cer
tific
atio
ns
avai
labl
e. A
udit
proc
edur
es
esta
blis
hed
HEA
P,
CBO
s,
WAP
, D
SS,
utili
ties,
seni
ors/
hous
ing
agen
cies
, "gr
een"
age
ncie
s
End-
use
cons
umer
s,en
ergy
effi
cien
t bui
ldin
g sp
ecia
lists
, con
trac
tors
, co
nsul
tant
s, le
nder
s, au
dito
rs, h
eatin
g fu
el
vend
ors
Vend
ors
Con
trac
tors
, bui
ldin
g ow
ners
/dev
elop
ers,
audi
tors
,co
nsul
tant
s, le
nder
sM
arke
t Act
ors
EE b
ecom
es st
anda
rd p
art o
f low
-in
com
e ho
usin
g/eq
uipm
ent
deci
sion
s
Mar
ket i
nfra
stru
ctur
e es
tabl
ishe
d to
ef
fect
ivel
y se
rve
low
-inco
me
cust
omer
s thr
ough
out s
tate
Mor
e ef
ficie
nt re
side
ntia
l/lo
w-in
com
e bu
ildin
g st
ock,
su
stai
ned
ener
gy sa
ving
s
Impr
oved
env
ironm
enta
l qu
ality
, eco
nom
ic w
ell-
bein
g.
Hou
sing
aud
ited,
EE
mea
sure
s in
stal
led,
hom
es w
eath
eriz
ed,
mor
e ef
ficie
nt h
ousi
ng
cons
truct
ed, h
eatin
g fu
el
proc
ured
, hea
ting
equi
pmen
t re
paire
d
Ener
gy se
rvic
es (
e.g.
, m
aint
enan
ce/re
pairs
), te
chni
cal b
uild
ing
assi
stan
ce, a
udits
, cus
tom
er
ener
gy/fi
nanc
ial e
duca
tion
Incr
ease
d aw
aren
ess a
nd
unde
rsta
ndin
g of
low
-inco
me
prog
ram
s and
spec
ific
EE
oppo
rtuni
ties,
elig
ible
cu
stom
ers a
nd p
roje
cts
iden
tifie
d
Mid
-mar
ket p
rogr
am
parti
cipa
nts r
ecru
ited
and
train
ed
kW
, kW
h an
d th
erm
sa
ving
s, bi
ll re
duct
ions
, im
prov
ed a
ir qu
ality
, co
mfo
rt an
d sa
fety
Parti
cipa
nts m
ore
know
ledg
eabl
e ab
out E
E be
nefit
s and
opt
ions
Bui
lder
s, co
ntra
ctor
s, ve
ndor
s and
m
id-s
tream
act
ors f
indi
ng e
ffic
ienc
y op
tions
and
serv
ices
pro
fitab
le
thro
ugh
the
prog
ram
s Mar
ket p
artic
ipan
ts a
ctiv
ely
prom
otin
g E
E pr
oduc
ts,
serv
ices
(a
udits
, ene
rgy
anal
ysis
) and
hou
sing
(e
.g.,
EN
ERG
Y S
TAR
)
Dem
and
for E
E pr
oduc
ts, s
ervi
ces
and
hous
ing
cont
inue
s to
incr
ease
(as
allo
wed
by
inco
me
cons
train
ts)
Cus
tom
ers e
xper
ienc
e re
duce
d en
ergy
cos
ts,
impr
oved
air
qual
ity,
com
fort
and
safe
ty
Sust
aine
d EE
mar
ket i
n th
e lo
w-in
com
e se
ctor
Red
uced
ene
rgy
cost
bu
rden
for l
ow-in
com
e ho
useh
olds
Polic
y an
d Pl
anni
ng
Pro
gram
s coo
rdin
atio
n w
ith lo
w-in
com
e ho
usin
g sp
ecifi
ying
age
ncie
s (e.
