NSW Energy Efficiency Programs 2012 Evaluation Report · NSW Energy Efficiency Programs 2012...

NSWEnergyEfficiencyPrograms

2012EvaluationReport

FinalReportto

OfficeofEnvironmentandHeritage,

NSWDepartmentofPremierandCabinet

August2012IncludesOEHresponsesatJune2013

FinalReport–August2012 2012evaluationofNSWenergyefficiencyprograms

ARTDPtyLtdABN75003701764Tel0293739900Fax0293739998

Level4,352KentStSydneyPOBox1167QueenVictoriaBuildingNSW1230Australia

ii

©2014StateofNSWandOfficeofEnvironmentandHeritage

TheStateofNSWandOfficeofEnvironmentandHeritagearepleasedtoallowthismaterialtobereproducedinwholeorinpartforeducationalandnon‐commercialuse,providedthemeaningisunchangedanditssource,publisherandauthorshipareacknowledged.

PreparedbyARTDConsultantsfortheOfficeofEnvironmentandHeritage.

DisclaimerThisreporthasbeencompiledingoodfaith,exercisingallduecareandattention.Norepresentationismadeabouttheaccuracy,completenessorsuitabilityoftheinformationinthispublicationforanyparticularpurpose.OEHshallnotbeliableforanydamagewhichmayoccurtoanypersonororganisationtakingactionornotonthebasisofthispublication.Readersshouldseekappropriateadvicewhenapplyingtheinformationtotheirspecificneeds.

Publishedby:OfficeofEnvironmentandHeritage59GoulburnStreet,SydneyNSW2000POBoxA290,SydneySouthNSW1232Phone:(02)99955000(switchboard)Phone:131555(environmentinformationandpublicationsrequests)Phone:1300361967(nationalparks,generalenvironmentalenquiries,andpublicationsrequests)Fax:(02)99955999TTYusers:phone133677,thenaskfor131555Speakandlistenusers:phone1300555727,thenaskfor131555Email:[email protected]:www.environment.nsw.gov.auReportpollutionandenvironmentalincidentsEnvironmentLine:131555(NSWonly)orinfo@environment.nsw.gov.auSeealsowww.environment.nsw.gov.auISBN9781743593868OEH2014/0052February2014


ARTDPtyLtdABN75003701764Tel0293739900Fax0293739998

Level4,352KentStSydneyPOBox1167QueenVictoriaBuildingNSW1230Australia

iii

Acknowledgments

ThisworkwascompletedwiththeassistanceoftheDataandEvaluationTeamintheOfficeofEnvironmentandHeritage,DepartmentofPremierandCabinet.

WewouldalsoliketothanktheOEHmanagersandstafffortheirtimeandinsightsandtrustthattheirviewsareadequatelyrepresentedinthisreport.

ARTDConsultancyteam

ChrisMilneFlorentGomez‐Bonnet

OEHCommentBoxes

TheOfficeofEnvironmentandHeritage(OEH)hasprovidedcommentboxesattheendofeachsectioninthisreport.

Thesecommentboxes: providedetailsonthestatusofOEHenergyefficiencyprogramssincethecompletion

ofthereportuptoJune2012;and commentontheevaluationfindings.


iv

Contents

Tablesandfigures...........................................................................................................................v

Acronymsandglossary...............................................................................................................vii

Executivesummary.....................................................................................................................viii Scopeoftheprograms......................................................................................................................viii The2012evaluation.........................................................................................................................viii Overallfinding........................................................................................................................................ix Energysavingsarebeingachieved.................................................................................................x Implementationhasbeeneffective............................................................................................xiii

1. Theprogramsandtheevaluation................................................................................16 1.1 Theprogramsinscope..........................................................................................................16 1.2 Directenergysavingprogramsarethemajorcomponent....................................17 1.3 ThepolicycontextforenergyefficiencyinNSW.......................................................18 1.4 Programlogic............................................................................................................................19 1.5 Evaluationoftheenergyefficiencyprograms.............................................................21

2. Overalloutcomesandachievements..........................................................................23 2.1 Programoutcomes..................................................................................................................23 2.2 Achievementsandissueswithimplementation.........................................................30

3. Progressofindividualprograms..................................................................................35 3.1 HomePowerSavingsProgram(HPSP)..........................................................................35 3.2 EnergyEfficiencyforSmallBusinessProgram(EESBP)........................................39 3.3 EnergySaverProgram(ESP)..............................................................................................44 3.4 EnergyefficiencycomponentofNSWGovernmentSustainabilityPolicy

(EEGSP)........................................................................................................................................48 3.5 EnergyEfficiencyTrainingProgram(EETP)...............................................................56 3.6 EnergyEfficiencyCommunityAwarenessProgram(EECAP)..............................61 3.7 DataandEvaluationProgram(DEP)...............................................................................66

4. Cross‐programcoordinationandstrategy‐widegovernance............................73 4.1 Theinitialdesignhadlimitedscopeforintegration................................................73 4.2 Organisationalsiloswereabarriertointegration....................................................74 4.3 Coordinationwouldhavebeenimprovedbymorestructured

opportunities.............................................................................................................................75 4.4 Managersseekmoreoverarchinggovernance...........................................................76

Appendix1. Evaluationreportsusedforthesynthesis............................................77

Appendix2. Estimatesofactualenergysavings‐preliminaryresults................79

Appendix3. Keyreferences................................................................................................86


v

Tablesandfigures

Table1‐1. Theprogramsbyapproach,sector,completionandallocatedOEHexpenditure.......16

Table1‐2. Programsgroupedbyapproachesandgovernance................................................................17

Table2‐1. Energyefficiencyprograms–estimatedannualsavingsfromactivitiesimplementedtoJune2012.................................................................................................................26

Table2‐2. Cost‐effectivenessforthedirectenergysavingsprograms..................................................29

Table3‐1. HomePowerSavingsProgram–estimatedannualsavingsfromactivitiesimplementedtoJune2012.................................................................................................................37

Table3‐2. EnergyEfficiencyforSmallBusinessProgram–estimatedsavingsforoneyearfromactivitiesimplementedtoJune2012..................................................................................42

Table3‐3. ESPuptakeandimplementationovertimetoendofJune2012........................................45

Table3‐4. EnergySaverProgram–estimatedsavingsforoneyearfromactivitiesimplementedtoJune2012.................................................................................................................46

Table3‐5. NABERSratingsobtainedfrom2007/08to2010/11............................................................51

Table3‐6. GovernmentBuildingRetrofitProgram–smallsitescomponent‐estimatedsavingsforoneyearfromactivitiesimplementedtoJune2012........................................55

Table3‐7. Reporteddemandanduptakecomparedtoexpectations....................................................58

Table3‐8. SummaryofmethodsusedtoestimateenergysavingsforeachprogramtoendofJune2012..............................................................................................................................................68

Table4‐1.Evaluationreportsandmaindatacollectionmethodsforeachreport.............................77

Table4‐2. HPSPbillingdataanalysispreliminaryresults..........................................................................79

Table4‐3. ESSMeasurement&Verificationpreliminaryresults............................................................80

Table4‐4. ESPMeasurement&Verificationpreliminaryresults............................................................81

Table4‐5. EEGSPMeasurement&VerificationpreliminaryresultsfortheWestmeadHospitalcasestudy................................................................................................................................82

Table4‐6. EEGSPMeasurement&VerificationpreliminaryresultsfortheCentralPassageoftheSydneyOperaHousecasestudy..........................................................................................83

Table4‐7. EESBPMeasurement&Verificationpreliminaryresultsbybusinessactivity.............84

Table4‐8. EESBPMeasurement&Verificationpreliminaryresultsbytechnology........................85


vi

Figure1‐1. ProgramlogicoftheinitialEnergyEfficiencyStrategy..........................................................20

Figure2‐1. Improvedreliabilityofenergysavingsestimates.....................................................................24

Figure2‐2. AllocationofoverallelectricitysavingsachievedtoendofJune2012acrossprograms....................................................................................................................................................25

Figure3‐1. TreasuryLoanFunduptake...............................................................................................................53

Figure4‐1. OrganisationalchartofOEHunitsinvolvedinenergyefficiency.......................................74


vii

Acronymsandglossary

ACP AccreditedCertificateProviderundertheESSthatcreatetradeableenergysavingscertificates(ESCs)

CALD CulturallyandLinguisticallyDiverse

DEAS DECCWEnergyAssessmentSystem

DEC NSWDepartmentofEducationandCommunities

DECCW NSWDepartmentofEnvironment,ClimateChangeandWater(until2011,thenOEH)

DTRIS DepartmentofTradeandInvestment,RegionalInfrastructureandServices

EEAP EnergyEfficiencyActionPlan,theNSWGovernmentapproachtoenergyefficiencyproposedfrom2012

EECAP EnergyEfficiencyCommunityAwarenessProgram,NSWgovernmentprogram

EES EnergyEfficiencyStrategy,theNSWGovernment’sapproachtoenergyefficiency2008‐2012

EESBP EnergyEfficiencyforSmallBusinessProgram,NSWgovernmentprogramtargetingsmallbusinesses

ESC EnergySavingsCertificate,atradablecertificatecreatedthroughtheESSfromthemeasurementofenergysavings

ESP EnergySavingsProgram,NSWgovernmentprogramtargetingmediumtolargebusinesses

EETP EnergyEfficiencyTrainingProgram,NSWgovernmentprogram

EEGSP EnergyefficiencycomponentofNSWGovernmentSustainabilityPolicy

ESS EnergySavingsScheme,NSWgovernmentwhitecertificatescheme

FY FinancialYear

HPSP HomePowerSavingsProgram,NSWgovernmentprogramtargetinglowincomehouseholds

HVAC Heating,VentilationandAir‐conditioning

IAB InternalAuditBureau,NSWgovernmenttradingenterprisethatprovidesauditservices

IPART IndependentPricingandRegulatoryTribunal

IRA InstituteforRuralAffairs

ISF InstituteforSustainableFutures

KPI KeyPerformanceIndicator

M&V MeasuringandVerificationtheprocessofusingmeasurementtoreliablydetermineactualenergysavingsbycomparingmeasuredusebeforeandafterimplementationofaproject

NGO Non‐governmentorganisation

NABERS NationalAustralianBuiltEnvironmentRatingSystem

OEH OfficeofEnvironmentandHeritage, NSWDepartmentofPremierandCabinet

PD4VET ProfessionalDevelopmentforVocationalEducationandTrainingpractitioners

RTO RegisteredTrainingOrganisation

VET VocationalEducationandTraining


viii

Executivesummary

Thisreportisthe2012evaluationofsevenprogramsmanagedbytheOfficeofEnvironmentandHeritage(OEH)thatwerepartoftheformerNSWEnergyEfficiencyStrategy(ESS).ItassessestheprogramsataninterimpointtoJune2012andisbasedonevaluationfindingsavailablebyJune2012.

Scopeoftheprograms

TheNSWGovernmenthasanongoingcommitmenttoimprovingenergyefficiencyacrossthehousehold,businessandgovernmentsectors.Thesesevenprogramscommencedin2009andrepresentaninvestmentinenergyefficiencybyOEHof$161.4million.ThereareotherNSWGovernmentandOEHenergyefficiencyprogramswhicharenotpartofthisevaluation.

Threeoftheseprogramsaredirectenergysavingprograms(HPSP,ESP,andEESBP)targetingspecificsectors(lowincomehouseholds;smallbusinesses;mediumandlargebusinesses)andaccountfor61percentoftheOEHexpenditure(HPSPaccountsfor39percent).Twoarebroadercapacitybuildingprogramsthataddresscommunityawareness(EECAP)andtheworkforceforenergyefficiency(EETP).EEGSPisapolicymixtargetingthegovernmentsectorthroughfiveprograms.

Theuncertaintyaroundenergysavingsfromenergyefficiencyprograms,highlightedbythe2007OwenInquiryintoElectricitySupplyinNSW,wasanimportantdriverforevaluation,andledtheestablishmentoftheDataandEvaluationProgram(DEP).

ThedesignoftheEESwasinfluencedbytheapproachinCalifornia,consideredtheworldleaderinenergyefficiencypolicy,whichhasamixofprogramstargetingmultiplemarketsectors;programsforeducation,trainingandstate‐widemarketing;andasubstantialevaluationprogram.

