1. Residential Advisory Committee Meeting
February 3, 2011

2. Agenda Desired Outcomes:
10:00 Welcome 10:15 LUMEN Update 10:30 Guiding Principals & 2011 Goal 11:30 Retrofit: Current State 12:45 Lunch 1:15 Retrofit: Discussion 4:00 Adjourn
Desired Outcomes:
ID our 2011 Goal and Guiding Principles
Gain greater understanding of what is going on now in retrofit - regionally & nationally
Explore what can make your programs perform better
Feel inspired about uncovering new potential
Feel more cohesive as a committee

3. LUMEN Update (Lighting Understanding for a More Efficient Nation)
New coalition. First meeting Feb 1, 2011.
Purpose: To provide education and awareness about federal requirements for energy-efficient light bulbs post EISA.
Opportunity to participate in a committee and/or fund:
Retail Education
Mass Media Education
PR Task Force
Media Relations
War Room Strategy and Response
Action: Anyone interested in participating in one of the committees or can offer a media spokesperson?

4. Guiding Principles & 2011 Goal

5. Guiding Principles Each group develops 2 guiding principles
Less than 9 words per principle

6. 2011 Goal
Think about what is happening in the region now that we want to be a part of or shape
What have we done in the past?
Agree on 5 year business plan
Develop integrated operations plan
What would give you a sense of purpose and accomplishment, and fits the needs of the region for the future?

7. Retrofit Discussion: Current State

8. The 6th Power Plan Residential Sector Resources
Tom Eckman
Manager, Conservation Resources
Northwest Power and Conservation Council
NEEA
Residential Advisory Committee
February 3, 2011

9. Sixth Plan Resource Portfolio*
*Expected Value Build Out. Actual build out schedule depends on future conditions
slide 9 9

10. 6th Plan Conservation Goals 1200 aMW Over Five Years

11. 6th Plan “Technically Achievable” Conservation Potential by Sector
slide 11

12. Residential - What’s Covered
Water Heating
High Efficiency Tanks (EF95 – Federal Std in 4/2015 for <56 gal tanks)
Heat Pump and Solar Water Heaters (EF2.0 – Federal Std 4/2015 for >55 gal tanks)
2.0 GPM Showerheads (DOE no longer preempts adoption in state codes)
GFX Wastewater Heat Recovery
Appliances and Lighting
Clothes Washers (New fed Std due 3/2011)
Clothes Dryers (New Fed Std & Test Procedure due 3/2011)
Dishwashers (New Fed Std & Test Procedure due 1/2015)
Refrigerators (New Fed Std & Test Procedure due – Imminent!)
Freezers (New Fed Std & Test Procedure due – Imminent!)
Microwaves & Ovens (New Fed Std for Standby/off-mode due 6/2011)
Solar Photovoltaic Systems (On site use)
Consumer Electronics
Televisions (New Fed Std & Test Procedure due 12/2012)
Set Top Boxes (Cable, Satellite, DVR) (Fed decision to cover due 2/2011)
Desktop Computers
Computer Monitors
slide 12

13. Residential - What’s Covered (cont)
Space Conditioning
Thermal Shell Improvements (e.g. insulation, high efficiency windows)
Duct Sealing
Heating System Conversions to Air-Source Heat Pumps, including “ductless” systems
Heat Pump System Efficiency Upgrades (New Fed Std due 6/2011)
Central Air Conditioning Efficiency Upgrades (New Fed Std due 6/2011)
Room/Window Air Conditioning Efficiency Upgrades ((New Fed Std due 6/2011)
Heating and Air Condition System “Commissioning”
slide 13

14. 6th Plan Residential Consumer Electronics Supply Curve
slide 14

15. 6th Plan Residential Water Heating, Lighting and Appliance Supply Curve
slide 15