g.,
HU
D),
LIFE
mee
tings
and
co
nfer
ence
s org
aniz
ed a
nd
cond
ucte
d; C
olla
bora
tion
with
oth
er e
ffic
ienc
y an
d de
man
d re
spon
se p
rogr
ams
and
orga
niza
tionsPr
ogra
m st
aff,
polic
y m
aker
s,re
gula
tors
, low
-inco
me
ener
gy
serv
ice
prov
ider
s
Incr
ease
d aw
aren
ess o
f lo
w-in
com
e en
ergy
is
sues
and
bes
t pra
ctic
es
by p
rogr
am st
aff,
polic
y m
aker
s, ho
usin
g ag
enci
es
SBC
III G
oals
A
djus
t for
Q
A/
QC
find
ings
A-5
R&
D S
ecto
r L
ogic
Mod
el
Activ
ities
Outp
uts
Shor
t- an
d In
term
ediat
e-Te
rm
Outc
omes
Long
er-T
erm
Outc
omes
Exte
rnal
Influ
ence
s:Av
ailab
ility o
f priv
ate c
apita
l for R
&D in
vest
ment
, ene
rgy
cost
s, co
st/p
erfor
manc
e of c
ompe
ting
and
comp
lemen
tary
techn
olog
ies, e
nd u
sers
' willi
ngne
ss to
adop
t new
tech
nolog
ies, a
ttitu
des t
oward
s fun
ding
high
-ris
k R&
D ac
tivitie
s, fu
ndin
g an
d ac
tivitie
s of o
ther
R&D
initia
tives
, poli
tical
/legi
slativ
e/reg
ulato
ry c
hang
es, c
hang
es in
perc
eptio
ns of
glob
al wa
rmin
g
Proj
ect D
evelo
pmen
t an
d Se
lectio
nSt
udy,
Prov
e Con
cept
sD
evelo
p New
or
Impr
oved
Pro
duct
Prod
uct
Dem
onst
ratio
ns an
d Ed
ucati
on
Inpu
ts:
NYSE
RDA
pro
gram
fu
ndin
g, st
aff, N
YSER
DA
R&D
comp
eten
cies
Proj
ect t
ypes
pr
iorit
ized,
el
igibil
ity
esta
blish
ed fo
r so
licita
tions
Tech
nolo
gy a
nd p
rodu
ct
feasib
ility
studie
s, da
ta co
llecte
d, pa
pers
and
artic
les w
ritten
on
know
ledge
gaine
d
Inte
rmed
iate s
cale
prot
otyp
es de
velo
ped,
pate
nts s
ecur
ed
Prod
uct d
emon
strate
d an
d fie
ld im
pleme
ntati
ons
comp
leted
, edu
catio
nal
mate
rials
publ
ished
, wo
rksh
ops/
semi
nars
co
nduc
ted, a
naly
tical
tools
PONs
/RFP
s iss
ued,
prop
osals
re
view
ed an
d se
lected
for
fund
ing
Info
rmat
ion sh
ared w
ith
R&D
comm
unity
Tech
nolog
y perf
orma
nce/
cost
spec
ifica
tions
im
prov
ing, in
teres
t/inv
estm
ent in
prod
uct
grow
ing
Incr
ease
d pro
duct
visib
ility,
cre
dible
data
on p
erfor
man
ce in
di
fferen
t con
texts
, cos
ts an
d im
pacts
avail
able
to R
&D
comm
unity
, ear
ly ter
m ad
opter
s and
poli
cy m
akers
Busin
ess i
nfra
stru
cture
in pl
ace
to su
ppor
t pro
ducts
it ha
s nu
rture
d, in
creas
ed av
ailab
ility
and
attrac
tiven
ess o
f tec
hnol
ogies
and
serv
ices
Prod
ucers
, sup
plier
s, en
d us
ers s
ee p
rodu
ct va
lue an
d kn
ow h
ow to
appl
y tec
hnol
ogy,
new
indus
try
stand
ards
Busin
ess
Infra
struc
ture/
Mar
ket
Deve
lopm
ent S
uppo
rt
Train
ing a
nd ce
rtific
ation
of
mark
et ac
tors
avail
able,
pr
oduc
tion
and i
nsta
llatio
n inc
entiv
es av
ailab
le, bu
sines
s pa
rtner
ing an
d pla
nning
as
sistan
ce av
ailab
le
Stra
tegic
and f
lexibl
e pro
gram
po
rtfol
io de
velop
ed to
pro
mot
e pu
blic
bene
fits
Prod
uct D
evel
opm
ent
Dem
onstr
ation
Proj
ect M
anag
emen
tRe
sear
ch fo
r Pol
icy
Stud
ies to
Info
rm
Polic
y an
d R&
D Co
mmu
nity
Agen
cy pa
rtners