The2012evaluation

ThisevaluationassessestheprogramsataninterimpointtoJune2012.Itexamines

howeffectivelyprogramsarebeingdeliveredandreachingtheirtargetgroups theoutcomesproducedbytheprogramstodateincludingreducedenergyuseand

increasedcapacityformanagingenergyuseacrossthesectors

Theprograms HomePowersavingsProgram

(HPSP) EnergyEfficiencyforSmall

BusinessProgram(EESBP) EnergySaverProgram(ESP) energyefficiencycomponentof

NSWGovernmentSustainabilityPolicy(EEGSP)

EnergyEfficiencyCommunityAwarenessProgram(EECAP)

EnergyEfficiencyTrainingProgram(EETP)

DataandEvaluationProgram(DEP)


ix

improvementsinthereliabilityofenergysavingsestimates

Theevaluationisbasedonasynthesisofevaluationsandreportsontheprograms.Quantitativedataonreach,uptakeandenergysavingswascollectedbytheprogramsandanalysedbytheOEHStrategyandAnalysisteam.Eachprogramundertookarangeofevaluationandreporting.MethodstoverifyenergysavingsweredevelopedandimplementedthroughtheDataandEvaluationProgram.

Weareconfidentthatthefindingsofthisevaluationrepresenttheoverallpatternsofdeliveryandoutcomestodate.Thefindingsfromdifferentsourceswereconsistent,andmorereliabledataonenergysavingswasavailable(seebelow).Somecautionisneededassomeoftheevaluationsandthemeasurementprojectsareworksinprogressatthisstageandsomeuncertaintiesremain.

Overallfinding

Theseenergyefficiencyprogramsarelargelybeingdeliveredeffectively.Thishasrequiredmanyadaptationswithinprogramswhichhaveledtoincreasinglystrategicandeffectiveapproaches.Alltheevidenceindicatesthattheprogramsaregenerallywellreceivedbyparticipants.

OEHnowhasmorereliablemeasuresofenergysavings,withtheapplicationofnewmethodssubstantiallyimprovingestimatesovertheperiod.

Energysavingsarebeingachievedandtheseareexpectedtoincrease.Alldirectenergysavingsprogramshavedeliveredsubstantialenergysavings,thoughthereisstillvariationinthereliabilityofestimates.Theseenergysavingsarecost‐effective,deliveredatalowercostthanthecostofprovidingthesameamountofelectricity.


x

OEHComment

TheCouncilofAustralianGovernments(COAG)calledonjurisdictionstoreviewthecomplementarityofclimatemitigationprograms,includingNSWenergyefficiencyprograms,withtheCommonwealth’sCleanEnergyFuturepackage.

InDecember2012,thePremierannounceddecisionstocease,reformandretainNSWenergyefficiencyprogramsasaresultofthiscomplementarityreview.

TheNSWProfessionalServicesActionPlananddraftNSWRenewableEnergyActionPlancommittedtheMinisterfortheEnvironmenttobringforwardanEnergyEfficiencyActionPlanwithanimprovedsuiteofenergyefficiencyprograms.

BoththefindingsofthisindependentevaluationandgovernmentdecisionsonthecomplementarityreviewinformedtheNSWEnergyEfficiencyActionPlan.

Energysavingsarebeingachieved

Expectationsattheinterimstage

Mostoftheprogramsstartedintheircurrentformin2009andarefundeduntil2013or2014.Theyarebeingdeliveredinacontextofchangeanduncertaintyaroundelectricitycosts,energyefficiencyandclimatechangewithingovernmentsandthewidercommunity.MostoftheprogramsarenewforNSW—HPSPandEESBParethefirsttimelowincomehouseholdsandsmallbusinesseshavebeendirectlytargetedinthisway.Inthesecircumstancesevidenceofinitialoutcomesandeffectiveimplementationiscritical.

OEHhasmorereliablemeasuresofenergysavings

Theestimatesofenergysavingshavesubstantiallyimprovedovertheperiod,progressingfromprojecteddeemedsavingstoverifiedestimatesbasedonmeasuresofactualenergyuse.Asignificantachievementhasbeenthedevelopmentofmethodstoestimateactualenergysavingsinlinewithinternationalbestpractice.OEHreachedagreementswithenergydistributorstoaccesslarge‐scalebillingdataforhouseholds(HPSP)andsmallbusinesses(EESBP)—thefirsttimesuchcomprehensivedatahasbeenavailabletoagovernmentagencyinAustralia—whichformedthebasisforindependentstudiesusingrigorousstatisticalanalysis.Formediumtolargesites(ESP,EEGSP)OEHdevelopedaguideformeasurementandverification(M&V)basedontheinternationalprotocolandhascommissionedarangeofindependentstudies.

AtthisstagetheevidenceforHPSPandEESBPisbasedonactualmeasuresofenergyuse,andforESPonengineeringestimates,withM&Vprojectstobeunderwaylaterthisyear.Whilethescopeformeasurementhasvariedbetweentheprograms(dependingonthenumbersandcharacteristicsofparticipantsaswellasontechnologiesinstalled),thisworkhasandwillcontinuetoprovideincreasinglyreliablemeasures.Withmorerobust


xi

evidenceandreduceduncertaintyaroundenergysavings,OEHhasanincreasinglysoundbasisforassessingeffectivenessandcost‐effectiveness,forrefiningdeliveryandforplanningfutureenergyefficiencyprograms.

Energysavingsarebeingachievedandexpectedtoincrease

Alldirectenergysavingsprogramshavedeliveredsubstantialenergysavings,thoughasdescribedabovethereliabilityofestimatesvaries.Totalannualenergysavingsare118,834MWhofelectricityand187,716Gjofgas,leadingtoanestimatedreductioninparticipants’energybillsof$28,496,340toendofJune2012(thisincludestheGovernmentBuildingRetrofitProgramforsmallsites).Theestimatedenergysavingswouldresultin136,697tonnesofavoidedCO2emissions.Eachoftheprogramshasbeenasignificantsourceofenergysavings,withESPcontributing38%ofelectricitysavings,EESBP32%andHPSP27%.

FortheESPthesavingsatthisinterimstageareexpectedtoaccelerateoverthenextfewyears.Itisclearthattheprogramhasamodelthatcanachievesubstantialenergysavingsandcutenergybillsatmediumtolargesites.Theextentofsavingsislikelytobeclearerasmorebusinessesimplementauditrecommendationsovertime,andtheprogrammeasuresandreportsonthis,withincreasinglyreliabledatafromM&V.

ForEESBPthehighlevelofreachprovidesastrongfoundationforsavings(17,185smallbusinessesregisteredtoendofJune2012comparedtotheinitialtargetof6,000).Thekeychallengehasbeenliftingtherateofconversionfromregistrationtotheimplementationofrecommendations,andmajorrefinementstotheprogramdesignarebeingsuccessfulinaddressingthis,withevidenceofanincreasingconversionrateandmostactionsareattributabletotheprogram.

HPSPhasbeenauniqueprogramforOEHinseveralways.Itisaverylarge‐scaleintermsofbudgetandnumberofparticipants,andbeganwithrelativelyuntestedassumptions.Itiscomplicatedbyhavingsocialaswellasenergyefficiencyobjectives,whichfocusonlowincomehouseholds,specifictargetgroups(CALDandAboriginalhouseholds),andgeographicequityofaccess.InitialresultsforHPSPhavebeenpromising.Withextensivereachacrossitstargetgroupoflowincomehouseholds(115,508completedassessmentstoJune2012),ithasafirmbasistodeliversavings.EnergysavingswereestimatedwithahighlevelofreliabilitybythebillingdataanalysisconductedwithDEPinMay2012.Itfoundaveragesavingsof0.22megawatt‐hoursofelectricityperannum(or4percentreduction)foreachparticipatinghousehold,butdifferedwiththekititemsreceived(householdsreceivingtheshowerheadachieveonaverage6percentsavings).Theenergysavingsareencouraginggiventhelimitedpossibleimpactofthesmallkititems.Further,theelectricitysavingfromthelargestiteminstalledbyHPSP(efficientshowerheads)matchedthemeasuredsavingsfromSydneyWater’sefficientshowerheadretrofitprojects.Inadditiontheprogramhasachievedthesesavingswhileeffectivelyaddressingitssocialobjectiveoftargetinglow‐incomehouseholds.


xii

WhiletheenergysavingspresentedinthisreportareprimarilylimitedtothedirectenergysavingprogramsandmeasuredbyOEH,therearelikelytobemorediffuseimpacts.Forexamplethereisevidencethatthedirectprogramsleadtowiderenergysavingswithintheirsectorsthroughmultipliereffectsasindividualsandbusinessespromoteenergyefficiencymorebroadly.Thecapacitybuildingprograms(EETPandEECAP)arealsoexpectedtohavepositivebutmorediffuseimpactsonenergysavingsnowandintothefuture.

TheESPhashadanimportantpositiveimpactforNSWbypositioningparticipatingorganisationstoattractfundingfortheirenergyefficiencyactivities.ForexampleinJune2012fourESPparticipantswongrantsinthefirstroundoftheCommonwealthCleanTechnologyInvestmentProgram(CTIP),receiving86%ofthenationalallocation,andafurther20ESPsitesareapplying.AkeysuccessfactorwasthecomprehensiveESPaudit.

OEHComment

ThecomplementarityreviewinformedgovernmentdecisionstomergetheEESBPintoESPtoimproveadministrativeefficiencyandtoretainHPSPasitmetallofthecomplementarityprinciples.

NSW2021includesatargettosupport220,000lowincomehouseholdstoreduceenergyuseby“upto20%”by2014.TheEnergyEfficiencyActionPlanseekstoincreasetheenergysavingsofparticipatinghouseholds.

Energysavingsarebeingproducedatalowercostthanthecostofprovidingthesameamountofelectricity

Onthecurrentevidenceallthedirectenergysavingsprogramareprovingtobecost‐effectiveovertheirlifetimewhenthecostpermegawatt‐houriscomparedwiththebenchmarkretailcostofprovidingelectricitytoeachcustomergroup.

OEHcalculatedcost‐effectivenessusingthemethodinthe2009IPARTreviewofNSWClimateChangeMeasures.BasedonthesavingsestimatesdescribedaboveforeachprogramtoendofJune2012,cost‐effectivenessisexpressedasthelevelisedcostpermegawatt‐hourthatreflectsthepresentvalueofcostsoverthelifetimeofprojects,takingintoaccountthevaryingpersistencefactorsoftheretrofits,equipmentinstalledandbehaviourchanges.Onthisbasisthelevelisedcostofonemegawatt‐hoursavedis$138forHPSP,$66forEESBP,$34forESPand$179forGBRP.

Comparisonofcost‐effectivenessbetweentheseprogramsgiveslimitedinsightbecausetheyhavedifferentobjectivesandinparticulartargetdifferentsectorsandcustomergroups.Itismorerelevanttocomparethecostofamegawatt‐hoursavedforeachprogramtoitsrelevantbenchmarkcost,inthiscasetheretailcostinresourcesofprovidingelectricityforthesametypeofcustomers.Thisbenchmarkcostvariesfrom$184forGovernmentcontractsto$281forhouseholds.Onthisbasisallthedirectenergysavingsprogramarecost‐effectiveovertheirlifetime.


xiii

Communityawarenessisincreasing

TheSavePowermassmediacampaigntelevisionadvertisinginitsfinalphasereachedalmosttwo‐thirdsofNSWadults(63percent),withmost(77percent)findingitconvincingandathirdfeelingmotivatedtotheactionsinthemessages.Approvalofthecampaignhasbeenpositiveandresearchsuggeststhatitiscontributingtoimprovedknowledgeofenergyefficiencyandhaspositivelyinfluencedenergyusebehaviours.Thewidereachofthecampaignoffersgreatpotentialforenergysavingsfrombehaviourchangeatthisscale.

Implementationhasbeeneffective

Adaptiveandincreasinglyeffectiveimplementation

Akeyachievementtothispointisthattheprogramsarelargelybeingdeliveredasintended,arereasonablyinlinewithdeliverytargets,andhavedevelopedincreasinglystrategicandeffectiveapproaches.Forthedirectenergysavingsprogramsinparticularthishasrequiredmanyadaptationstotheirinitialsettingsanddeliveryprocesses,summarisedinthisreport.

Highparticipantsatisfactionandpositivestakeholderengagement

Alltheevidenceindicatesthattheprogramsweregenerallywellreceivedbyparticipants.Highlevelsofparticipantsatisfactionhavebeenrecordedforthedirectenergysavingprograms.Theprogramshavealsobeeneffectiveinengagingexternalstakeholdersincludingparticipantsas‘multipliers’topromotetheprogram.Assessorshavebeenakeyassetnotjustindeliveringassessmentsbutincontributingtopromotionandfurtherrecruitmentofparticipants.

