1 Residential New Construction And Codes and Standards High Level Findings And Ongoing Studies Mary Kay Gobris PG&E September 22, 2004 CALMAC Meeting

2 Listing of Completed Statewide Studies Projected Impact of 2001 and 2005 Code Changes –Itron – June 2001 and March 2004 Baseline Characteristics and Code Compliance – Itron – September 2001 and 2002 – Homes Built in 1999 and 2000 Phase One Evaluation of 2002 RNC Program – RLW and Itron –March 2004

3 Listing of On-Going Statewide Studies Baseline Characteristics and Code Compliance Study – Itron - Homes Built in 2003 New Construction Potential Study – Itron and RLW Phase Two Evaluation of 2002 RNC Program and Evaluation of Program – RLW 2006 Strategy Assessment – RLW, KEMA and Itron

4 Project Advisory Teams RNC Evaluation and Potential Teams: SCE – Shahana Samiullah, Rich Pulliam, Cathy Chappell (HMG); SDG&E – Henry De Jesus, David Blanke; PG&E – Rafael Friedmann, Mary Kay Gobris; CPUC – Eli Kollman and Jay Luboff Codes and Standards Team: SCE – Rich Pulliam, Tony Pierce, Cathy Chappell and Doug Mahone (HMG); SDG&E – Henry De Jesus, Mary Wold; PG&E – Pat Eilert, Gary Fernstrom, Misti Bruceri, Steve Blanc, Mary Kay Gobris; CEC – Bill Pennington; CPUC – Eli Kollman

5 Overview of C&S and Residential New Construction Title 24 energy codes establish standard energy budgets Energy budgets specify maximum kbtu/sq foot of energy usage Builders are allowed to trade-off between measures Typical tradeoffs are installation of more glazing vs. installation of EEF appliances

6 Title 24 Code Changes Title 24 codes are updated about every three years Database of actual homes to estimate statewide impact of code changes – Minimal changes – Decreased energy usage by 15% – Decreased energy usage by 20% 25% to 50% impact in inland areas and desert for both 2001 and 2005 code changes

7 Code Compliance Analyses Code compliance analyzed three times: 1995, 1998, 2001 codes Analyses used on site data – 1995 codes based on 648 homes built in – 1998 codes based on 575 homes built in 2000 – 2001 codes based on 575 homes built in 2003 Data collection includes all major items in the Micropas CEC approved compliance model. Micropas models run for each home

8 Building Characteristics Comparison Significant changes from 1999 to 2003 – Increased square footage of 17% – Number of homes without A/C reduced from 20% to 12% – Percent glazing reduced from 17% to 15% – Increased use of low-E widows from 10% to 83% – Increased AFUE of furnaces from 80.4 to 81.2 –Increased use of >11 SEER HVAC in Central Valley and Desert from 4% to 60%. Minimal changes from 1999 to 2003 – Water heating efficiencies, radiant barriers, insulation

9 Compliance Analyses Results Year homes built Code year Non-compliant16%15%26% Indeterminate33%22%26% Compliant51%63%48% Total100%

10 Compliance Analyses Results By Climate Zone For 2001 Codes Compliance groupNorth Coastal South Coastal South Inland Central Valley Desert and Mountains Non-compliant2%1%10%42%53% Indeterminate7% 14%41%25% Compliant91%92%76%18%23% Total100%

11 Energy Star New Homes Program (ESNHP) Statewide program first implemented in 2002 Prior to 2002, each utility was offering rebates for the installation of specific measures Current program requires 15% energy reductions from the current code

12 Phase 1 Evaluation of ESNHP Evaluation based on title 24 Micropas simulation models, when builders applied to the program Overall ESNHP exceeded code by 20% – 26% in north coastal – 22% in desert – 20% elsewhere

13 Phase 2 Evaluation of ESNHP Evaluation based on fully constructed and inspected homes Evaluation conducted when 60% of homes are built Analyses will compare ESNHP with the code home and actual non-participant homes Anecdotal evidence that windows are more efficient than in compliance documentation

14 New Construction Potential Study Study Conducted for Residential, Commercial and Industrial Sectors Study Identifies Measure Bundles to Achieve 15% to 25% Better than 2001 and 10% to 15% Better than 2005 Standards Study Identifies Economic Potential Study Also Incorporates Codes and Standards Component New Construction Potential Included in the Summary Potential Study

15 Strategy Assessment for 2006 – RNC program Initial assessment based on the results from the Potential Study Strategy assessment interviews with Title 24 consultants, architects, builders, turnkey service providers Evaluate the following strategies for 2006 – Continue the statewide ESNHP as is – Geographically based (coastal vs. inland) requirements for ESNHP – Prescriptive program – rebates for specific measures

16 Strategy Assessment Continued Each strategy will include the following assessments/ projections: – Measures most likely to be installed to meet the 2005 Title 24 code and to qualify for the program – Projected energy savings and measures costs – Builders reaction to the proposed strategy – Potential marketing strategies – Advantages and disadvantages of each strategy

17 Ability To Predict Builder Responses Strategy assessment includes prediction of which measures builders most likely to install to meet new standards. Predictions were made in advance of the 2001 standards. Title 24 consultants predictions –Accurate regarding equipment efficiency –Under predicted the incidence of low-e windows –Over predicted the levels of insulation Builders had less knowledge than Title 24 consultants.