hips
form
ed, s
tudie
s co
mmis
sione
d, po
licy-
relev
ant r
esea
rch, w
hite
pape
rs, w
orks
hops
Incr
ease
d aw
aren
ess a
nd
unde
rstan
ding
of re
levan
t te
chnic
al, sc
ientif
ic an
d ins
titut
ional
issue
s rela
ted t
o R&
D ba
rriers
, env
ironm
enta
l im
pacts
, pub
lic ag
ency
co
ordin
atio
n
Info
rmed
pol
icies
and p
rogr
ams
deve
loped
, R&
D op
portu
nitie
s id
entif
ied,
enha
nced
agen
cy
coor
dina
tion,
stand
ards
and
regul
ation
s de
velo
ped,f
indin
gs
publ
icize
d
Lab
prot
otyp
es d
evel
oped
, kn
owled
ge of
futu
re R&
D an
d pr
oduc
t opt
ions
Prod
uct T
estin
g and
Re
finem
ent
Prod
ucts
teste
d in
lab an
d rea
l-wor
ld se
tting
s, te
st da
ta av
ailab
le to
the
R&D
comm
unity
Prod
uct r
efine
d acc
ordin
g to
less
ons l
earn
ed
Prod
uct p
erfo
rman
ce pr
oven
an
d int
rodu
ced i
nto t
he
mark
et, c
osts
decr
easin
g
Comm
ercia
l sca
le pr
oduc
t de
velo
ped
and
poten
tial
demo
nstra
ted
Pre-
deplo
ymen
t
Know
ledge
gaine
d fo
r fut
ure R
&D an
d pro
duct
s, fir
ms su
pply
ing ne
w pr
oduc
ts h
ave
credib
ility
and
are ec
onom
ically
viab
le, m
arke
t inf
rastr
uctu
re su
ppor
ts in
creas
ed
dema
nd fo
r new
pro
duct
s
Envi
ronm
enta
l ben
efits
, Ene
rgy
bene
fits (
more
relia
ble p
ower
gene
ration
, incre
ased
energ
y/lo
ad m
anag
emen
t, inc
reas
ed en
ergy
effic
iency
), Eco
nomi
c ben
efits
(new
com
panie
s fo
rmed
, New
Yor
k job
s cre
ated
/reta
ined
, cos
t of r
egula
tory
comp
lianc
e is r
educ
ed)
Incr
ease
d awa
renes
s of
techn
olog
y op
tions
, com
mon
know
ledge
base
esta
blish
ed
Tech
nolo
gy p
erfo
rman
ce
incre
ases
, mile
stone
s ac
comp
lishe
d, pr
oduc
t sta
ndar
ds es
tabli
shed
Incr
ease
in tr
ained
/cert
ified
mar
ket
acto
rs, gr
eater
numb
er of
energ
y/tec
hnol
ogy p
rodu
cers
ope
ratin
g in
Ne
w Yo
rk St
ate,
allian
ces f
orme
d, inn
ovat
ive b
usine
ss s
trate
gies
im
plem
ente
d, red
uced
prod
uct a
nd
insta
llatio
n co
sts
Appendix A
A-6
Cle
an E
nerg
y In
fras
truc
ture
Log
ic M
odel
Act
iviti
es
Out
puts
Shor
t- an
d In
term
edia
te-
Term
O
utco
mes
Long
er-T
erm
O
utco
mes
Ext
erna
l Inf
luen
ces:
Publ
ic a
nd p
rivat
e ca
pita
l for
cle
an e
nerg
y in
vest
men
ts, c
ompe
titio
n fr
om o
ther
stat
es to
recr
uit c
lean
ene
rgy
firm
s, c
hang
ing
ener
gy c
osts
, cos
t/per
form
ance
of c
ompe
ting
and
com
plem
enta
ry te
chno
logi
es, e
nd u
sers
' w
illin
gnes
s to
adop
t new
tech
nolo
gies
, per
cept
ions
abo
ut g
loba
l war
min
g, p
oliti
cal/l
egis
lativ
e/re
gula
tory
cha
nges
Proj
ect D
evel
opm
ent
and
Sele
ctio
nM
arke
t Bar
riers
R
esea
rch
Inpu
ts:
NY
SER
DA
pro
gram
fu
ndin
g, st
aff,
NY
SER
DA
R&
D
com
pete
ncie
s
Proj
ect t
ypes
pr
iorit
ized
, el
igib
ility
es
tabl
ishe
d fo
r so
licita
tions
Res
earc
h st
udie
s co
mpl
eted
, sta
keho
lder
w
orks
hops
con
duct
ed,
barr
iers
iden
tifie
d
Educ
atio
nal m
ater
ials
(b
roch
ures
, rep
orts
) pu