Regionalfocusachieved

TheprogramshavehadasignificantregionalfocusinlinewiththeGovernment’scommitmenttosupportregionalcommunities.HPSPisaddressinganexplicittargetforgeographicequityofaccess,andtheothertwodirectenergysavingsprogramshaveover50%ofparticipatingbusinessesfromoutsideSydney.

Workingwiththegovernmentsectorhadmixedresults

EffectivenessofimplementationofthefiveprogramsundertheNSWGovernmentSustainabilityPolicyvariedsignificantly:somehadsomegoodresultsliketheGovernmentRetrofitBuildingProgram,whilesomeothershadlittleimpact.Commonbarrierstoengageeffectivelywithagenciesincludedtheirlackoftechnicalknowledge,andtimeandresourcestoapplyforthesupportoffered.

Communityawarenessandworkforcecapacityforenergyefficiencyisbeingdeveloped

Twoprogramsaddressedtheenablersandbarriersforgreaterenergyefficiency,andhavebothbeenlargelyimplementedasintended.TheEETPtargetskeyindustrysectors


xiv

andoccupationswhichareabletoimplementenergyefficiencyopportunities,theeducationandtrainingworkforce,andpolicymakersandprogrammanagers.IthasdevelopedclearformalpartnershiparrangementswiththeDepartmentofEducationandCommunities(DEC)thatnowprovidesasoundplatformforsharedprogramdelivery.Amajorachievementhasbeenengaging5,290participantsinenergyefficiencytraining,networkingorprofessionaldevelopmentbetweenJuly2009andApril2012.

TheEECAPsuccessfullyimplementedacomprehensive,multi‐strategyandongoingsocialmarketingcampaignoverthreeyears.TheSavePowermassmediacampaignwasdeliveredinfivephasesofadvertisingactivityovertwowintersandtwosummers,supportedbytwophasesofqualitativeresearchandsevenroundsoftrackingresearch.

TheEECAPeffectivelydeliveredarangeofothereducationalprogramstoreachdifferentsegmentsoftheNSWcommunity.Bi‐lingualeducatorsweretrainedanddelivered57energyworkshopsdeliveredtoCALDparticipants.TheCSIRO’sEnergymarkprojectwastrialledwith112groupstoApril2012.SavePowerlibrarykitswereborrowedby6,400householdsintwelvemonthswithevidenceofpositiveimpactontheirknowledgeandbehaviour.Majorelectricalapplianceretailersweresuccessfullyengagedwithtrainingdeliveredtostaffin142storestoassistcustomerstoconsiderenergyefficiencyintheirpurchasedecisions.Theexperienceoftheseprograms,thetrackingresearchandtheevaluationsareprovidingOEHwithasubstantialevidencebasetoinformfuturesocialmarketingforenergyefficiency.

OEHComment

ThecomplementarityreviewinformedgovernmentdecisionstoceasethevocationaltrainingelementsofEETPastheyduplicatefundingfromtheCommonwealth.Thenon‐duplicativeaspectsofEETParetobemergedintotheESP.

TheEECAPendedin2012asplanned.

Cross‐impactsofprogramshavebeenlimited

Therehavebeenonlylimitedcross‐programimpactsatthisstage.ThedeliveryofthedirectenergysavingsprogramsandtheEEGSPwererelativelyseparateandfocussedontheirspecifictargetgroups.LinkagesbetweentheseprogramsandtheNSWEnergySavingsScheme(ESS)havebeenlimited.

Thetwocapacitybuildingprogramshavescopetosupporttheotherprogramstosomedegreethroughincreasingawarenessacrossthestate,andbuildingtheenergyefficiencyworkforce.TheSavePowercampaignandtheEESwebsitedeliveredprovidedcommonbrandingfortheprogramsandinfluencedattitudesinthecommunity.EETPisplanningformoreemphasisoncustomisingexistingcoursesandresourcesandcomplementingimplementationofESPprojects.Inpracticecross‐pollenisationhasbeenlimitedbythedifferenttimeframes.Long‐termimpactsofEETPontheenergyefficiencyworkforcewillbemorediscernibleinthefuture.


xv

MostOEHmanagersinvolvedwiththeseenergyefficiencyprogramswantedamoresystematicandstructuredprocessforoverallgovernanceandinformationsharing,whilerecognisingtheneedtoavoidprocessburdensandtomaintainprogramflexibility.


16

1. Theprogramsandtheevaluation

1.1 Theprogramsinscope

TheNSWGovernmenthascommittedtoimprovingenergyefficiencyacrossthehousehold,businessandgovernmentsectors.InJune2008itlaunchedasuiteofeightprogramsknownastheNSWEnergyEfficiencyStrategy.NotallNSWGovernmentorOEHenergyefficiencyprogramswereincludedintheEES.ThisevaluationcoverstheprogramsundertheEEStoJune2012butdoesnotincludetheNSWEnergySavingsScheme(ESS)whichisnotmanagedbyOEHandhasnotbeenfullyevaluatedtodate.

TheprogramsrepresentaninvestmentinenergyefficiencybyOEHof$161.4million,withtheHomePowerSavingProgram(HPSP)accountingfor39percent.Mostoftheprogramsstartedintheircurrentformin2009andarecurrentlyfundeduntil2013or2014(Table1‐1).

Table1‐1. Theprogramsbyapproach,sector,completionandallocatedOEHexpenditure

Program Sector/initialtarget Fundeduntil $million %

HomePowerSavingProgram(HPSP)

Households‐ 220,000lowincomehouseholds

June2014 $63 39%

EnergyEfficiencyforSmallBusinessProgram(EESBP)

Smallbusinesses‐ 6,000 December2012 $15 9%

EnergySaverProgram(ESP) Mediumandlargesites‐ 800 June2014 $20 12%

EnergyefficiencycomponentofNSWGovernmentSustainabilityPolicy(EEGSP)

NSWGovernmentagencies December2012 $26.4 16%

EnergyEfficiencyCommunityAwarenessProgram(EECAP)

NSWcommunity‐ domesticandworkplace

June2012 $15 9%


Educationandtrainingorganisations

June2013 $20 12%

DataandEvaluationProgram Energyefficiencyprograms June2013 $2 1%

Total $161.4 100%

Therationaleforthestrategyincludedafocusonintensiveandhighlyvisibleprogramsthatwouldkick‐startenergyefficiencyactionsinNSW,andwouldcomplementtheanticipatednationalemissionstradingscheme.AninitialinfluencewastheapproachinCalifornia,consideredtheworld’sleaderinenergyefficiencypoliciesandprograms,althoughatamuchlargerscaleandwithaverydifferenthistory,regulatorysettingandmarketcontextfromNSW.LikeNSW,Californiahasamixofprogramstargeting


17

multiplemarketsectors(residential,commercial,industrialandagricultural),monetaryincentivesandotherprogramssuchaseducationandtraining,state‐widemarketingandasubstantialevaluationprogram.1

1.2 Directenergysavingprogramsarethemajorcomponent

Forthisevaluationitisusefultogrouptheprogramsbasedontheirmainstrategiesforchangeandtheirgovernancearrangements(Table1‐2):

Threedirectenergysavingprogramstargetdifferentsectors,allmanagedbyOEH,aimtodeliveryenergyandcostsavingsforprogramparticipants.Togethertheyarethemostsignificantcomponentoftheprogramsandaccountfor61percentofOEHexpenditure.

Twoprogramsaddresstheunderlyingcapacityforchangetowardsgreaterenergyefficiency.OneismanagedbyOEH,theotherisaformalpartnershipbetweenOEHandNSWDepartmentofEducationandCommunities(DEC).

TheenergyefficiencycomponentofNSWGovernmentSustainabilityPolicyinvolvesmultipleagenciesandhasdistributedgovernancearrangementswhereOEHhaspolicyresponsibilitybutnodirectmanagementrole.

TheOEHDataandEvaluationProgramwhichaimstoimprovecapacityformeasuringenergyefficiencyacrosstheprogramsandtoprovideevaluation.

Table1‐2. Programsgroupedbyapproachesandgovernance

DirectenergysavingprogramsmanagedbyOEH

ThreeOEHprogramsaimtoachieveoutcomesattwolevels(1)participantswithincreasedcapacity(assessments,retrofitrebates,energyefficientitems),skillsandawarenessformanagingtheirenergyleadingto(2)energysavingsandtheassociatedsavingsinparticipants’energybills.Theyuseanassessmentofenergyusewhereassessorsprovideparticipantswithadviceandtoolstoimprovetheirenergyefficiencyusingan‘assess‐plan‐act’model.

Theprogramstargetenergyusersindifferentsectorsandhavedistinctivestrategiesforengagingwithparticipantsandsupportinghouseholdororganisationalbehaviourchange. HomePowerSavingProgram(HPSP)offersfree

assessmentandasavepowerkittolowincomehouseholds.

SmallBusinessEnergyEfficiencyProgram(EESBP)offersasubsidisedenergyassessmenttosmallbusinessesandmatchedfundingtosupporttheimplementationofrecommendations.Upto4hoursofsupportisalsoavailableassistthebusinesseswiththeirupgrades.

EnergySaverProgram(ESP)providesmediumtolargebusinesseswithsubsidisedenergyassessments,includingbusinesscasesforinvestmentinenergyefficiency.Upto20hoursoftechnicalandprojectsupportisalsoavailabletoassistwiththeinstallationofequipment.

1SeeCalifornianPublicUtilitiesCommission,EnergyDivision(2010)2006‐2008EnergyEfficiencyReport.


18

Capacitybuildingprograms

Twoprogramsaddressunderlyingcommunityandworkforcecapacityforaddressingenergyefficiency.OneismanagedbyOEH(EECAP);theotherisaformalpartnershipbetweenOEHandDEC(EETP).

EnergyEfficiencyCommunityAwarenessProgram(EECAP)usesmainstreamandbelow‐the‐linecommunicationscampaignsunderthe“SavePower”banner.

EnergyEfficiencyTrainingProgram(EETP),multiplestrategiestoimprovethecapacityoftheworkforceforenergyefficiency

OEHsupportingaprogramimplementedbyothergovernmentagencies

OEHcoordinatestheenergyefficiencycomponentofNSWGovernmentSustainabilityPolicy,whichcoversseveralprogramsthatareultimatelytheresponsibilityoftheindividualagencies

TargetsforthewholeofgovernmentweresetinthePolicy.TheenergyefficiencycomponentofNSWGovernmentSustainabilityPolicy(EEGSP)coversfiveprograms:theSchoolsEnergyEfficiencyProgram,NABERSratingofofficebuilding,Greenleaseschedules,TreasuryLoanFund‐SustainableGovernmentInvestmentProgramandtheGovernmentBuildingRetrofitProgram.OEHisprovidingsupporttoparticipatingagenciesthroughfacilitation,technicalsupportandinformationresources.

Dataandevaluation

ThisOEHprogramisbuildingcapacitytomeasureandevaluateenergyefficiency.

DataandEvaluationProgram(DEP)hasprojectstoimprovecapacityformeasuringandverifyingenergyefficiency,forevaluatingprogramsandforassessingoverallbenefits.

1.3 ThepolicycontextforenergyefficiencyinNSW

EnergyefficiencyisamajoraspectofNSWGovernment10‐yearstrategicplan‘NSW2021’;itflowsacrossseveralgoals,especiallythoserelatedtothecostoflivingandthenaturalenvironment.Rapidlyincreasingelectricitypricesarehighlightingthevalueofenergyefficiencyforthepublicandthegovernment.

Inthewiderpolicycontext,energyefficiencyisreceivingmoreandmoreattentionacrossAustralianstatesandterritoriesandatthenationallevel,especiallyinthecontextoftheCommonwealthGovernment’scarbontax.AspartoftheCleanEnergyFutureplan,theCommonwealthGovernmenthasdevelopedenergyefficiencyinitiativesthatmayimpactonNSWprogramsinthisarea.

Thecontextfortheseprogramsoverrecentyearshasbeenchangeanduncertainty.TheyaremainlynewprogramswithsomeapproachesbeingimplementedforthefirsttimeinNSWandevenAustralia.TheyhaveinvolvedOEHinnewstrategies,increasedscalesofdeliveryandnewstakeholderrelationships.Theyarebeingdeliveredina


19

policyandprogramcontextforenergyefficiencyandclimatechangecharacterisedbyuncertaintywithinstateandCommonwealthgovernments.

