DAWG Meeting June 18, 2012 Estimates of Incremental Uncommitted Energy Savings For CED 2011 Chris Kavalec Demand Analysis Office Electricity Supply Analysis Division Chris.Kavalec@energy.ca.gov 916-654-5184

Mid Savings Case GWh: Total Market Potential (Gross C&S) vs Mid Savings Case GWh: Total Market Potential (Gross C&S) vs. Incremental Uncommitted Savings

Mid Savings Case MW: Total Market Potential (Gross C&S) vs Mid Savings Case MW: Total Market Potential (Gross C&S) vs. Incremental Uncommitted Savings

Mid Savings Case MM Therms: Total Market Potential (Gross C&S) vs Mid Savings Case MM Therms: Total Market Potential (Gross C&S) vs. Incremental Uncommitted Savings

Method Codes and Standards EE Measures Emerging Technologies Lighting Interactive effects Three Scenarios

Codes and Standards Included C&S savings from Potential Study not incorporated in CED 2011: 2011 and future Title 20 Future Federal appliance standards 2008 Title 24 (residential) and 2013 Title 24 Used net C&S savings—subtracted off naturally occurring market adoption (NOMAD) from gross C&S savings Excluded lighting for overlap calculation

Codes and Standards Used Navigant estimates for savings except for end uses with 1 to 1 relationship with standards requirements, where CEC forecasting model used: Clothes dryers Central AC/Heat Pump Gas Pool heaters Room AC Gas ranges

EE Measures Cumulative savings starting in 2013 from Potential Study Used net savings Excluded lighting for overlap calculation Usage-based behavior incorporated separately

Lighting Overlap between CEC and Potential Study lighting savings Compared lighting savings incremental to 2010 (2011 for peak) Lighting savings = Potential Study savings from C&S plus Potential Study savings from measures (non-ET) minus CEC C&S lighting savings

Three Scenarios For low savings case, C&S compliance rate reduced by 20 percent Electricity measure savings reduced by 2 percent for low savings case, increased by 5 percent for high case Natural gas measure savings reduced by 5 percent for low savings case, increased by 4 percent for high case ET included only in high savings case

Results: All IOU GWh

Results: All IOU MW

Results: All IOU MM Therms

Incremental Uncommitted GWh by Scenario, all IOUs

Incremental Uncommitted MW by Scenario, all IOUs

Incremental Uncommitted MM Therms by Scenario, all IOUs

Comparison to Itron-CEC 2009 Estimates of Incremental Uncommitted

Impact on Forecast: PG&E ST Sales, Mid Case 2010-2022 avg annual growth falls from 1.19% to 0.76%

Impact on Forecast: PG&E ST Peak, Mid Case 2011-2022 avg annual growth falls from 1.53% to 1.08%

Impact on Forecast: SCE ST Sales, Mid Case 2010-2022 avg annual growth falls from 1.19% to 0.68%

Impact on Forecast: SCE ST Peak, Mid Case 2010-2022 avg annual growth falls from 1.56% to 1.04%

Impact on Forecast: SDG&E ST Sales, Mid Case 2010-2022 avg annual growth falls from 1.94% to 1.55%

Impact on Forecast: SDG&E ST Peak, Mid Case 2010-2022 avg annual growth falls from 2.04% to 1.59%

Naturally Occurring Savings Associated with Incremental Uncommitted Savings (Mid Case, All IOUs)

Naturally Occurring Savings Higher than incremental CEC price effects (although this is apples to oranges comparison) Option 1: NOS is capturing behavior by a segment of the market (“efficient group”). This behavior is counterbalanced by less efficient behavior in the market as a whole. Option 2: CED 2011 forecast “missed” this increased efficiency and should be adjusted.