blis
hed,
wor
ksho
ps/
sem
inar
s con
duct
ed,
anal
ytic
al to
ols a
vaila
ble
Stra
tegi
es d
evel
oped
to
addr
ess t
echn
ical
, ec
onom
ic, i
nfor
mat
ion
and
inst
itutio
nal b
arrie
rs
Pote
ntia
l end
-use
rs h
ave
incr
ease
d aw
aren
ess a
nd
know
ledg
e o
f cle
an e
nerg
y co
sts,
bene
fits,
oper
atio
ns;
unde
rsta
nd h
ow to
acq
uire
it;
con
fiden
t in
perf
orm
ance
PON
s is
sued
, pr
opos
als s
elec
ted
for f
undi
ng
Tech
nica
l, ec
onom
ic,
info
rmat
ion
and
inst
itutio
nal b
arrie
rs
over
com
e (in
clud
ing
chan
ges t
o re
gula
tions
, st
anda
rds)
End-
user
s mor
e ac
cept
ing
of
clea
n en
ergy
tech
nolo
gy,
incr
ease
d de
man
d fo
r in
stal
latio
ns
Incr
ease
in tr
aine
d/ce
rtifie
d cl
ean
ener
gy in
stal
lers
and
pr
ofes
sion
als,
new
trai
ning
an
d ce
rtific
atio
n pr
ogra
ms
deve
lope
d, sc
hool
s/pr
ogra
ms
accr
edite
d
Trai
ning
and
cer
tific
atio
n av
aila
ble
for c
lean
-ene
rgy
inst
alle
rs, c
ode
offic
ials
, in
spec
tors
, and
mar
kete
rs
Stra
tegi
c an
d fle
xibl
e pr
ogra
m
portf
olio
de
velo
ped
Trai
ning
and
C
ertif
icat
ion
Info
rmat
ion
for
Polic
y an
d T
echn
olog
y D
evel
opm
ent
Pre-
Dep
loym
ent A
ssis
tanc
e
Out
reac
h an
d Ed
ucat
ion
to E
nd-
Use
rs
Ince
ntiv
es fo
r cle
an e
nerg
y sy
stem
inst
alle
rs a
vaila
ble
(pas
sed
thro
ugh
to e
nd-
user
s to
redu
ce c
osts
)
Out
reac
h an
d in
cent
ives
to
attra
ct c
lean
ene
rgy
busi
ness
es to
New
Yor
k St
ate,
bus
ines
s par
tner
ing,
pl
anni
ng a
nd te
chni
cal
assi
stan
ce a
vaila
ble
Gre
ater
num
ber/v
arie
ty o
f cl
ean
ener
gy sy
stem
des
igne
rs,
man
ufac
ture
rs, d
istri
buto
rs
and
serv
ice
firm
s ope
ratin
g in
St
ate,
star
t-ups
ass
iste
d,
inno
vativ
e bu
sine
ss st
rate
gies
im
plem
ente
d, a
llian
ces f
orm
ed
Inst
alla
tion
Ince
ntiv
es
Cle
an E
nerg
y B
usin
ess R
ecru
itmen
t an
d A
ssis
tanc
e
Div
erse
and
pro
fitab
le
infr
astru
ctur
e of
cle
an e
nerg
y m
anuf
actu
ring
and
dist
ribut
ion
firm
s in
the
Stat
e an
d as
soci
ated
jobs
cre
ated
, re
duce
d sy
stem
cos
ts d
ue to
in
nova
tive
busi
ness
pra
ctic
es
Red
uced
cos
t of i
nsta
llatio
ns
and
insp
ectio
ns, i
ncre
ased
cl
ean
ener
gy sy
stem
pe
rfor
man
ce a
nd re
liabi
lity,
re
duce
d op
erat
ing
cost
s
Mar
ket i
nfra
stru
ctur
e is
read
y to
supp
ly a
nd
serv
e in
crea
sed
dem
and
for c
lean
ene
rgy
Appendix A
A-7
Dis
trib
uted
Ene
rgy
Res
ourc
es L
ogic
Mod
el
Act
iviti
es
Out
puts
Shor
t- an
d In
term
edia
te-
Term
O
utco
mes
Long
er-T
erm
O
utco
mes
Ext
erna
l Inf
luen
ces:
Priv
ate
capi
tal f
or R
&D
inve
stm
ent,
ener
gy c
osts
, cos
t/per
form
ance
of c
ompe
ting
and
com
plem
enta
ry te
chno
logi
es, e
nd u
sers
' will
ingn
ess t
o ad
opt n
ew te
chno
logi
es, f
undi
ng a
nd a
ctiv
ities
of o
ther
R&
D in
itiat
ives
, po
litic
al/le
gist
lativ
e/reg
ulat
ory
chan
ges
Proj
ect D
evel
opm
ent
and
Sele
ctio
n
Pow
er S
yste
ms
Feas
ibili
ty a
nd R
elat