1.4 Programlogic

AnEvaluationFrameworkwasdevelopedfortheEESin2010andrevisedwiththeEESEvaluationAdvisoryGroup.ItissummarisedintheprogramlogicdiagraminFigure1‐1.Theevaluationframeworkandprogramlogichelpstocommunicatetheprograms’objectives,formulateevaluationquestions,assesstheextentofimplementationatdifferentlevelsofimplementation,andformthebasisofevaluativeargumentsabouttheoveralleffectivenessoftheprograms.2

TheprogramlogicshowshowtheEESisbasedonthesuccessfuldeliveryoftheprogramstothetargetedsectors(theverticaldimension),toachievetheintermediateoutcomesofimprovedcapacitytomanageenergyuseinthatsector.Thedirectenergysavingsprogramsareexpectedtodeliverenergysavingsfortheirparticipants.Ultimatelytheprogramsareexpectedtocontributetotheintendedenvironmental,economicandsocialbenefitstoNSW.Oneoftheseoutcomesisreliableinformationonenergysavingsandcosts.

Theprogramlogicalsoshowstheassumedhorizontalinfluences:twoprograms(EECAPandEETP)aretobuildwidercapacitywithinthecommunityandtheindustrythatwillsupporttheoutcomesoftheotherprograms,andtheperformanceofthewholestrategyisinfluencedbyeffectivegovernanceandmanagementprocesses,andtheDataandEvaluationProgram(DEP).

ThelogicillustrateshowtheEnergySavingSchemeisoutsideofOEHandrunsparallelwiththeotherprograms.ItalsohighlightstheroleofotherfactorsthatmayimpactuponthepotentialachievementsoftheEESandinfluencetheintendedoutcomes.

2Identifyingtheprogramlogicisimportantintheevaluationofenergyefficiencyprogramsbecauseitrepresentstheunderlyingtheoryofchange,assumptionsandintermediateoutcomes—seeReed,J.H.,Jordan,G.,&Vine,E.(2007).Impactevaluationframeworkfortechnologydeploymentprograms,USDepartmentofEnergyhttp://www.cee1.org/eval/impact_framework_tech_deploy_2007_main.pdf;MirjamHarmelink,LarsNilssonandRobertHarmsen(2008),Theory‐basedpolicyevaluationof20energyefficiencyinstruments,EnergyEfficiencyVolume1,Number2,Springer

FinalReport– August2012 2012evaluationofNSWenergyefficiencyprograms

20

Otherenergyefficiencyinstruments

(Cwlth,NSW)

ESS

Activitiesandoutputs

Intermediateoutcomes

Environmental,economicandsocialbenefitstoNSW Reducedcoststotheeconomyandenvironment(electricitydemand;emissions;needforinfrastructure;impactofrising

pricesoncustomers;costofemissionsreduction) Transformedmarketforenergyefficiency Sustainedbehaviourchangesbypeopleandorganisations Reliableinformationonenergysavingsandcosts

Ultimateoutcomes

Appropriatemixofprogramsdesigned,resourced,established.Targetsset.Appropriategovernancearrangements&processesestablished.Dataandevaluationsystemsdeveloped.

Reducedenergyuseacrosskeysectors

Increasedcapacity,skillsandawarenessformanagingenergyuseinkeysectors

Otherinfluences(positiveornegative)

Changingeconomicconditions

Changingcommunityattitudes

Newtechnologies

Factorsarisinginothersectorse.g.building

Populationchanges

Weatherandclimate

Targetgroupsreached/accessprograms

Immediateoutcomes

EESProgramsdeliveredefficientlyandasplanned

Households‐lowincomefamiliesHPSP

SmallBus.EESBP

Med&LargeBus.ESP

CommunityEECAP

NSWGovagenciesEEGSP

WorkforcesEETP

economicandenvironmentalcostsofenergywasteandhighdemandduetomarketfailures costandgreenhousegasemissionsofmoregenerationandnetworkinfrastructure risingelectricitypricesforNSWbusinesses,householdsandgovernmentagencies. uncertaintyandlackofreliableinformationaboutenergysavingsandtheircost

Design

Effectivegovernance,management,dataandevaluation

Serviceprovidersentermarketandseekaccreditation

Suitablesettings,management

Energyusersupgradeequipmentandimproveenergyefficiency

ACPs reachenergyusers,generateESCs

Suitableserviceprovidersareaccredited(ACPs)

Needidentified

Figure1‐1. ProgramlogicoftheinitialEnergyEfficiencyStrategy


21

1.5 Evaluationoftheenergyefficiencyprograms

AnimportantdriverforevaluationofenergyefficiencyprogramsinNSWwastheuncertaintyaroundreportedenergysavings,highlightedbythe2007OwenInquiryintoElectricitySupplyinNSW.

Enhancedenergyefficiencycoulddelaytheneedfornewbaseloadcapacity,butitwouldnotbeprudenttorelyonthisbeingthecase,particularlyinviewofthelackofreliableinformationabouttheactualelectricitysavingstodatefromexistingenergyefficiencyprograms,andtheuncertaintiessurroundingfutureelectricitysavingsfromexistingandpotentialenergyefficiencymeasures.

Thishasledtoafocusonbettermeasurementofenergysavingsandevaluation,andtheestablishmentofDataandEvaluationProgram(DEP)in2009(seesection3.7).

OEHdevelopedtheevaluationframeworkbasedontheprogramlogic(above)andanevaluationstrategywhereeachprogramcollectsdataonimplementationandoutcomesandconductsitsownevaluationactivities.ThisiscomplementedbydataanalysisbytheStrategyandAnalysisunitandthemeasurementandevaluationprojectsundertheDEP.

The2012evaluation(thisreport)isaDEPprojectundertakenbyARTDConsultantsincollaborationwithOEH.Theevaluationispartimpactevaluationandpartimplementationevaluation3,andexamines

– howeffectivelyprogramsarebeingdeliveredandreachingtheirtargetgroups– theoutcomesproducedbytheprogramstodateincludingreducedenergyuse

andincreasedcapacityformanagingenergyuseacrossthesectors– improvementsinthereliabilityofenergysavingsestimates

Thisevaluationhasbeenconductedasasynthesisoftheavailableevaluationinformationstructuredaroundtheprogramlogic.Themainsourceswere:

evaluationsandreportsfromtheprograms.Eachprogramconductedevaluationandresearchactivities,includingcomprehensiveindependentevaluationsorevaluationactivitieslikeparticipantsurveys,and/orinternalevaluationreports(seeAppendix1).

datafromtheStrategyandAnalysisteamcollectedforClimateChangeFundreporting

3ForacomprehensiveoverviewofevaluationforenergyefficiencyintheUSthatisrelevanttoNSW,seeReed,J.H.,Jordan,G.,&Vine,E.opcit;andNationalActionPlanforEnergyEfficiency(2007)ModelEnergyEfficiencyProgramImpactEvaluationGuide.StevenR.Schiller,SchillerConsulting,Inc.www.epa.gov/eeactionplan


22

reportsfromtheDEPmeasurementandverificationprojects

interviewswithOEHmanagersbyARTDinMay‐June2012tocollectfeedbackontheapproachtogovernance,coordinationandinformationsharing

feedbackfromOEHstakeholdersonearlierreports.

Weareconfidentthatthefindingsofthisevaluationrepresenttheoverallpatternsofdeliveryandoutcomestodate.Thedatafromdifferentsourceswereconsistent.Atthisinterimstage,somegapsanduncertaintiesremain,particularlywhereevaluationreportsfocussedoninitialphasesoftheprogramorwerestillindraftform.Similarlytheestimationsofenergysavingsarestillbeingdevelopedandapplied.


23

2. Overalloutcomesandachievements

Mostoftheprogramsstartedintheircurrentformin2009andarecurrentlyfundeduntilin2013or2014.Atthisinterimpointthischapterexaminestheoveralloutcomesandachievementsinmid‐2012,drawinguponthefindingsfromtheevaluationsoftheindividualprogramssummarisedinchapterthree.

2.1 Programoutcomes

2.1.1 Estimatesofenergysavingsareincreasinglyreliable

SincetheprogramsstartedOEHhassubstantiallyimprovedthereliabilityofestimatesofenergysavingsachievedbyprogramsdirectlysupportingparticipantstoreducetheirenergyuse.Intheearlyphaseofeachprogram,energysavingsestimatesweredesktopcalculationsbasedontargetuptakeandplanningassumptions.Theseinitialestimateswereinformedbytheavailableinformationineachareawhichvariedbetweenprograms.Forinstancelimitedinformationwasavailableaboutenergysavingsachievedthroughdistributionofsmallenergyefficiencyitemstohouseholds,whereasnumerousstudieshadalreadytestedassumptionstoestimatetheimpactofretrofittingbuildingsandequipment.

OEHhasprogressivelyrefinedthesecalculationsfirstlybasedonactualuptakeofprogramsandsecondlybasedonrefinedengineeringestimatesasnewevidenceavailableaboutthetargetgrouporthetypesofchangesrecommended(retrofit,newequipmentorbehaviourchange).Inparticular,theyincludethepersistenceofenergysavings.ForexamplewithHPSPpersistenceisassumedtovarywiththeequipmentinstalled(e.g.10yearssavingsfromshowerheads,5yearsfromotherkitcomponents)andwithbehaviourchange(oneyearpersistence).

AsrepresentedinFigure2‐1belowthemainachievementhasbeentomovefromprojectedtoverifiedenergysavingsbasedon‘before‐and‐after’analysisinlinewithinternationalbestpractice.TheDataandEvaluationProgramhasprovidedallenergyefficiencyprogramswithvarioustoolsforrigorousestimationofenergysavings:after1.5yearsofnegotiationsagreementswerereachedwithenergydistributorstoaccesslarge‐scalebillingdataforhouseholds(HPSP)andsmallbusinesses(EESBP);DEPdevelopedaguideformeasurementandverification(M&V)basedontheinternationalprotocol4thathasbeenusedbyEESBP,ESP,GBRPandtheESS;arangeofindependent

4Measurementandverificationistheprocessofusingmeasurementstoreliablydetermineactualsavingscreatedforanindividualfacilityorproject.IPMVPistheInternationalPerformanceMeasurementandVerificationProtocol(http://www.evo‐world.org).


24

studieshavebeencommissionedtoanalysemeasurementdatacollected.Section3.7providesdetailedinformationonmethodsusedtoestimategrosssavingsforeachprogram.

Figure2‐1. Improvedreliabilityofenergysavingsestimates

Deemedsavings(projected) Grosssavings(verified) Netsavings(verified)

Engineeringassessment…

...basedontargetuptake

…basedonactualuptake

Beforeandafteranalysis…

...basedoncasestudiesorasmallsample

…basedonarepresentativesample

Excludingfree‐ridership

Accountingforpersistence

…coveringallprojects

HPSP

EESBPESP

GBRP

2009‐10 2011‐12

Reliability

HPSP

EESBP

ESP

GBRP

Source:OEHandARTDbasedonUSNationalActionPlanforEnergyEfficiency(2007)

AtthisstageestimatesofenergysavingsarebasedonactualmeasuresofenergyusefromrepresentativesamplesforHPSPandEESBP;reportingforGBRPandESPstillreliesondeemedsavingsbasedonactualuptake,withM&Vprojectson‐goingorplannedfor2013.Thedifferencesinmethodsandtimeframeformeasurementmainlydependontheparticipants’characteristicsandtheprojecttimeframe.InparticularESPandGBRPprojectsareofmuchbiggersizeandhavelongertimeframeswhichleadstodelaysin‘before‐and‐after’analysis.Asaresultmonitoringtheimplementationoftheseprojectsovertimeisakeychallenge.

Thenextstepinthiscontinuumtowardsmorereliableenergysavingsestimatesistoassessnetsavings,ortheportionofenergysavingsthatisattributabletotheprogram.Estimatingnetsavingsinvolvesexcludingfree‐ridersandreboundeffects.Someofthemethodsusedinthisevaluationalreadyassessnetsavings.All‘beforeandafter’analysisofenergyuse(e.g.forEESB)includesanyreboundeffectaftertheenergyefficiencyaction.Further,theverificationofenergysavingsfromHPSPincludeduseofanon‐participantcontrolgroup.Thisshowedgrossreductionsinenergyuseforprogramparticipantsof10%,with4%netenergysavingsafterremovingcommunitywideeffectsevidentinthecontrolgroup.

