| March 2004 | |||||
|
|
Letter From the Executive DirectorMany of the decisions that affect our region’s energy future will be made outside the borders of San Diego County. One of those places is San Francisco, the home of the California Public Utilities Commission ( CPUC). In any given month there are dozens of open proceedings on topics ranging from setting electricity and gas rates to determining the rules of the road for advanced metering, and from transmission planning to energy incentive programs. Keeping up with all this activity is a Herculean task and requires a 25th hour in the day and an 8th day in the week! In our work with the San Diego community, we sense a need among stakeholders for more information and analysis on energy issues being decided at the CPUC that affect our region. CCSE has formed a Policy and Planning team that is tracking regulatory and legislative issues more closely than we have in the past. While we cannot track and analyze all issues with the depth that we believe is necessary, we are focusing on a select group of issues important to the region. From time to time in this newsletter, we will inform you of key issues being discussed and any deadlines that might apply. In this issue of Energy Connection, we would like to bring to your attention two ongoing proceedings before the CPUC that could affect our region: (i) the future of the Self-Generation Incentive Program ( SGIP) that provides incentives for distributed generation technologies, and (ii) how the public goods energy efficiency funds will be administered in the future. We hope you find this information useful and we encourage you to get involved in these proceedings and make your voice heard in San Francisco. We also invite you to let us know which issues are most important to you. This will help us direct our limited staff time appropriately. Sincerely, - TOP - Self-Generation Incentive Program ( SGIP)The Self-Generation Incentive Program provides $15.5M to the San Diego region to provide incentives for distributed generation including photovoltaics and cogeneration systems. The SGIP program had a sunset date of 12-31-04 but AB-1685 has extended the program through 2007. This extension provides the CPUC an opportunity to reassess the SGIP and make changes to make it a more effective program. On 12-10-03 the CPUC requested comments on the four SGIP evaluation reports and program structure and policies as part of rulemaking R.98-07-037. In our region, CCSE and SDG&E provided extensive comments. Perhaps the most important issue is the future funding levels for SGIP. AB-1685 extended the SGIP through 2007 but did not specifically designate future funding levels. While the legislation directed the CPUC to “administer a self-generation incentive program for distributed generation resources, in the same form as exists on January 1, 2004,” some parties believe that this did not make clear future funding levels. CCSE has argued that the SGIP should be funded at the original level of $15.5M annually for the San Diego region. Some parties, including SDG&E, have recommended extending the SGIP program with no additional funding. We believe that funding the SGIP extension at $15M annually is critical to maintain the current momentum the region is experiencing in distributed generation installations, particularly photovoltaics. Fully funding SGIP is essential to meeting the California Center for Sustainable Energy Strategy's aggressive goals for distributed generation in the coming decades. Further, this funding will be crucial for the City of San Diego to meet its aggressive target of 50 MW of renewable power in the City limits by 2013. Another key issue is who will administer the SGIP in San Diego. The CPUC designated CCSE as the program administrator in the SDG&E territory. There were no indications in AB-1685 that the administrative arrangement in San Diego should change and the CPUC specifically asked for comments on how to reduce the utility involvement in the San Diego SGIP. CCSE believes it is the CPUC’s intention for CCSE to continue administering the SGIP in our region. However, SDG&E argued in their comments that they should replace CCSE as SGIP administer in our region. SDG&E based this argument on a report that compares non-utility and utility administration of the SGIP, the conclusions of which CCSE has challenged. Additionally, the CPUC likely will make changes to the SGIP incentive structure and amount. There is fairly widespread agreement that the SGIP should change the incentive structure to a fixed dollar per watt ($/watt) with no percentage limitations. If this happens, the incentive amounts will almost certainly be reduced. Also, there is growing support for an incentive structure that declines over time. This will help distributed generation technologies become affordable without incentives. When the CPUC issues a final decision on the SGIP changes, CCSE will provide a summary of the changes in this newsletter. If you have any thoughts or questions about this process, please contact Scott Anders at 858-244-1180 or This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it . - TOP - Long-term Energy Efficiency Program AdministrationAnother important CPUC proceeding (R.01-08-028) could affect the way public good energy efficiency programs are managed in California. Currently, the utilities administer 100% of the public goods charge (PGC) funds, which are collected through the energy rates of electric and gas utility customers. The PGC funds amount to about $37.5 million annually for our region. In recent years, the CPUC has allocated 20% of these PGC funds to programs implemented by non-utility administrators. CCSE and its six local government partners and about 40 other non-utility entities statewide receive funding through this mechanism to run energy efficiency programs. In the next 6 months the CPUC will be making major decisions about the way California administers public good energy efficiency programs. These decisions could affect implementation of local energy efficiency programs. The next key dates for activity on this topic are: · March 17th and 18th – The CPUC is holding a two-day workshop on possible structures for the administration of public good energy efficiency programs. This is not about who will implement the programs at the local level, rather who will manage the entire pot of PGC funds and select local program implementers. · April 8th – CPUC has asked all interested parties to submit proposed administrative structures based on the March 17-18 workshop. Once these are submitted there will be an opportunity to comment on the structures proposed by others around the state. CCSE will be attending these workshops and submitting comments to the CPUC on our proposed administrative structure. CCSE will provide updates on this issues as the process unfolds. If you have any thoughts or questions about this process, please contact Scott Anders at 858-244-1180 or This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it . - TOP - Rebuild America Success StoryThe California Center for Sustainable Energy ( CCSE) performed 35 energy assessments at the City of San Diego libraries, police stations, fire stations and recreation centers. In addition, CCSE provided site feasibility studies for the installation of photovoltaics and cogeneration systems. As a result, based on a bundled package of energy efficiency measures, photovoltaics and cogeneration systems, the City qualified for and received a $2.3 low interest loan from the California Energy Commission to implement energy efficiency, photovoltaic and co-generation measures. The Challenge The City of San Diego pays more than $35 million per year for energy. With current budget constraints and the threat of even more cuts looming, The City is continually looking for innovative ways to leverage every dollar, increase energy efficiency, and increase the amount of renewable energy within the City. Although the City has a dedicated Mayor, City Council and environmental office, they lacked the available staff and money to audit the facilities and implement the energy efficient opportunities identified. The Solution The City of San Diego identified 180 facilities in need of an energy assessment. Lacking the available staff to complete these audits, the City turned to its Rebuild America partner, CCSE. In the first round of assessments, CCSE completed a total of 35 facility audits including office buildings, police stations, recreation centers, parks and libraries. After careful analysis of each location, CCSE provided site-specific suggestions for each facility. Such energy opportunities included lighting retrofits, HVAC and controls upgrades, as well as no-cost / low-cost solutions such as reconfiguration of equipment schedules and energy management systems. As a result of these audits, CCSE identified an annual energy savings of 1,849,378 kWh and a peak load reduction of 68 kW. If all measures were implemented this would save the City of San Diego an estimated $304,720 a year. By bundling the energy efficiency measures with 190 kW of photovoltaics and 120 kW of cogeneration systems, the City of San Diego was able to qualify for the California Energy Commission’s Energy Efficiency Low Finance Loan while still maintaining a simple payback of less than 10 years. In January of 2004, the City received $2.3 million in financing from the CEC to implement these measures. What the Future Holds The City plans on continuing with the model of identifying energy opportunities through audits, bundling energy efficiency opportunities with photovoltaics and cogeneration projects, and obtaining the financing through the California Energy Commission’s low interest loans. - TOP -
|
The California Center for Sustainable Energy(
Featured InstrumentCalifornia Center for Sustainable Energy, Copyright 2003 www.energycenter.org
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|