ed
Stud
ies
DG
-CH
P P
rodu
ct
Dem
onst
ratio
ns
Inpu
ts:
NY
SER
DA
pro
gram
fu
ndin
g, st
aff,
NY
SER
DA
R
&D
com
pete
ncie
s
Proj
ect t
ypes
pr
iorit
ized
, el
igib
ility
es
tabl
ishe
d fo
r so
licita
tions
DER
pow
er sy
stem
s pr
oduc
t and
tech
nolo
gy
feas
ibili
ty st
udie
s, be
st
prac
tice
and
busi
ness
mod
el
stud
ies,
regu
lato
ry is
sues
st
udie
s
Inno
vativ
e D
G-
CH
P sy
stem
de
mon
stra
tions
in
stal
led
Mos
t via
ble
and
best
pe
rfor
min
g pr
oduc
ts,
tech
nolo
gies
, and
stra
tegi
es
iden
tifie
d
Ove
rall
grow
th in
the D
ER p
ower
syst
ems m
arke
ts in
New
Yor
k, p
rogr
am re
sults
inco
rpor
ated
into
NY
SER
DA
dep
loym
ent
prog
ram
s (EE
S/R
EAP)
, im
prov
ed sy
stem
-wid
e re
liabi
lity,
pea
k lo
ad re
duct
ions
PON
s an
d R
FPs
Issu
ed, p
ropo
sals
re
view
ed a
nd
sele
cted
for
fund
ing
Info
rmat
ion
for
Polic
ymak
ers
Stak
ehol
ders
hav
e in
crea
sed
awar
enes
s and
kno
wle
dge
of
DG
-CH
P in
stal
latio
ns,
resu
lts, b
est p
ract
ices
DG
-CH
P In
tegr
ated
Dat
a Sy
stem
web
site
, whi
te
pape
rs, c
ase
stud
ies,
stak
ehol
der c
onfe
renc
es
and
wor
ksho
ps,
tech
nolo
gy tr
ansf
er st
udie
s
Stak
ehol
ders
see
valu
e of
D
ER p
ower
syst
ems,
cons
ider
them
relia
ble,
in
crea
se in
vest
men
t in
the
tech
nolo
gy
Stra
tegi
c an
d fle
xibl
e pr
ogra
m p
ortfo
lios
deve
lope
d
Com
mun
icat
ion
with
st
ate
and
fede
ral p
ublic
po
licy
offic
ials
Polic
ies a
nd st
anda
rds
supp
ort
DER
pow
er
syst
ems
Polic
ymak
ers u
nder
stan
d re
gula
tory
bar
riers
Perf
orm
ance
m
onito
red,
cre
dibl
e da
ta o
n pe
rfor
man
ce,
cost
s, an
d im
pact
s av
aila
ble
Pow
er S
yste
ms
Prod
uct D
evel
opm
ent
Prot
otyp
es d
evel
oped
and
re
fined
, tes
t dat
a av
aila
ble
Prod
uct a
nd te
chno
logy
pe
rfor
man
ce in
crea
ses,
tech
nica
l mile
ston
es a
ttain
ed
Prod
ucts
com
mer
cial
ized
and
ne
w b
usin
ess m
odel
s de
velo
ped
to d
eliv
er n
ew
DER
pow
er sy
stem
pr
oduc
ts a
nd te
chno
logi
es
Info
rmat
ion
D
isse
min
atio
n
Perm
ittin
g, st
anda
rd
inte
rcon
nect
ion
requ
irem
ents
, util
ity
stan
dby
serv
ice,
tarif
fs
addr
esse
d
Syst
ems r
efin
ed
acco
rdin
g to
less
ons
lear
ned
Perf
orm
ance
-bas
ed
ince
ntiv
es u
tiliz
ed to
re
plic
ate
succ
essf
ul D
G-
CH
P de
mon
stra
tions
at
low
er ri
sk
Bro
ader
repl
icat
ion
of D
G-C
HP
syst
ems
Appendix A
A-8
Dem
and
Res
pons
e an
d In
nova
tive
Rat
e R
esea
rch
Log
ic M
odel
Appendix A
Act
iviti
es
Out
puts
Shor
t- an
d In
term
edia
te-
Term
O
utco
mes
Long
er-T
erm
O
utco
mes
Ext
erna
l Inf
luen
ces:
Priv
ate
capi
tal f
or R
&D
inve
stm
ent,
ener
gy c
osts
, cos
t/per
form
ance
of c
ompe
ting
and
com
plem
enta
ry te
chno
logi
es, e
nd u
sers
' will
ingn
ess t
o ad
opt n
ew te
chno
logi
es, f
undi
ng a
nd a
ctiv
ities
of o
ther
R&
D in
itiat
ives
, po
litic
al/le
gist
lativ
e/reg
ulat
ory
chan
ges
Proj
ect D
evel
opm
ent
and
Sele
ctio
n
Tech
nica
l and
Eco
nom
ic