TheworkinitiatedbyDEPhasreduceduncertaintyaroundenergysavingsfromtheseprogramsandestablishedasoundbasistoassesstheeffectivenessandcost‐effectivenessoftheprograms.Thiscaninformimprovementstoprogramdeliveryanddesignoffutureprograms.DEPresultshavebeenincorporatedinestimatesofprojectedsavingsoverthelifetimeofprojectsthatareinformingthedesignoftheEnergyEfficiencyActionPlan.


25

2.1.2 Energysavingsarebeingachievedandexpectedtoincrease

Thedirectprogramsaimtoachieveenergysavingsandtheassociatedsavingsinparticipants’energybillsthroughprovidingthemwithincreasedcapacity(energyassessments,retrofitrebates,energyefficientitems)skillsandawarenessformanagingtheirenergyuse.

Onthebestavailableestimates,allthedirectenergysavingsprogramshaveeitherdemonstratedorindicatedsubstantialenergysavingstodate.Acrossallfourprograms(includingtheGovernmentBuildingRetrofitProgramforsmallsites,adirectenergysavingscomponentoftheNSWGovernmentSustainabilityPolicy),totalestimatedannualenergysavingsare118,434MWhofelectricityand187,716Gjofgas,leadingtoareductioninparticipants’energybillsof$28,496,340peryear.Theestimatedenergysavingswouldalsoresultin136,697tonnesofavoidedCO2emissions(Table2‐1).

Theprogramswillproducebenefitsoverthelifecyclesoftheinstalledtechnologieswhiletheyremaininplaceandoperable.Thesesavingswillvarywiththetechnologiesandwithunderlyingtechnical,marketandeconomicchangesineachsector.

Eachoftheseprogramshascontributedtotheenergysavings,withatthisstagemostsavingscomingfromthemediumtolargebusinesssectorthroughtheESP.

Figure2‐2. AllocationofoverallelectricitysavingsachievedtoendofJune2012acrossprograms

27%

32%

38%

3%

Home Power Savings Program

Energy Efficiency for Small Business Program

Energy Saver Program

Government Building Retrofit Program

.

FinalReport– August2012 2012evaluationofNSWenergyefficiencyprograms

26

Table2‐1. Energyefficiencyprograms–estimatedannualsavingsfromactivitiesimplementedtoJune2012

Fundingtodate$ Reach Electricitysaved(MWh)pa

Gassaved(Gj)pa CO2tonnessaved Participants $savings

electricitybillspa

Participants $savings

gasbillspa

TotalParticipants$savingspa

HomePowerSavingProgram

$23,924,019 115,508completedassessments

31,595 32,346 $8,372,675 $8,372,675


$17,958,385 17,185businessesregistered

37,396 39,640 $9,124,627 $9,124,627

EnergySaverProgram

$11,095,056 366audits 45,432 186,155 60,357 $7,996,068 $2,345,552 $10,341,620

EnergyefficiencycomponentofNSWGovernmentSustainabilityPolicy(GovernmentBuildingRetrofitProgram)

$5,249,631 105sites,567projects

4,011 1,561 4,354 $637,749 $19,669 $657,418

Total 118,434 187,716 138,273 $26,131,119 $236,5221 $28,496,340

Source:StrategyandAnalysis,OEHbasedonprogramdata

Notes:

MethodsforcalculatingsavingsarebasedonthemostrecentdatafromevaluationreportsandtheDEPmeasurementandverificationprojects,usingconservativeestimates.Detailsareinnotestotheindividualprogramtablesinsection3.

Thebillsavingsusethetariffsdevelopedforthe2010‐11ClimateChangeFundannualreport.


27

FortheESPthe31,595MWhofestimatedenergysavingsatthisstageareexpectedtoaccelerateoverthenextfewyears.Itisclearthattheprogramhasamodelthatcanachievesubstantialenergysavingsandcutenergybillsatparticipants’sites.Casestudieshavedemonstratedenergysavingsofupto70percentforindustrialrefrigerationatvarioussites,andsimilarresultsforlightingretrofits.Theextentofsavingsislikelytobeclearerasmorebusinessesimplementauditrecommendationsovertime,andtheprogrammeasuresandreportsonthis.TheincreaseduseofM&VshouldprovidefirmevidenceofenergyandcostsavingsandallowESPtomoreaccuratelyextrapolatefindingsacrossparticipatingbusinessesandsub‐sectors.

EESBPhasachievedahighlevelofreach(17,185smallbusinessesregisteredtoJune2012comparedtotheinitialtargetof6,000)andgeneratedanestimated37,400MWhofannualelectricitysavingsleadingtoasavingsinparticipantselectricitybillsofover$9.1million.Thekeychallengehasbeenliftingtherateofconversionfromregistrationtorebatesforretrofits.Majorrefinementstotheprogramdesignhaveincreasedtheconversionratetoover50percenttotheendofJune2012,withevidencethatmostactionsareattributabletotheprogram.ThescaleofenergysavingswasdemonstratedthroughfindingsfrommeasurementandverificationanalysisconductedbyDEPover331projects(accountingforaround17%ofalltherebatesatthattime).Onaverageeachbusinesssaved5.64MWhor9.3percentrelativetoitsbaselineforthefirstyear.

InitialresultsforHPSPhavebeenpromising.Ithasachievedextensivereachacrossitstargetgroupoflowincomehouseholds(115,508completedassessmentstoJune2012),andhasdelivered31,595MWhofannualelectricitysavingsleadingtoasavingsinparticipants’electricitybillsofalmost$8.4millionTheseenergysavingsweremeasuredwithahighlevelofreliabilitythroughthebillingdataanalysisconductedinMay2012whereaveragesavingsof0.22megawatt‐hourofelectricityperannum(or4percentreduction)foreachparticipatinghouseholdwerefound.Savingsdifferedaccordingtothekititemsreceived(householdsreceivingtheshowerheadachieveonaverage6percentsavings).Theenergysavingsareencouraginggiventhelimitedpossibleimpactofthesmallkititems.Further,theelectricitysavingfromthelargestiteminstalledbyHPSP(efficientshowerheads)matchedthemeasuredsavingsfromSydneyWater’sefficientshowerheadretrofitprojects.Inadditiontheprogramhasachievedthesesavingswhileeffectivelyaddressingitssocialobjectiveoftargetinglow‐incomehouseholds,equityofaccessacrossthestate,andworkingwithspecifictargetgroupsinCALDandAboriginalhouseholds.

2.1.3 Otherbenefitsareemerging

Theenergysavingspresentedinthisreportareprimarilylimitedtothedirectenergysavingprograms.Howevertherearelikelytobemorediffuseimpacts.Forexamplethereisevidencethatthetheseprogramsleadtowiderenergysavingswithintheirsectorsthroughmultipliereffectsasindividualsandbusinessespromoteenergyefficiencymorebroadly.


28

Furthermorethecapacitybuildingprogramswillalsohaveapositiveimpactonenergysavings.WhileEETPhasnodirectmeasurableenergysavingsoutcomes,atthisstagethelimitedpreandposttrainingdatashowstrainingparticipantsreportingchangedorganisationalpractices,operationsand/ortechnologies,andanumberestimatedormeasuredresultingenergysavingsattributedtotheprogram.TheEECAPsocialmarketingcampaignfocussedonwiderawarenessraisingandcapacitybuildingbutanumberofcomponentsindicateddirectenergysavings.Peoplewhohadraisedawarenessfromthemassmediacampaignreportedincreasedenergysavingbehaviours,sustainedovertime.ParticipantsintheEnergymarkprojectreportedreductionsintheirhousehold’scarbonemissionsandelectricityuse.

AnotherlongertembenefitforNSWisimprovingthecapacityororganisationstofurtherachieveenergysavings.ForexampletheESPhashadanimportantpositiveimpactbypositioningparticipatingorganisationstoattractfundingtoimplementtheirenergyefficiencyactivities.InJune2012fourESPparticipantswongrantsinthefirstroundoftheCommonwealthCleanTechnologyInvestmentProgram(CTIP),receiving86%ofthenationalallocation,andafurther20ESPsitesareapplying.AkeysuccessfactorwasthecomprehensiveESPaudit.AnotherexampleislinkingeachsitetoanAccreditedCertificateProvider(ACP)withintheESS,theNSWenergyefficiencytradingscheme,togeneratefundsforbusinessestoimplementprojects.

2.1.4 Thedirectenergysavingsprogramsarecost‐effectiveoverthelifetimeofsavings

OEHassessedthecost‐effectivenessofitsenergy‐efficiencyprogramsusingthemethodsetoutinthe2009IPARTreviewofNSWClimateChangeMeasuresonthebasisofcomplementaritytotheCommonwealthcarbonpricescheme.Undertherecommendedframework,acost‐effectiveenergysavingprogramisdefinedasonethatdeliversitssavingsatalowercostthanifthesamebenefitsweremadeundertheCarbonPollutionReductionScheme(CPRS).Thebenchmarkcostisdefinedasthefuturecarbon‐inclusiveretailpriceofelectricitythatisrelevanttothetargetedcustomergroup,whichreflectsnotonlytheusagecomponentbutthefullcostinresourcesofprovidingelectricity.5

Cost‐effectivenesswascalculatedby:

1. Expressingtheestimatedcostsandsavingsinpresentvaluetermsusinga7percentdiscountrate

2. Convertingthepresentvalueofthecostsandbenefitsintoaanaveragecostperunit—levelisedcost—inthiscasethecostpermegawatt‐hour

3. Calculatingtherelevantbenchmarkcostaccordingtothetargetcustomergroup.

5IPART,ReviewofNSWClimateChangeMitigationMeasures,May2009


29

TheTable2‐2belowpresentstheresultsofthiscost‐effectivenessanalysisforthefourprogramsproducingdirectenergysavings.Thekeypartofthisanalysisistoestimatesavingsachievedbyparticipantsbasedonthedatetheyenteredtheprogram,assumptionsforannualsavingsandlifeofsavingsaccordingtotheretrofit,equipmentinstalledorbehaviourchange.

Table2‐2. Cost‐effectivenessforthedirectenergysavingsprograms

HPSP EESBP ESP GBRP

Discountrate 7% 7% 7% 7%

ProgramcoststoendofJune2012(realcosts,$m)

$27.296 $18.794 $11.622 $5.381

Electricitysavingsperyear(MWh)

31,595MWh 37,396MWh 45,432MWh 4,011MWh

Lifetimeelectricitysavings 252,763MWh 373,960MWh 454,322MWh 40,110MWh

Calculatedlevelisedcost $138/MWh $66/MWh $34/MWh $179/MWh

Benchmarklevelisedcost $281/MWh $245/MWh $187/MWh $184/MWh

Source:OEH,WaterandEnergyProgramDivision,StrategyandAnalysissection,August2012

Onthisbasisallfourprogramsprovetobecost‐effective,withlowercostpermegawatthoursavedthantheirrelevantbenchmarkcost(Table2.2).Eachprogramisdeliveringenergysavingsatalowercostthanthecostofprovidingthesameamountofelectricity.Comparingcost‐effectivenessbetweentheseprogramsgiveslimitedinsightbecauseprogramshavedifferentobjectivesandinparticulartargetdifferentcustomergroups.

Theaccuracyoftheseresultsissubjecttothereliabilityofenergysavingsestimatesasdescribedinsection2.1.1withhigherreliabilityforHPSPandEESBPwhereestimatesarebasedonverifiedsavings.

2.1.5 Markettransformationandeconomicbenefitswillbeassessed

Afullerpictureofthelongertermimpactsoftheprogramswillbeavailableby2013,withtwostudiesconductedbytheDEP.Amarkettransformationstudyhascommencedtoevaluatetheimpactoftheprogramsontheenergyefficiencyproductandservicemarkets(seesection3.7).SecondDEPiscommissioningaprojecttoestablishcost‐benefitmetricsoftheenergyefficiencyprogramsasawholefortheelectricitymarketandthestateeconomy,coveringpublicaswellasprivatecost.Itwillinvolveenergymarketandeconomy‐widemodellingandwilltransfersomeofthemodellingcapacitytoOEHatthecompletion(currentlyunderprocurement).


30

2.2 Achievementsandissueswithimplementation

2.2.1 Directenergysavingprogramsareadaptiveandbeingdeliveredeffectively

Thethreedirectenergysavingprograms(HPSP,EESBP,andESP)arethemostsignificantcomponentoftheprogramsandaccountfor61percentofOEHexpenditure.Theyaimtodirectlyproduceenergysavings,andusebroadlysimilarstrategiestoworkwithenergyusersintheirtargetsectors,lowincomehouseholds,smallbusinessesandlargeenergyusingsites.Eachprogramhasmethodstoassesstheparticipants’energyuseandoffersupportforimprovingtheirenergyefficiency.

