Climate & Usage, Health & Safety Lessons Learned ESAP Workshop #1 October 17, 2011

Outline Mild Climates Extreme Climates –Discussion Customer Usage, Low-Income Profiles –Discussion

3 Installation Rates (2008) measures for most climates & dwelling types SFMFMH Refrigerator26%19%30% CFLs, or82%81%85% –Occupancy sensor Other lighting –Hard-wired fixtures37%16%33% –torchiere Hot Water Reduction (DHW) –Low-Flow Showerheads61%70%38% –Aerators64%75%46% –Heater/Pipe Insulation14%5%8%

CA RASS Electric Consumption 2

5 CA Climate Zones

6 Low-Income Households, CZ CZUtility% dwellings% served ’08 1PG&E1%<1% 2PG&E3%2% 3PG&E10% 4PG&E, (SCG)4%3% 5PG&E, SCG1% 6SCE, SCG, SDG&E7%2% 7SDG&E, (SCG)6%8% 8SCE, SCG13% 9SCE, SCG17%12% 10SCE, SCG, SDG&E9%17% 11PG&E5%4% 12PG&E7%9% 13PG&E, SCE, SCG8%11% 14(PG&E), SCE, SCG, SDG&E4%3% 15SCE, SCG, (SDG&E)1%2% 16PG&E, SCE, SCG2%1%

7 Installation Rates (2008) heating/cooling SFMFMH Envelope & Air Sealing70%73%48% Attic Insulation7%1%0% Furnace Repair/Replace^13%1%8% A/C*, or33%6%9% Evap Cooler*16%0%16% ^for gas utilities*for eligible climate zones 10-16

8 Heating & Cooling Insights 2009 Impact Eval The survey assessed the quality of installation, measure retention, reasons for removal of measures, missed opportunities, post-installation use of the efficient equipment, and behavioral changes made as a result of the program (p.12) –1,502 phone surveys – furnaces, weatherization, evap coolers –382 on-site surveys of single-family homes –furnaces & evap coolers Temperature varies within climate zone Current ESAP policy is to approve measures approval by climate zone –“Specifying homes eligible for specific weather-sensitive measures based on CEC climate zone may eliminate some participants with potentially cost effective installations.” (2005, p. 15) (2009, p.95) –Table 3 in 2009 Report shows wide range of temperatures in each region –The impact evaluation could not utilize climate zone as a predictor of “extreme weather”, because variability was too great. Instead used temperature data from about 60 weather stations in CA.

9 Evaporative Coolers- Improve Education “The phone and on-site survey respondents indicated that many of them did not realize that the evaporative collers should be operated with the windows open and that they should not run their air conditioners at the same time.” (2009) “It is clear that some of the operating procedures for the evaporative coolers are not thoroughly understood by LIEE participants,…35% reporting use with all windows closed occasionally, and 16% reporting using refrigerant- based system with evaporative cooler” (2005)

10 Infrequent Heating Use “about a third of the survey respondents reported using their heating system 30 days or less” (2005 Evaluation) Days per Year Household Use Furnace (2009 Tables 42 & 46) Extremely cold climateMilder climate Received new furnace Received repaired furnace Received new furnace Received repaired furnace 30 days or less 30%28%41%54% More than 90 days 47%*25%18%*12% * Appears Table 42 reverses % of furnace use in mild/extreme climates

11 Envelope & Air Sealing - Gas Safety (2009) PG&E SCG SDG&E # of Dwellings receiving 55,03267,82915,400 Envelope & Air Sealing Post-weatherization 18%33%0% “NGAT” failure Furnace/water heater “redtagged” –owners 4,01719,0371 –renters 1098,1402 Source: 2009 Annual Reports, Data Request Responses

12 Area For Improvement 2009 Process Evaluation identifies combustion appliance problems as limiting measure installations, provision for “minor home repairs” may not be sufficient to correct problems Households could be left without heat or hot water, renters are particularly vulnerable (2009 Process Eval pp ) Find funding or establish partnerships to resolve these events (p.91) Program should communicate with landlord rather than allowing tenant to pursue fix (p.91)

13 Discussion-Climate Where are the areas with extreme heating needs? Extreme cooling areas? How many low-income customers are in these areas? What types of customers are especially vulnerable to weather? (medically vulnerable, elderly) What are the approved measures for these areas? Installation rates of these approved measures in these areas? What kind of program improvements could address this priority?

14 Energy Consumption by Income Sources –Utility Annual Reports, Table 9 –2009 California Residential Appliance Saturation Survey, Figures ES-34, ES-35, Table ES-7 –2005 & 2009 Impact Evaluation Reports

15 Average Electric Usage CARE customers use less electricity than the average residential customer ESAP: Pre-installation use for households treated in 2008 –50% used <421 monthly –50% used >421 monthly PG&ESDG&ESCE2009 CA RASS RegularCARERegularCARERegularCAR E $25,000- $74,999 <$25,000 Elec * Source: 2009 Annual Reports Average Monthly Usage2009*

16 10 Equal Customer Groupings

17 10 Equal Customer Groupings

18 10 Equal Customer Groupings

19 Average Gas Usage CARE customers use less gas than the average residential customer ESAP: Pre-installation use for households treated in 2008 –50% used <26 monthly –50% used >26 monthly PG&ESDG&ESoCalGas2009 CA RASS RegularCARERegularCARERegularCAR E $25,000- $74,999 <$25,000 Therms * Source: 2009 Annual Reports Average Monthly Usage2009*

20 Discussion-Usage Is usage a consideration in outreach? How is it used in education? SCE High Usage Needs Assessment: High users are more similar to other high users across climate zones than they are to other households in similar climate zones Have higher use customers had success after ESAP service? What drives high electric usage? What kind of program improvements could address this priority? How will proposed new measures address high usage? Baseload usage?

21 Useful Insights From Report  Phone and on-site surveys generate information for weather-sensitive measures  Furnaces/heating systems  Evaporative coolers, A/C  Weatherization  Recommendations from phone & on-site surveys consistent with 2005 LIEE Impact Evaluation  Valid question whether to pursue estimating measure- level benefits, or pursue possibly overlooked non-energy benefits  Gas safety improvements  Indoor air quality, moisture, pest control  Water consumption savings

22 Prioritize What To Estimate “ It may be more fruitful to spend evaluation dollars investigating the non-energy benefits accruing from the program…..Pursuing these savings is likely to be more productive than continuing to try to make incremental improvements to the estimates of energy savings.” (2005 LIEE Impact Evaluation, p.157)

23 Climate & Usage, Health & Safety Lessons Learned ESAP Workshop #1 October 17, 2011