1. 2016 EM&V Roadmap Update Emerging Technologies Program chapter
Cathy Fogel (ED) & Olivia Paterson (Op Dy)
And IOU staff, Oct 12, 2016
For presentation, see:

2. Emerging Technologies Program Overview
Table A IOU Emerging Technology Program Overview
Utility
2015 Budget
2016 Budget
Southern California Edison
$10,768,180
$10,768,179
Pacific Gas and Electric
$5,959,297
$6,292,076
San Diego Gas and Electric
$1,357,000
$1,370,000
Southern California Gas
$1,272,335
Total
$19,356,812
$19,702,660
Emerging Technologies Subprograms:
Technology Development Support (includes TRIO and market/behavioral studies)
Technology Assessments (TAs, demonstrations, Test Center)
Technology Introduction Support
Scaled field placements
Demonstrations
TRIP solicitations

3. 2013-15 ETP Research Budgets 2013-2015 Study Title Study Manager
WO Number
Budget
Status
Completion Date
Impact
N/A
Process
PY ETP Targeted Effectiveness Study ED
ED_O_ETP_1
ED_O_ETP_2
$391,222
Complete
November 30, 2015
Study of the California Utility Internal Measure Development Process
IOUs
$185,000
August 31, 2015
Statewide Emerging Technologies Program (ETP) Third Party Introduction Tactic Process Evaluation
$80,000
December 17, 2015
Total ( ) (ED & IOUs)
$656,222
2015 Targeted Effectiveness Study
$391,000
In Planning
TBD
PY2015 Technology Development Support Process Evaluation
IOU
120,000
June 2017
Total (2015) (ED & IOUs)
$511,000

4. 2016-17 ETP Research Budgets Next slides:
Total ( )
Process Evaluations
Energy Division
$104,792
$209,584
IOUs/PAs $0
$100,000
Total ( ) (ED & IOUs)
$204,792
$309,584
Next slides:
Findings and Recommendations from study (ED)
Draft Scope of 2015 study (ED)
Questions for discussion and input

5. 2013-14 Targeted Effectiveness Study Findings (ED)
IOUs met PIP objectives portfolio & CEESP
122 measures to portfolio; 2% of ex-ante savings
Aligned with CEESP, but metrics aren’t sufficient for tracking long term (MT) impact
Tracking challenges hamper ability to track savings impacts; but are there!
ETP a “leader” with broad array of tactics
Focus on technical readiness (2/3s of projects)
Need to improve market readiness efforts
Uses a broad array of tactics, but
Strategic focus needed: tactic selection
Info dissemination good: 50% of surveyed use website
Submission link hard to find

6. Effectiveness Study Recommendations (1)
Adjust PPM and PIP Objectives to measure program effectiveness
technology metrics (not project)?
Actual vs. technical potential for measures transferred?
Improve: project status, adoption and measure transfer
Clarify annual and cumulative reporting
Ensure correct measure code use
Improve tracking in custom projects
Pilot a SW “strategic technology plan”
Shift to technology-level focus
Increase: SW; tactics market readiness
Start with 1 technology (5% budget)
4. Increase attention to market barriers
Practices not consistent nor systematic
5. Improve ETCC website navigability & content

7. 2015 Targeted Effectiveness Study (ED) draft options
Assess success in implementing new tracking approaches in
Tracking comprehensive technology support
Clarify annual and cumulative reporting
Ensure correct measure code use
Improve tracking in custom projects
Continue to assess scanning and screening efforts
Ensure screening tools appropriate for tactics
Evaluate project choices re screening / selection
Strategic Technology Plan pilot
Status?
Need to focus more, and systematically, on market barriers and technology supply support, for MT purposes

8. ETP Study Needs for 2016 and Beyond?
ETP moving to SW administration
What issues or needs have not been recently covered?
What is likely to come out of the business plans to anticipate study needs? Are there other triggers creating study needs?
Funds available:
IOU Earmarked $100K / year;
ED has $391 K (2015) + $105 K/ year