HPSPandEESBPwerenewprogramsforNSWandthefirsttimelowincomehouseholdsandsmallbusinesseshadbeendirectlytargetedinthisway,whileESPwasadevelopmentofthepre‐existingSustainabilityAdvantageProgram.HPSPinparticularisaverylarge‐scaleprogramthatbeganwithrelativelyuntestedtheoriesandassumptions.HPSPisfurthercomplicatedinthatinadditiontoitsenergyefficiencyobjective,italsohasasocialequityobjectivetofocusonlowincomehouseholds,reachspecifictargetgroups(CALDandAboriginalhouseholds),andtoensuregeographicequityofaccessbymakingtheprogramavailableacrossallofNSWatalltimes.Thishashadsignificantimplicationsforprogramdelivery.

AstrengthofthedesignphasefortheseprogramswasthedevelopmentofrobustITsystemstomanagedeliveryandrecordimplementationofassessments.Eachprogramdevelopedandrefinedassessmenttoolsforusebyassessors.Theprogramsalsoestablishedrobustauditingprocesses,totacklepotentialriskstoimplementationashighlightedbytheCommonwealth’shomeinsulationprogram.

Foreachprogram,amajorachievementwasestablishinglarge‐scalecontractualarrangementswithserviceproviders,overcominginitialchallengesandcapturingalargepartoftheenergyefficiencycontractingmarket.Theprogramscontributedtotheup‐skillingofauditors/assessorsandjobcreation(theextentwillbeassessedthroughthemarkettransformationstudy,anothercomponentoftheoverallevaluation).

Challengesinimplementationincludedfindingthebestchannelstopromotetheprogram,gettingthesignalsrightforthedifferenttargetgroups,andengagingwithparticipantsinthelongerruntosupportsustainedbehaviourchange.Anotherchallengehasbeenusingdata.Programscollectedawealthofdataonimplementationandwhilesomeprogramsmadelimiteduseofthisfortheanalysisofimplementation,ithasbeenincreasinglyusedthistoguideimprovements.

Theprogramsunderwentmanyadaptationstoreachandbetterrespondtotheirtargetgroups(seechapter3)andby2012wereonmorestrategicfootings.Programshadtoexpandandrefinestaffingtoaddresstheemergingrangeofdeliverytasks.Theprogramshadtheflexiblytochangetheirsettingswithinoveralltargetsandobjectives.WhileHPSPandESPhadinitialslowuptakes,allthreeprogramshavehadtheir


31

timeframesextended,andareallnowontracktoreachtheirdeliverytargets.Asthevolumeofdeliveryhasincreased,efficiencyofimplementationhasimprovedovertime.

Theprogramsmadechangestomanageboththedemandforandthesupplyofenergyefficiencyservices.Allthreeprogramsshiftedfocusfromusingtheassessmenttoidentifypracticalmeasurestoimproveenergyefficiency,tosupportingtheimplementationofrecommendations,whetheritwasHPSPhouseholdersinstallingkititemsorESPbusinessesmakingdecisionsaboutinvestinginnewtechnology.EESBPfurtherrefinedtheprocesstohaveassessorstoputmorefocusonsupportingimplementationandlessondeliveringanassessmentonly,resultinginadramaticliftinbusinessesproceedingtorebate.

Datafromprogramdeliveryisbeingincreasinglyusedtoguidestrategiestotargethigherpotentialforsavings.Forexample,EESBPistargetingbusinesstypeslikebutchers,poultryfarmers,smallsupermarketsandfastfoodoutletsashighenergyusers,withapproachesarebeingputinplaceinpartnershipwithpeakindustry.EESBPisalsodevelopingindustrybenchmarkingbasedonthedatacollectedtodate.Forexampleinthedairyindustry,datafrom440assessmentshasestablishedabenchmarkofenergyuseper1,000litresofmilk.

2.2.2 Highparticipantsatisfactionandpositivestakeholderengagement

Alltheevidenceindicatesthatprogramsweregenerallywellreceivedbyparticipants.Thethreedirectenergysavingprogramshaverecordedhighlevelsofparticipantsatisfaction.HPSPmonitorssatisfactionthroughitsreportingandauditprocesses,whichfoundover95%ofhouseholdshighlysatisfiedwiththeprogram,especiallywiththefreekititemsandthetailoredassessmentsthathelpthemtosaveenergy.ForEESBPindependentsurveyresearchinMay‐June2012foundthat78percentofbusinessesweresatisfiedorverysatisfiedwiththeassessorand80percentwiththerecommendations(n=301),inlinewithsimilarfindingsin2010.SimilarlyforESP,independentsurveyresearchin2011foundparticipatingbusinessesverysatisfiedwiththeESP(80percentwithauditors,92percentwiththeESPteam).MorebroadlyapprovaloftheSavePoweradvertisingcampaignhasbeenpositive(over80percentofpeopleapprovedorstronglyapproved).

Akeyachievementofdeliveryofthedirectenergysavingprogramswasengagingexternalstakeholdersincludingparticipantsas‘multipliers’topromotetheprogramthroughtheirnetworks,andusingearlyadoptersasadvocates.Assessorswerealsoakeyassetnotjustindeliveringassessmentsbutalsoincontributingtopromotionandfurtherparticipantrecruitment.Programsbuiltthisintotheirdeliveryindifferentwayssuchasdevelopingtrainingorincludingincentivesintheirpaymentmodel.Theprogramsdevelopedstrongsupplychainrelationshipswithassessorsandotherproviderstobuildpartnerships,usingmethodssuchasforums,requiredattendanceatprogramupdates,webinarsandemailcommunication.


32

2.2.3 Regionalfocusachieved

TheprogramshavehadasignificantregionalfocusinlinewiththeGovernment’scommitmenttosupportregionalcommunities.HPSPisaddressinganexplicittargetforgeographicequityofaccess,whileEESPandESPhaveover50%ofparticipatingbusinessesfromoutsideSydney.

2.2.4 Workingwiththegovernmentsectorhadmixedresults

ThefiveprogramsundertheenergyefficiencycomponentofNSWGovernmentSustainabilityPolicy(EEGSP)hadvaryingsuccessinreachingthegovernmentagenciesandeffectivelyengagethemintheprogramrationale.Settingtargetswasnotsufficient.‘Outclauses’includedinthepolicy,suchas“wherepractical”or“whererelevant”meanttargetwerenotmandatory.Basedonfeedbackfromagencies,OEHstaffidentifiedthathavingaclearpolicymandate,agency‐specifictargetsandaccountabilityrequirementspossiblywithpublicreportingwouldsupportthesuccessfulimplementationofprograms.

Effectivenessofimplementationoftheprogramsvariedsignificantly:somehadsomegoodresultsliketheGovernmentRetrofitBuildingProgram,thedirectenergysavingscomponent,wherethesmallsitescomponenthadgeneratedestimatedsavingsof4,011MWhofelectricityand1,561Gjofgasleadingtoasavingsinparticipants’energybillsofover$.657million.OtherssuchastheGreenLeaseprogramdidnotproduceanyimpact.Allprogramshadcommonbarrierstoengageeffectivelywithagencies:thelackoftechnicalknowledge,timeandfinancialresourcesforauditstoapplyforthesupportoffered.

2.2.5 Awarenessandcapacityforenergyefficiencyisbeingdeveloped

Twoprogramsaddressedtheenablersandbarriersforgreaterenergyefficiency,targetingthewidercommunity,keyindustrysectorsandoccupationswhichareabletoimplementenergyefficiencyopportunities,theeducationandtrainingworkforce,andpolicymakersandprogrammanagers.Eachoftheseprogramshasbeenlargelyimplementedasintended,andsummariesareinchapter3.

TheEnergyEfficiencyTrainingProgram(EETP)usesmultiplestrategiestoimprovethecapacityoftheworkforceforenergyefficiency.AkeyfeatureoftheEETPiscross‐agencygovernancebetweenOEHandNSWDepartmentofEducationandCommunities(DEC).EETPhasdevelopedclearformalpartnershiparrangementsandwhilethepartnershipfacedsomechallengesinitsdevelopment,itisnowvaluedandsupportedbyinternalstakeholdersacrossbothagenciesandprovidesasoundplatformforsharedprogramdelivery.Industryandtrainingstakeholdersalsovaluedthepartnershiparrangementsbetweendifferentgovernmentagenciesandfoundthiscontributedtothesuccessoftheprogram.


33

AmajorachievementofEETPhasbeenengaging5,290participantsinenergyefficiencytraining,networkingorprofessionaldevelopmentbetweenJuly2009andApril2012,including

2,695committedplacesintheVocationalEducationandTraining(VET)system 179participantsintheProfessionalDevelopmentforVETPractitioners(PD4VET)

workshops 629participantsinotherVETProfessionalDevelopment(PD)trainingor

networkingevents 1,233participantsin30IndustryPartnershipsprojects 544participantsinHigherEducationcourses

TheEnergyEfficiencyCommunityAwarenessProgram(EECAP)isacommunicationandeducationprogramtargetingthebroadcommunitytoimprovecommunityknowledge,understandingandmotivationtoactinrelationtoenergyefficiency.Itusedacomprehensive,multi‐strategyandongoingapproachthatreflectsbestpracticeinsocialmarketingtoreacharangeofdifferentaudiencesthroughmainstreamandbelow‐the‐linecommunicationscampaignsunderthe“SavePower”banner,andspecificeducationprojects.TheEECAPmassmediacampaigntargetedanoverallpopulationof5.8millionpersons(approximateNSWadultpopulation)

TheSavePowermassmediacampaigntelevisionadvertisinginitsfinalphasereachedalmosttwo‐thirdsofNSWadults(63percent),withmost(77percent)findingitconvincingandathirdfeelingmotivatedtotheactionsinthemessages.Trackingresearchdemonstratedthatapprovalofthecampaignremainedhighovertime,fromwinter2009tosummer2010:morethan80percentofpeopleapprovedorstronglyapprovedgovernmentadvertisingwithmessagesaboutsavingpower.Researchsuggeststhatitcontributedtoimprovedknowledgeofenergyefficiencyissuesandhashadaninfluenceinchangingenergyusebehaviours.Thewidereachprovidesgreatpotentialforenergysavingsfrombehaviourchangeatthisscale.

TheEECAPeffectivelytrialledarangeofothereducationalapproachestoreachdifferentsegmentsoftheNSWcommunity.InpartnershipwiththeEthnicCommunitiesCouncil,bi‐lingualeducatorsweretrainedandthendelivered57energyworkshopsdeliveredto1,044participants.Anewprogramin2012willrecruit20EnergyChampionsand50LeadersfromacrossCALDcommunitiestoencourageparticipationandactiontoreduceenergy.TheCSIRO’sEnergymarkprojectwastrialledinNSW,with112groupsand517participantstoApril2012(another19werestillinprogress).SavePowerlibrarykits(841)wereplacedwith62CentralLibraryServicesinNSW(withupto260branchlibraries)andborrowedby6,400householdsintwelvemonthswithevidenceofpositiveimpactontheirknowledgeandbehaviour.TheRetailerEngagementProjectsuccessfullyengagedmajorelectricalapplianceretailersandprovidedtrainingtostaffin142storestoassistcustomerstoconsiderenergyefficiencyintheirpurchasedecisions.


34

2.2.6 Cross‐impactsofprogramshavebeenlimited

Theoverallstructureanddesignhasnotfocussedoncross‐programlinksorlentitselftomoreintegrateddelivery,andtherehavebeenonlylimitedcross‐programimpactsatthisstage.Thisisfurtherdiscussedinchapter4oncoordinationandgovernance.

ThedeliveryofthethreedirectenergysavingsprogramsandtheEEGSPwererelativelylinear,separateandfocussedontheirdifferenttargetgroupssectors.However,ESPandEESBPthatworkoutofthesamebranchhavecollaboratedinseveralways:recommendingbusinessestotheotherprogram,developingtechnologyandsectorreports,designingsectorapproachesthatcoverbusinessesofdifferentsizes,andutilisingthesamepanelsofserviceproviders.

Thetwocapacitybuildingprograms(EECAP,EETP)wereexpectedtosupporttheotherprogramstosomedegree(throughincreasingcommunityawareness,andbuildingtheenergyefficiencyworkforce).TheSavePowercampaignandwebsitedevelopedthroughEECAPprovidedcommonbrandingforthestrategy.EECAPmadegrantsto36councilstopromotetheHPSPandawarenessofSavePower.