16. 6th Plan Residential Space Conditioning Supply Curve
slide 16

17. Residential Sector – The “Big Measures”
slide 17

18. Residential Retrofit Measures
Energy Star Lighting
Non-EISA (Specialty) ~ 200 aMW
EISA Covered Products ~ 50 to 60 aMW
Showerhead Replacement (< 2 GPM) ~ 85 aMW
Existing SF Ductless HP ~ 195 aMW
Existing SF, MF & MH Weatherization ~ 290 aMW
Solar Residential Water Heater (not cost-effective)
Customer-side Solar PV (not cost-effective)
slide 18

19. Residential Space Conditioning Retrofit Measures
slide 19

20. Achievable Potential (aMW)
Prime Window Replacements Are Largest Single Retrofit Weatherization Measure*
Dwelling Type
Achievable Potential (aMW)
Single Family 90
Multifamily 50
Manufactured Homes 30
Total
170
*Measure includes Class 30 or better replacements of
single or double pane metal framed prime windows.
slide 20

21. PNW Regional Conservation Achievements and Goals
slide 21

22. 1978 – 2009 Conservation Savings
slide 22

23. Accomplishing the 6th Plan’s Conservation Goal Will “Stretch” the Columbia River
We Can Sustain A Legacy
Over the next 20 years we can stretch the output of all hydroelectric resources in the PNW by 50%
Chief Joseph
McNary
Grand Coulee
John Day
Bonneville
. . .and reduced the power systems carbon-footprint 15% below 1990 levels
Rocky Reach
The Dalles

24. slide 24

25. Conservation – Cheap, But Worth It?
Any Questions?
slide 25

26. Energy Trust of Oregon: Energy Performance Scores

27. Energy Performance Score Pilot for Existing Homes NEEA February 3, 2011

28. The Energy Performance Score
An asset-based performance metric
A Miles-per-gallon (MPG) for homes
tool for strategic engagement of customers and markets
but only if it can be a reliable
accepted
effective tool in the field
used as a resource to give visibility and awareness to consumers on the performance of their home’s shell and mechanical systems under standard operating conditions

29. The Energy Performance Score is not
a certification
a program
a guarantee
a cash incentive
an alternative to Home Performance with ENERGY STAR®
The Energy Performance Score is not a certification, a program, a guarantee or a cash incentive. Nor is it an alternative to certification programs.

30. Advantages of the EPS
Helps homeowners compare their energy usage with homes of a similar size to theirs
Provides a target score that homeowners can achieve with recommended upgrades
Shows energy use on a scale   

31. How is EPS Calculated? Data Inputs Home size Insulation levels
Air leakage
Duct leakage
Heating and cooling systems
Several other factors
* Energy modeling assumes average operating conditions. Actual use may vary on number of occupants and behaviors.
One of the most valuable features of the EPS is that it allows homeowners to see on this scale how their home compares to an average Oregon home of similar size and heating fuel.

32. Phase 1
Report
reports/EPS_2008_Pilot_Report.pdf 32

33. Library/Reports – Search by Existing Homes

34. Findings from Initial EPS Research
Complicated models were no better at forecasting energy savings than less complex models.
The best performing non-complex model had an apparent error band of plus or minus 30%.
Comparisons to billing data are not the accurate test of a model’s forecasting efficacy, due to homeowner behavior.
A set of enhancements to the less-complex energy models might improve accuracy.
More tests of improved models in comparison to a standardized baseline (non-bill) should be conducted.

35. Next Phase EPS with
DOE’s HES

36. Goals of the EPS Pilot
Does an EPS motivate a customer to act, in terms of sooner, deeper or both?
Which information is most useful
Score or no score, energy usage & savings representation
How do consumers relate carbon footprint information
What are the customers’ visual preferences
Does an EPS have efficacy in:
Directing customers to do the right sorts of things
Assigning a comparative ranking without diagnostic testing
Predicting energy saved without diagnostic testing
Which of three models perform better (HES, SIMPLE and RHA2)
What is ease of use in the field for the three models