Feas
ibili
ty S
tudi
es
Inpu
ts:
NY
SER
DA
pro
gram
fu
ndin
g, st
aff,
NY
SER
DA
R
&D
com
pete
ncie
s
Proj
ect t
ypes
pr
iorit
ized
, el
igib
ility
es
tabl
ishe
d fo
r so
licita
tions
Flex
ible
load
and
tim
e se
nsiti
ve ra
tes t
echn
ical
an
d ec
onom
ic fe
asib
ility
st
udie
s, da
ta a
vaila
ble
Mos
t tec
hnol
ogic
ally
and
ec
onom
ical
ly v
iabl
e fle
xibl
e lo
ad sy
stem
sid
entif
ied
for d
emon
stra
tion
Incr
ease
d m
arke
tpla
ce
acce
ptan
ce o
f tim
e-se
nsiti
ve ra
te
prog
ram
s and
flex
ible
lo
ad te
chno
logi
es fo
r sm
all c
usto
mer
s
Peak
load
redu
ctio
ns, c
ost s
avin
gs fo
r sm
all c
usto
mer
s, sy
stem
relia
bilit
y in
crea
sed,
sust
aina
ble
busi
ness
dev
elop
ed fo
r equ
ipm
ent s
uppl
iers
an
d tim
e-se
nsiti
ve ra
te p
rovi
ders
PON
s an
d R
FPs
issu
ed, p
ropo
sals
re
view
ed a
nd
sele
cted
for
fund
ing
Info
rmat
ion
Dis
sem
inat
ion
Dem
onst
ratio
ns a
nd p
ilot p
roje
cts
impl
emen
ted
in re
side
ntia
l and
co
mm
erci
al b
uild
ings
to a
sses
s fle
xibl
e lo
ad
tech
nolo
gies
, tim
e-se
nsiti
ve ra
tes
and
prom
isin
g bu
sine
ss m
odel
s
Stra
tegi
c an
d fle
xibl
e pr
ogra
m
portf
olio
s dev
elop
ed
Com
mun
icat
ion
abou
t de
mon
stra
tions
and
pilo
t pe
rfor
man
ce w
ith
stak
ehol
ders
Incr
ease
d aw
aren
ess o
f the
be
nefit
s of
time-
sens
itive
ra
tes a
nd fl
exib
le lo
ad
tech
nolo
gy a
mon
g en
ergy
se
rvic
e co
mpa
nies
, eq
uipm
ent m
anuf
actu
rers
an
d su
pplie
rs, r
esid
entia
l an
d co
mm
erci
al e
nd-u
sers
Perf
orm
ance
mon
itore
d,
cred
ible
dat
a on
beh
avio
ral,
econ
omic
, and
pea
k lo
ad
impa
cts a
vaila
ble
Dem
onst
ratio
ns o
f Fle
xibl
e Lo
ad T
echn
olog
ies,
Tim
e-Se
nsiti
ve R
ate
and
New
B
usin
ess M
odel
s
Tech
nolo
gy a
nd b
usin
ess
mod
els r
efin
ed a
ccor
ding
to
less
ons l
earn
ed
Mor
e sm
all
cust
omer
s pa
rtici
pate
in
who
lesa
le a
nd lo
cal
dem
and
resp
onse
pr
ogra
ms
Dev
elop
men
t of
inno
vativ
e el
ectri
c se
rvic
e ra
tes b
y en
ergy
serv
ices
co
mpa
nies
Incr
ease
d te
chno
logy
pe
rfor
man
ce, o
ptim
al ra
te
stru
ctur
es d
evel
oped
, bus
ines
s m
odel
s dev
elop
ed to
max
imiz
e lo
ad re
duct
ions
and
incr
ease
re
venu
es
Gre
ater
var
iety
of
relia
ble
flexi
ble
load
pro
duct
s and
tim
e-se
nsiti
ve
rate
s in
mar
ketp
lace
A-9
Ele
ctri
c T
rans
port
atio
n L
ogic
Mod
el
Act
iviti
es
Out
puts
Shor
t- an
d In
term
edia
te-
Term
O
utco
mes
Long
er-T
erm
O
utco
mes
Ext
erna
l Inf
luen
ces:
Priv
ate
capi
tal f
or R
&D
inve
stm
ent,
ener
gy c
osts
, cos
t/per
form
ance
of c
ompe
ting
and
com
plem
enta
ry te
chno
logi
es, e
nd u
sers
' will
ingn
ess t
o ad
opt n
ew te
chno
logi
es, f
undi
ng a
nd a
ctiv
ities
of o
ther
R&
D in
itiat
ives
, po
litic
al/le
gist
lativ
e/reg
ulat
ory
chan
ges
Proj
ect D
evel
opm
ent
and
Sele
ctio
nPr
oduc
t/Tec
hnol
ogy
Nee
ds, F
easi
bilit
y an
d R
elat
ed S
tudi
es
Prod
uct D
evel
opm
ent
and
Test
ing
Dem
onst
ratio