Inpracticecross‐pollenisationhasbeenlimitedbythedifferenttimeframes.Forexample,long‐termimpactsofEETPontheenergyefficiencyworkforcewillbemainlydiscernibleintothefuture.TheDEPmarkettransformationstudywillassessprogresswithchangesinenergyefficiencyservicesinNSW.Forthisevaluation,verylittleifanydatawascollectedbytheprogramsontheinfluenceofEECAP(orpotentiallyEETP)ontheirparticipants.

TheNSWEnergySavingsScheme(ESS)offersasynergywiththethreedirectenergysavingprogramsandtheEEGSP,whereparticipantscanuseEnergySavingsCertificates(ESC)tofundenergyefficiencydevelopments.RecentlyeachoftheseprogramshasbeendevelopingtheseopportunitiesdirectlywithIPARTasadministratoroftheESS.However,coordinationisneededtoavoidriskssuchasinconsistentmarketsignals,oversubscription,andshortagesofcapacityfromserviceproviders.

OEHComment

ThecomplementarityreviewinformedgovernmentdecisionstomergetheEESBPandthenon‐duplicativeaspectsofEETPintoESPandtoincreaseuseoftheEnergySavingsScheme(ESS)tofundenergyefficiencyactions.

Thesedecisionsprovidethebasisformoreintegrateddeliverye.g.practicaltraininglinkedtolow‐costtoolstoaccesstheESSforspecifictechnologiesandsectors.


35

3. Progressofindividualprograms

Thischapterassesseshowtheprogramshavebeendesignedanddelivered,theadaptationsmadetoaddressbarriersandchangingcontexts,andtheinitialevidenceofenergyefficiencyoutcomes.Thesourceistheevaluationsandreportsfromeachprogram,andinterpretiveinterviewswithprogrammanagers.

3.1 HomePowerSavingsProgram(HPSP)

3.1.1 Programdesignanddevelopment

HPSPaimstohelp220,000low‐incomehouseholdsreducetheirpoweruseandbillsbytheendofJune2014.Thefreeprogramincludesthreemaincomponents:akitofenergyefficientitems,ahomepowerassessmentandatailoredactionplanidentifyingfreeandlow‐costwaysforthehouseholdtosavepower.TheprogramismanagedbyOEH,andFieldforceisthecontractordeliveringenergyassessmentservices.

FromtheinitialpolicybriefinJune2008totheendofDecember2011,HPSPhasbeenthroughalongjourney,withchangesmadealongthewaytobetterfitcircumstancesandthetargetaudience.TheinitialpolicydesignwasverybroadanddidnotspecifyaclearstrategicframeworkforaprogramthatwasuniqueforOEHinitsobjectivesaswellasitssizewitha$63millionbudget.Asaconsequence,twoofthefiveyearsinitiallyplannedfordeliveryofthe220,000energyefficiencyassessmentswereusedtodevelopamorerobustprogramdesignandrunthreepilots.Theprogramhasalsoanequityobjectivethathassignificantimplicationsforprogramdelivery.Thisobjectivemeansnotonlyreachingspecifictargetgroups(CALDandAboriginalhouseholds),butalsoensuringgeographicequityofaccessbymakingtheprogramavailableacrossallofNSWassplitintopostcodeclusters(PCC)—specificgeographicareascreatedtomanagethedeliveryoftheprogram—atalltimes.

Inthedevelopmentphase,OEHinitiatedwhathaveproventobesomeoftheprogram’skeystrengths.Theseincluded:involvingexternalstakeholdersfromthebeginning,pavingthewayfortheirstrongengagementinthepromotionoftheprogram;developingcomprehensiveITsystems,suchastheassessmenttoolandtherelatedassessmentsdatabase(DEAS),tosupportthedeliveryofassessments;andestablishingrobustauditandreportingsystemstoensurepropermonitoringandaccountability.

Theinitialdeliverymodel,however,didnotproperlycopewithallofthechallengesraisedbytheprogramimplementationtomeettheprogramobjectives.ThemainchallengesfacedintheinitialstagesofimplementationweregeneratingenoughdemandtoreachthequantitativetargetandclarifyingresponsibilitiesformarketingandcommunicationbetweenOEHandFieldforce.TheHPSPteamdidnothavethenumbersandskillstofullysupportthepromotionoftheprogramintheinitialphase.Increased


36

staffingandimprovedprocesseswithFieldforcehelpedtoleveragethepromotionaleffortsofallstakeholdersthroughanewlyestablishedmarketingstrategy.

3.1.2 Deliveryandreach

AssessmentsarearrangedbyFieldforcethroughaneffectiveschedulingprocessanddeliveredbyassessorsinthefield.Assessorsareattheforefrontandthemainassetoftheprogram;theirskillsandengagementarehighlyvaluable.However,theoriginalpricingmodelestablishedthroughthetenderprocessundervaluestheirkeyroleinprogrampromotionthroughlackofclearandsufficientincentives.

ByJune2012HPSPhadcompleted115,508assessmentsor58%ofitsfinaltarget.NowthattheprogramhasbeenextendedforanotheryeartoJune2014(inthecontextofNSW2021)andwiththesuccessofthemini‐campaignsthatfocusintensivepromotiononafewpostcodeclusters(PCCs)foralimitedtimeframe,theprogramappearstobeinreachofitsambitioustarget.

UptakeinsomePCCshasbeenmoresuccessfulthanothers,butthereisnoclearpatterninthesuccessfactorsthatcouldbevalidacrossNSW.SomePCCswithsimilarcharacteristicsperformdifferently.Inthiscontext,thereisno‘one‐size‐fits‐all’approach:localpromotionalstrategiesmustplayakeyroleinsuccessfuluptake.ThesestrategiesshouldbedesignedaccordingtothemainfeaturesandchallengesofeachPCC,forexample,stallsinmallsmayworkinPCCswithahighproportionofseniors,andpartneringwithCALDcommunityorganisationsforPCCswithahighproportionofthesehouseholds.

Overall,participantsarehighlysatisfiedwiththeprogram.HPSPmonitorssatisfactionthroughreportingandauditprocesses.Fieldforceconductsamonthlypost‐assessmentphonesurveyof100randomlyselectedparticipants–inDecember2011,95percentsaidtheywereextremelysatisfiedand5percentsatisfiedwiththeservice.IABauditresultsforthelastquarterof2011found97percentreportedapositiveexperience(n=153).Participantswereespeciallypleasedwiththekititemsbecausetheywerefreebutalsobecausetheymadetheideaofsavingsconcrete,andwiththetailoredassessmentsthatwouldhelpthemtosaveenergy.Themaincriticismfromparticipantswasthattheactionplanmaynotgivearealisticviewofthechangesandsavingstheycanachieve.Anecdotalevidenceofinconsistenciesinthewayassessmentsoritemsaredeliveredindicatesariskofnegativeperceptionsandfrustrationwhennotproperlyjustified(e.g.noshowerheadinstalledforHousingNSWtenants).

Programcostsarelowerthanbudgetedwithanaveragecostperassessmentof$270predictedfortheendoftheprogramcomparedwiththe$286initiallybudgeted,reflectingtheconstantattentiongiventoefficientprogramdelivery.


37

3.1.3 Outcomes

ByJune2012theprogramhadgeneratedanestimated31,595MWhofannualelectricitysavingsleadingtoasavingsinparticipants’electricitybillsofalmost$8.4million.Theenergysavingshavealsoresultedin32,346tonnesofavoidedCO2emissionsinoneyear(Table3‐1).Basedonthesesavingsestimatesthelevelisedcostpermegawatt‐hourcomparesverypositivelywiththebenchmarkcostinresourcesforprovidingretailelectricitytohouseholds.Takingintoaccountdifferentpersistencefactorsforsavingsfromkititemsandbehaviourchange,thecostofmegawatt‐hoursavedbyHPSPparticipantsis$138comparedto$281resourcescostforretailelectricity.

Table3‐1. HomePowerSavingsProgram–estimatedannualsavingsfromactivitiesimplementedtoJune2012

Reach Electricitysaved(MWh)pa

CO2tonnessaved Participants $savingselectricitybillspa

Participants watersavingsperyear(ML)

115,508completedassessments

31,595 32,346 $8,372,675 92.4

Source:StrategyandAnalysis,OEH

Notes:

ThesavingswerecalculatedbyapplyingthepreliminaryresultsofregressionanalysisofbillingdataundertakenbyindependentconsultantsinMay2012throughtheDEPmeasurementandverificationproject;estimatingsavingsbyassigningsavingstohouseholdsbasedonwhetherthehouseholdreceivedashowerheadornot;andassigningapersistencefactorof10yearstosavingsfromshowerheads,5yearstosavingsfromotherkitcomponentsand1yeartosavingsfrombehaviourchange

ThisestimateisconservativebecauseitadoptsthelowerestimatesofsavingsfromthedraftHPSPevaluationreport;appliesverylowpersistencefactorstosavingsfrombehaviourchange;andapplieslowerboundestimatesofpersistencefactorssavingsattributedtokititems.

Thebillsavingsusethetariffsdevelopedforthe2010‐11ClimateChangeFundannualreport($265/MWh),andusedthroughout2011‐12.

Electricitysavingsfromasampleof23,500homesweremeasuredbythebillingdataanalysisconductedwiththeDEPmeasurementandverificationprojectinMay2012.TheanalysisprovidedpreliminaryfindingsinMay2012withaveragesavingsof0.6kWhperhouseholdperday(or0.22megawatt‐hours(MWh)peryear,a4percentsaving),Thisrepresentsatotalfirstyearsavingof8979MWhfromthe41,000householdsthathadparticipatedintheprogrambyJune2011.Savingsvariedaccordingtothekititemsreceived:6percentsavingsforparticipantsthatreceivedthewholesavingkitagainst3.5percentforhouseholdersthatreceivedallitemsexceptshowerheads,whichhighlightsthesubstantialimpactofshowerheadsonenergysavings.Savingfromlightingrefitwasalsoestimatedfromthebillingdataanalysistobe0.35kWhperhouseholdperday(or2.3percentreduction).

Theseresultsareencouraginginthattheyprovedthehardwarecomponentsoftheprogrami.e.showerheadandCFLrealisedtheexpectedsavingsunderrealisticuseconditions.Forexample,theelectricitysavingfromthelargestiteminstalledbyHPSP


38

(efficientshowerheads)matchedthemeasuredsavingsfromSydneyWater’sefficientshowerheadretrofitprojects6.Ithighlightsthedistributionandinstallationofshowerheadsasamajorfactorforenergysavings.Oneissueisthatthemajorityofexistingparticipants,includingnon‐socialhousingtenants,arealreadyequippedwithenergyefficientshowerheads.

Furtheropportunitiesexisttoincreaseenergysavingsespeciallythroughthetipsintheactionplan,thathaveverybroadscopefromtakingshortershowerstosubstantialretrofitslikeahotwatersystem.Theevaluationrecommendedafollow‐upsurveyofparticipantstobetterunderstandtheirbehaviourandtheresultingoutcomes.HPSPisalsodevelopingastrategytoengageparticipantsinacontinuousrelationshipthatshouldbeinformedbyresearchonbehaviourchange,learningfromgoodpracticeinareaslikepreventivehealth.

3.1.4 Conclusion

HPSPhasbeenaverychallengingprogramtoimplementbasedonanambitiouspolicybriefandbothenergyefficiencyandsocialobjectives.Despiteinitialdifficultiesindefiningappropriatesettings,theprogramisontracktoreachthetargetof220,000participantsbyJune2014with115,508completedassessmentsattheendofJune2012.Theenergysavingsareencouraginggiventhelimitedpossibleimpactofthesmallkititems,andanecdotallyareconsistentwithcomparableprograms.Themainchallengeforthenextphaseoftheprogramwillbetoenhancethesavingsachievedbyparticipants,andtoensurethesustainabilityofbehaviourchange.

6SydneyWaterCorporation,InstituteforSustainableFutures(ISF),2004,‘EveryDropCounts’ResidentialRetrofits‐AnalysisofWaterSavingsStudyReport,April2004,ISFISF,2001,EvaluationoftheShellharbourResidentialRetrofitProgram:Part2(draft),June2001

OEHComment

ThecomplementarityreviewinformedgovernmentdecisionstoretainHPSPasitmetallofthecomplementarityprinciples.