37. EPS Next Steps
Continued vetting of visual score for consumer preferences on look, feel & content
Further analytic review of alternative approaches
SIMPLE 2.0
RealHomeAnalyzer2 (RHA2)
DOE’s Home Energy Score (HES)
Impact of home performance scores on influencing home improvement follow through rates

38. Pilot Overview
400 gas homes in total will get an assessment with a score
200 Homes provided DOE’s HES (Score & Recommendations)
200 with RealHomeAnalyzer 2.0 EPS (Score & Recommendations)
All homes will be modeled with SIMPLE as well
Standard HERs will be used as benchmark for follow through rates
Feb launch, March-April analysis (consumer surveys 1 week & 6 months)
BPI certified technicians as Energy Advisors (5 dedicated)
For this effort Advisors are from the PMC*
Training (HES, RHA, Call Center, Contractors)
Homes will be randomly assigned from the requests for a Home Energy Review (free checklist audit)
*PMC: Program Management Contractor Conservation Services Group

39. Overview (Continued) Home energy score provided to homeowner on site
Recommendations sheet
Packet of materials
List of Trade Allies
List of Incentives
Measure fact sheets based on recommended measures
Energy Advisor business cards
Follow-up with 2 surveys (1 week & 6 months)
Not doing a blower door test
Leakage will be assigned based on advisors assessment of multiple characteristics of home including visual inspection (values are based on multiple historic leakage rates, home size, foundation, age, number of stories)

40. Energy Performance Score

41. Recommendations Report

42. US Department of Energy’s Home Energy Score (HES)42

43. Energy Trust is One of Ten Home Energy Score (HES) Pilots under DOE
Allegheny County Pensylvania, Efficiency PA
Cape Cod and Martha's Vineyard, Cape Light Compact
Colorado Mountain Region, Energy Smart Program
Greater Charlottesville area, Virginia, Local Energy Alliance Program
Indiana, Hoosier Energy
Minnesota, Center for Energy & Environment
Omaha and Lincoln Nebraska, Cities of Omaha and Lincoln
Portland Oregon, Energy Trust of Oregon
South Carolina, Electric Cooperatives of South Carolina
Texas, United Cooperative Services

44. Home Energy Score (HES)
An asset-based performance metric is produced with US DOE’s Home Energy Saver (HES) Pro
Scale from 1 to 10, with current score and score after upgrades, along with estimated annual savings
Comparison home score is from national RECs data
Includes total source energy use (MBTUs/year) and home size
Includes Tips to Save Energy at Home, Home Upgrade Recommendations, and Summary Page of Inputs
Pilots to provide recommendations reports to DOE by June 2011

45. Home Energy Score Label
INSERT PICTURE OF LABEL

46. Why an HES Pilot Also?
Comparing multiple modeling tools, of which DOE’s HES is one
Comparing consumer response to different visual representations
Opportunity to provide recommendations to DOE to improve HES

47. Timeline Launch in February 2011 All homes scored by early April
Preliminary evaluation in early summer 2011
Contractor roll-out late 2011/early 2012
contractor engagement starts in January
depends on results of tool comparison
and preliminary follow through rates

48. Pilot process

49. Questions Customer follow-through rates on measure installation
Pull project data from our efficiency project database at the following intervals (1 month, 3 months, 6 months & 1 year)
Compare to standard Home Energy Review follow-through rates
Data analysis & metric comparisons
Relative accuracy of HES, SIMPLE and RHA2
Comparison to each other and other models (SIMPLE)
Use of billing data
Actual blower door comparisons on sub sample
Look at different benchmarks (SEEM data) vs (RECs)

50. Questions (Continued)
Customer feedback surveys (multiple questions)
Participants will be surveyed electronically (1 week & 6 months)
Actions taken (behavioral change, small measures (CFLs))
Satisfaction & value of Energy Advisor in the process
Visual score inquiry (scale, energy data representation)
Program delivery efficiencies & customer information
Tablets and printers on site
Scripted conversations for message consistency
Automatic randomized site selection and advisor assignment
Timing of activities (audit time, scheduling, printing etc)
Demographics (more detail on occupants)