ns a
nd
Kno
wle
dge
Dis
sem
inat
ion
Inpu
ts:
NY
SER
DA
prog
ram
fu
ndin
g, st
aff,
NY
SER
DA
R
&D
com
pete
ncie
s
Proj
ect t
ypes
pr
iorit
ized
, el
igib
ility
es
tabl
ishe
d fo
r so
licita
tions
Mar
ket s
tudi
es/p
rodu
ct
need
s ass
essm
ents
, co
ncep
tual
tech
nolo
gy
eval
uatio
ns, p
rodu
ct
feas
ibili
ty s
tudi
es
Prot
otyp
es d
evel
oped
and
re
fined
, tes
t dat
a av
aila
ble,
pa
tent
s sec
ured
Prod
ucts
dem
onst
rate
d an
d fie
ld im
plem
enta
tions
co
mpl
eted
, res
ults
pu
blis
hed,
con
fere
nce
pres
enta
tions
PON
s Is
sued
Mos
t via
ble
and
best
pe
rfor
min
g te
chno
logi
es
iden
tifie
d, fu
ture
pro
duct
/re
sear
ch n
eeds
iden
tifie
d
Tech
nolo
gy p
erfo
rman
ce
incr
ease
sC
redi
ble
data
on
perf
orm
ance
, cos
ts a
nd
impa
cts a
vaila
ble
New
com
pani
es fo
rmed
, New
Yor
k jo
bs c
reat
ed/
reta
ined
, cos
t of r
egul
ator
y co
mpl
ianc
e is
redu
ced
Incr
ease
d en
ergy
eff
icie
ncy
of c
omm
uter
rail/
subw
ay sy
stem
s, in
crea
sed
use
of o
ff-p
eak
pow
er, i
ncre
ased
ele
ctric
ity re
liabi
lity,
redu
ced
ener
gy c
osts
for t
rans
porta
tion
owne
rs a
nd e
nd-u
sers
, m
obili
ty b
enef
its fo
r end
-use
rs, r
educ
ed p
etro
leum
use
, gre
enho
use
gase
s and
crit
eria
em
issi
ons
Prop
osal
s re
view
ed a
nd
sele
cted
for
fund
ing
New
tech
nolo
gies
ado
pted
in
com
petit
ive
mar
kets
, in
crea
sed
sale
s and
roya
lties
Prod
ucer
s, su
pplie
rs, e
nd
user
s see
tech
nolo
gy v
alue
an
d kn
ow h
ow to
app
ly
tech
nolo
gy
Tech
nolo
gies
are
fu
nctio
nally
via
ble,
co
mpa
tible
, cer
tifie
d, a
nd
finan
cing
is a
vaila
ble
Dev
elop
men
t cos
ts d
ecre
ase
Com
mer
cial
izat
ion
Supp
ort,
Prod
uct
Posi
tioni
ng
Targ
et m
arke
ts id
entif
ied,
bu
sine
ss p
lans
dev
elop
ed/
enha
nced
Mar
ketin
g pl
ans/
finan
cial
pl
ans a
nd c
ompe
titiv
e st
rate
gies
dev
elop
ed,
prod
uct p
ositi
onin
g st
udie
s co
mpl
eted
, stra
tegi
c al
lianc
es fo
rmed
Bus
ines
s inf
rast
ruct
ure
supp
orts
pro
duct
s it h
as
nurtu
red,
pro
duct
s rea
dy fo
r co
mm
erci
aliz
atio
n
Stra
tegi
c an
d fle
xibl
e pr
ogra
m p
ortfo
lio
deve
lope
d
Info
rmat
ion
for
Polic
y an
d T
echn
olog
y D
evel
opm
ent
Prod
uct D
evel
opm
ent
Dem
onst
ratio
n an
d Pr
e-D
eplo
ymen
t
Appendix A
A-10
Indu
stri
al a
nd M
unic
ipal
Pro
cess
Eff
icie
ncy
Log
ic M
odel
Act
iviti
es
Out
puts
Shor
t- an
d In
term
edia
te-
Term
O
utco
mes
Long
er-T
erm
O
utco
mes
Ext
erna
l Inf
luen
ces:
Priv
ate
and
mun
icip
al c
apita
l for
R&
D in
vest
men
t, en
ergy
cos
ts, c
ost/p
erfo
rman
ce o
f com
petin
g an
d co
mpl
emen
tary
tech
nolo
gies
, end
use
rs' w
illin
gnes
s to
adop
t new
tech
nolo
gies
, fun
ding
and
act
iviti
es o
f oth
er R
&D
in
itiat
ives
, pol
itica
l/le
gist
lativ
e/re
gula
tory
cha
nges
Proj
ect D
evel
opm
ent
and
Sele
ctio
nR
esea
rch
and
Feas
ibili
ty
Stud
ies
Prod
uct D
evel
opm
ent
and
Test
ing
Dem
onst
ratio
ns a
nd
Kno
wle
dge
Dis
sem