51. Contacts Diane Ferington Energy Trust of Oregon
Residential Sector Lead
Kendall Youngblood
Residential Sector Manager
PMC CSG
Stephanie Vasquez Kyle Barton New Initiatives Program Manager Program Analyst EPS Field Lead

52. Community Retrofit Program
Residential Advisory Committee
Anne Brink
February 3, 2011

53. The Clean Energy Works - Oregon
A financing solution - Local lenders offer competitive loans that can be paid back on utility bills, where energy savings help cover loan amounts.
Simplifies the transformation of older homes into energy efficient and livable homes by offering bundled energy remodel services in collaboration with Energy Trust of Oregon, utilities, financial institutions, local communities and contractors
A non-profit committed to positive environmental and social change that reduces a community’s environmental impact and creates jobs with family-supporting wages, benefits and career pathways.

54. Clean Energy Works Goals
6,000 residential and small business energy remodels by the end of 2013
Leveraging $100 million in private capital and fulfilling the terms of a 2010 investment by US Dept. of Energy
High road agreement
Create lasting green jobs

55. Clean Energy Works Provides
Centralized branding and marketing services
Education workshops for homeowners
Online customer application
Consumer rebates – partnered w/ETO

56. Clean Energy Works Provides
Customer support provided by highly-trained Energy Advisors
Highest quality contractors and building science professionals
100% quality control verification
Up to 100% financing with attractive terms, including utility bill repayment

57. Eligible Improvements
Weatherization
Insulation: wall, attic, floor
Air sealing: windows, doors, attic, basement
Duct sealing
Equipment
Space heating: furnace and heat pump
Water heaters: tank and tankless

58. Clean Energy Works Process
Online application
Credit Screen (underwriting)
Home Performance Assessment
Bid Proposal
Loan signing
Construction and QC
On-bill Repayment

59. Financing solution Low Touch Underwriting
Non‐Traditional: Utility payment history, FICO >590
IT Platform: Linked to utilities and loan management
Product Specifications
Rate: 5.99% (3.99% for <250% Federal Poverty)
Term: 20 year amortized
Security: blind subordinate lien on property
Servicing: on‐bill repayment (heating utility)
Risk: cash funded loan loss reserve = 10% loans
Transferable: at time of home sale (processing fee)

60. Results to date Program Successes Average energy savings: $500/year
Carbon reductions: 2.7 metric tons per home
Median project costs: $12,600
Projects funded: $5,750,000
Loans signed:461
Homes Retrofitted: 415
Median loan payment: $76 per month
Overall customer satisfaction rating: 93%

61. Community Power Works - Seattle
a neighborhood based community retrofit program that will achieve deep energy savings and create lasting green jobs.

62. Community Power Works Goals
Achieve energy and carbon savings – 15% savings
Create lasting green jobs
Engage the entire community
Successfully retrofit at least 2,000 homes
Implement the high road agreement
Deliver cost-effective energy efficiency

63. Eligible Improvements
Modeling
15% improvement
Energy Performance Scores

64. Financing solution Low Touch Underwriting
Non‐Traditional: Utility payment history, FICO >590
IT Platform: Linked to utilities and loan management
Product Specifications
Rate: 5.99% (3.99% for <250% Federal Poverty)
Term: 20 year amortized
Security: blind subordinate lien on property
Servicing: on‐bill repayment (heating utility)
Risk: cash funded loan loss reserve = 10% loans
Transferable: at time of home sale (processing fee)

65. Community Power Works - Process
Online application
Credit Screen (underwriting)
Home Performance Assessment
Bid Proposal
Loan signing
Construction and QC
On-bill Repayment

66. Key differences Community Power Works Targeted at low income
Energy Modeling w/Performance Score
Auditors employed by the program
Clean Energy Works
Broader demographic target
Prescriptive approach
Independent auditors providing the home energy audits

67. LUNCH

68. Retrofit Discussion: Exploration of opportunities

69. Thank you!