inat
ion
Inpu
ts:
NY
SER
DA
pro
gram
fu
ndin
g, st
aff,
NY
SER
DA
R
&D
com
pete
ncie
s
Proj
ect t
ypes
prio
ritiz
ed,
crite
ria e
stab
lishe
d fo
r so
licita
tions
Con
cept
ual t
echn
olog
y ev
alua
tions
, pro
duct
and
pr
oces
s fea
sibi
lity
stud
ies
Prot
otyp
es d
evel
oped
and
re
fined
, tes
t dat
a av
aila
ble,
pa
tent
s sec
ured
Prod
ucts
dem
onst
rate
d,
resu
lts p
ublis
hed,
co
nfer
ence
pre
sent
atio
ns,
web
site
info
rmat
ion
Prom
isin
g, v
iabl
e an
d be
st
perf
orm
ing
tech
nolo
gies
and
pr
oces
ses i
dent
ified
Tech
nolo
gy p
erfo
rman
ce
incr
ease
sC
redi
ble
data
on
perf
orm
ance
, cos
ts a
nd
impa
cts a
vaila
ble
New
Yor
k jo
bs c
reat
ed, c
ost o
f re
gula
tory
com
plia
nce
is re
duce
d
Red
uced
indu
stria
l pro
cess
ene
rgy,
redu
ced
indu
stria
l was
tes a
nd e
mis
sion
s, in
crea
sed
ener
gy e
ffic
ienc
y in
wat
er/w
aste
wat
er se
ctor
, im
prov
ed N
ew Y
ork
wat
er q
ualit
y, re
duce
d en
viro
nmen
tal
impa
cts o
f was
tew
ater
eff
luen
t
PON
s is
sued
, pr
opos
als r
evie
wed
an
d se
lect
ed fo
r fu
ndin
g, p
artn
ersh
ips
esta
blis
hed
New
tech
nolo
gies
and
pro
cess
es
adop
ted
in i
ndus
trial
and
wat
er/
was
tew
ater
sect
ors,
incr
ease
d sa
les o
f pro
ject
rela
ted
tech
nolo
gies
Prod
ucer
s, su
pplie
rs, e
nd
user
s see
val
ue o
f im
prov
ed
tech
nolo
gies
and
pro
cess
es
valu
e an
d kn
ow h
ow to
ap
ply*
Tech
nolo
gies
and
pro
cess
es
are
func
tiona
lly v
iabl
e,
com
patib
le, c
ertif
ied
and
finan
cing
is a
vaila
ble
Prod
uct c
osts
dec
reas
e
Com
mer
cial
izat
ion
Ass
ista
nce
(Ind
ustri
al)
Bus
ines
s and
mar
ketin
g pl
ans d
evel
oped
/enh
ance
d,
prod
uctio
n fa
cilit
ies
esta
blis
hed/
expa
nded
, en
ergy
man
agem
ent a
nd
eval
uatio
n gu
idan
ce fo
r w
ater
/was
tew
ater
sect
or
avai
labl
e
Prod
uct a
dvis
ory
boar
ds,
partn
ersh
ips f
orm
ed,
prod
uctio
n sy
stem
s de
velo
pmen
t, bu
sine
ss
plan
ning
ass
ista
nce
Prod
ucts
read
y fo
r co
mm
erci
aliz
atio
n, b
usin
ess
infr
astru
ctur
e su
ppor
ts
prod
ucts
it h
as n
urtu
red*
Stra
tegi
c an
d fle
xibl
e pr
ogra
m p
ortfo
lio
deve
lope
d
Info
rmat
ion
for
Polic
y an
d T
echn
olog
y D
evel
opm
ent
Prod
uct D
evel
opm
ent
Dem
onst
ratio
n an
d Pr
e-D
eplo
ymen
t
Trai
ning
and
Tec
hnic
al
Ass
ista
nce
(Wat
er/W
aste
wat
er)
Incr
ease
d kn
owle
dge
of n
ew
ener
gy e
ffic
ient
tech
nolo
gy
and
proc
esse
s and
ene
rgy
man
agem
ent b
est p
ract
ices
Ener
gy m
anag
emen
t and
eq
uipm
ent t
rain
ing
for
plan
t ope
rato
rs, m
unic
ipal
st
aff,
cons
ulta
nts a
nd
prod
uct v
endo
rs
Ener
gy m
anag
emen
t bes
t pr
actic
es u
tiliz
ed re
gula
rly in
w
ater
/was
tew
ater
sect
or
thro
ugho
ut N
ew Y
ork
Partn
ersh
ips f
orm
ed w
ith
Fede
ral a
nd S
tate
age
ncie
s, re
sear
ch o
rgan
izat
ions
, etc
.
* Pr
oduc
ts a
nd te
chno
logi
es p
rom
oted
thor
ugh
R&D
act
iviti
es su
cces
sful
ly tr
ansi
tion
to d
eplo
ymen
t pro
gram
s
Appendix A