TheNSWEnergyEfficiencyActionPlanincorporatesthesegovernmentdecisionsandevaluationfindings.Forexample,theevaluationshowedthatsmall,lowcostitemsdeliververifiableenergysavingsinhouseholdsofaround6%.Newmechanismsarerequiredtoenablelowincomehouseholdstoinvestinlarger,highercostitemsthatproducemoresignificantenergysaving.

Lowincomehouseholdsvalueface‐to‐faceadviceprovidedthroughenergyassessors,althougheffectivenesscanbeimprovedbybettertargetingofactionstothespecificneedsofthehouseholdandefficiencycouldbeimprovedbyuseofmarketdelivery.


39

3.2 EnergyEfficiencyforSmallBusinessProgram(EESBP)

3.2.1 Designanddevelopment

TheEESBPwaslaunchedinFebruary2009andtargetssmallandmediumsizedbusinesses(thatuseelectricityuptoabout$20,000peryearor160megawatt‐hours;orhaveupto10fulltimestaff).The$15millionprogramhadaninitialtargetofatleast6,000smalltomediumsizedbusinessestomakeenergyefficiencyimprovements.TheEESBPwasoriginallyduetobecompletedinJune2011buthasbeenextendedtoDecember2012withanadditional$6.6millioninfunding.

TheEESBPprovidesaparticipatingbusinesswithasubsidisedenergyassessmentthatidentifieswhereelectricityisbeingused,andatailoredactionplanwithelectricityandcostsavingrecommendationsandtheinformationneededtoclaimrebates.Businessesthatimplementrecommendationswithgreaterthanatwo‐yearpaybackperiodhaveaccessmatchedfundingtocoverhalfoftheretrofitcostsforlighting,HVAC,motors,aircompressors,commercialrefrigeration,boilers,hotwatersystemsorinsulation.Fourhoursoffreesupportfromtheassessorisalsoprovidedtoassistwiththeinstallationofnewequipment.

Fromtheinitialpolicybrieftodatetheprogramhassignificantlyevolvedinresponsetochallengesemergingfromtheearlystagesoftheprogramimplementation,especiallythelowconversionratefromassessmentstorebates.Accordingtofeedbackfromprogramstaffthetimeframetodeveloptheprogramdesignwasveryshort.AprogrammanagerwashiredonlyinSeptember2008.Formativeresearchonbusinessesknowledgeandattitudesandsomepilotassessmentswereconductedtotesttheconcept.

Variousresearch,monitoringandevaluationactivitiesinformedchangestotheprogramdesign,inparticularregularmonitoringofassessmentsdata,externalauditsofservicesprovidedbyassessorsandparticipantssurveys.OEHcontractedDatabuildtoconducttwoparticipantssurvey,oneinNovember2010(230participants)andoneinJune2012(around300participants)toassessbusinesses’satisfaction,identifybarrierstoimplementrecommendationsandfinallyestimatetowhatextentdecisionstoretrofitbusinessescanbeattributedtoEESBP.Thesecondparticipants’surveyincludes

TheEnergySavingsSchemehasthepotentialtobothpartiallyfundsmallandlargeenergyefficiencyitemsandprovideabusinesscaseforthirdpartiestoconductassessmentsofhouseholds.

Energysavingsfromaone‐offbehaviourchangeactiondonotlastsotheEnergyEfficiencyActionPlanwillseeksnewwaystodeliversustainedsavingsfrombehaviourchangethroughtheEnergySavingsScheme.


40

interviewswithprogramstakeholders(programstaff,assessors,serviceprovidersandexternalauditors).


AlthoughEESBPwasoriginallyintendedtobea30monthprogram,itreacheditstargetof6,000participatingbusinessesinMay2010,only15monthsfromtheofferingofassessmentinFebruary2009.ByJune2012EESBPhad17,185registeredbusinesses,15,214ActionPlanspreparedandaround2,510retrofitsimplemented.Themainchangestotheprogramdesignhavesincefocusedonincreasingtheconversionratefromassessmentstorebate.

Changeswerealsomadeintheapproachtorecruitingbusinesses.ForreasonsofequityEESBPwasinitiallyadvertisedbyOEHandthroughcouncils.Theapproachthenmovedtoassessorsmainlyresponsiblefortheprogrampromotion,usingcommunicationmaterialprovidedbyOEH.Fixedpriceservicesprovidedbyorganisationsselectedbycompetitivetender(andplacedonaNSWPanel)meansthatassessorsareguaranteeda$600or$300assessmentforeverybusinesstheyrecruit.Thisinnovativeapproachensuresthatassessorshavea‘profitmotive’torecruitbusinessestoEESBPandithasbeenafoundationoftheoutstandingparticipationnumbers.

Duringthefirstandsubsequentyearsassessorswereofferedfurtherguidelinesandtraining.Theassessmenttoolwasrefinedonfouroccasionstoimprovethequalityofdataenteredandoffermorereportingfunctionalities.Furtherriskassessmentidentifiedadditionalrecommendations,includingcontractingoutauditstoimprovethequalityofassessments,implementedfromJanuary2011.

Programstaffidentifiedthekeychallengeasthelowerthanexpectedconversionratefromassessmenttotheimplementationof‘rebatable’recommendations.Programdatashowedatwopercentcumulativeconversionrateinmid‐2010.Afacilitationpilotwasconductedinearly2010wherebusinesseswereprovidedwithfourhoursofassistancetoimplementrecommendationsfromtheiractionplans,whichshowedanincreaseinconversionrateto51percent.Inresponse,significantchangestoprogramdesign(Phase2)weremadefromJuly2010:

reductionofassessmentscostforbusinesseswithasimplifiedone‐offfee fourhoursoffreesupporttohelpregisteredbusinessestoimplementtheaction

plan(facilitationtimepaidtoassessors) optionforbusinessestopayonly50percentoftheretrofitcostsupfront,OEH

payingtheremaining50percent 50percentconversionratetargetforassessorsbeforebeingallocatedmore

businessestoassess.

AnewpanelofassessorswascontractedinAugust2010toalignwiththeserequirements,especiallyhavingassessorsthathadrelationshipswithsupplierssotheycouldcoordinatemoreeffectivelytheretrofitcomponent.Thosechangesappeartohave


41

significantlyimprovedtheconversionratewhichprogressivelyincreasedtoaround30percentinearly2011anddidnotfallbelow50percentfromAugust2011.

Sincethattimetherehasbeenanimprovementintheconversionratesasaresultoftheprogram.Therecentindependentsurveyofparticipants(Databuild,June2012,n=301)examinedthisindetail.Itfoundthat93%ofbusinesseshadatleastpartiallyimplementedoneormorerecommendationofanytypeinbothphasesoftheprogram,dominatedbythehighlevelofactionfornocost/lowcostrecommendations.Theproportionofbusinessestakingnocost/lowcostactionshasfallenfrom93percentinPhase1to84percentinPhase2butthisshortfallhasbeenmadeupbyincreasedactionintheothertwocategories:

Justundertwothirdsofbusinesses(62%)haveatleastpartlyimplementedrebateeligiblerecommendationscomparedto40percentinPhase1.

47percentofbusinessesreceivingworthwhilelowcostrecommendationsatleastpartiallyimplementedoneormoreoftheseinPhase2comparedto37percentinPhase1.

Thestudyassessedtheattributionoftheseactionstotheprogramandfoundthatwhilethishasnotincreasedoverall,theproportionthatisfullyattributedhasincreasedfrom64to83percent.Fornocost/lowcostrecommendationsattributionoverallhasincreasedfrom55to78percent.Forworthwhilelowcostrecommendationsthelevelofattributionhasnotchanged.

Participantsatisfactionhasbeenhigh.IndependentsurveyresearchbyDatabuildinMay‐June2012foundthat78percentofbusinessesweresatisfiedorverysatisfiedwiththeassessorand80percentwiththerecommendations(n=301).Thisisinlinewithsimilarfindingsforphase1oftheprograminNovember2010(n=230)whereatleast90percentofrespondentsweresatisfiedwitheachaspectoftheprogram(theassessor,theactionplanrecommendationsandthefollow‐upsupport).The2010researchshowedthatthemajorityofinterviewedbusinesses(68percent)weremotivatedtotakepartintheprogrambythepotentialenergycostsavings.Barrierstoimplementingrecommendationsoccurredinsomecaseswheretheywerenotseenasappropriatebythebusinessesthemselves,orthelackofup‐frontcapitalformorecostlymeasures.Asaresultprogramchangesweremadetoimprovetheappropriatenessofrecommendationsintheactionplananddevelopbettercommunicationtobusinessesaboutfinancialassistance.

Auditsofassessmentsconductedsincemid‐2011havealsocontributedtoimprovequalityandaccuracyofenergyassessmentsaswellasverifyingretrofits.ToendofMarch2012,367assessmentsacross33assessorcompanieshavebeenauditedandfindingsprovidedtoassessorstoadoptcorrectingmeasuresifneeded.Theoverallqualityofassessmentsimprovedfrom‘average(70)’to‘aboveaverage(75)’onthe100pointsauditscale.Interestinglytheassistanceoflocalcouncils(inlessthan5%ofcases)improvedthequalityofthefacilitationforimplementingrecommendations.


42

EESBPisincreasinglyusingquantitativeanalysisofthedataonparticipatingbusinessestoidentifypatternsofuptakeandconversionacrossindustries,sizeorlocationthatmayguidestrategiestotargetbusinesseswithhigherpotentialforsavings.Thisisunderwaywithkeybusinesstypeslikebutchers,poultryfarmers,smallsupermarketsandfastfoodoutlets.Inthesecaseshighenergyusersarebeingtargetedforspecialistaction,suchascoolroomsinbutchersandotherformsofrefrigerationinsupermarkets.Inthecaseofpoultryfarmers,commonopportunitiesarebeingidentified,withimplementationsupporttofocusontheseopportunities.Inallcases,theselocationandsectorwideapproachesarebeingputinplaceinpartnershipwithindustryassociationssuchasNSWFarmersortheAustralianMeatIndustryCouncil,andfranchisessuchasFoodworks.

Toencouragebestpractice,industrybenchmarkingisbeingestablishedbasedontheEESBPdatacollectedtodate.Inthedairyindustryforexample,datafrom440assessmentsacrossNSWhasenabledtheestablishmentofabenchmarkofenergyuseper1,000litresofmilk.Thisenablesdairyfarmerstocomparetheirenergyefficiencyagainstfarmerswithsimilarsizedherd.Anecdotalfeedbacksuggestsitisprovingtobeanimportantmotivatorforaction.

3.2.3 Outcomes

ByJune2012theprogramhadgeneratedanestimated37,400MWhofannualelectricitysavingsleadingtoasavingsinparticipantselectricitybillsofover$9.1million.Theenergysavingshavealsoresultedin39,640tonnesofavoidedCO2emissions(Table3.2).ConsideringtheprogramcoststoendofJune2012,theprogramisprovingtobeverycost‐effectivewithacostpermegawatthoursavedbyprogramparticipantsat$66comparedtoabenchmarkcostof$245(costinresourcesforretailelectricitytosmallbusinesses).

Table3‐2. EnergyEfficiencyforSmallBusinessProgram–estimatedsavingsforoneyearfromactivitiesimplementedtoJune2012

Reach Electricity saved(MWh)pa

CO2tonnessaved

Participants$savingselectricitybillspa

17,185businessesregistered15,214ActionPlans

37,396 39,640 $9,124,627


Notes:Thesavingswerecalculatedbyextrapolatingtheknownrateofrebateclaims(16.5%ofbusinesses)andaveragesavingsperrebate(5.2MWhperbusiness)tothetotalnumberofparticipantbusinesses;andestimatingimplementationofnon‐rebateactionsusingtheratesfromthe2012Databuildsurveyandextrapolatingtheaveragesavingsperbusiness(5MWh)fromnon‐rebateactionstothetotalnumberofparticipantbusinesses(32%ofworthwhilelowcostactionsarefullyimplementedduetotheinterventionofEESBP,basedon37%ofworthwhilelowcostactionsfullyimplemented,with87%ofthosecanbeattributedpartiallyorfullytotheEESBProgram).Thisestimateisconservativebecausethe2012Databuildsurveyshowsthatbusinesseshaveonlyclaimedrebatesfor51%ofimplementedrebatableactions.Thissuggeststhatthesavingsfromtherebatescouldbeashighas200%ofthoseclaimed.Thebillsavingsusethetariffsdevelopedforthe2010‐11ClimateChangeFundannualreport($244/MWh),andusedthroughout2011‐12.


43

EESBPistakingpartina‘before‐and‐after’projectcoordinatedbyDEPtomeasureactualsavingsachievedbyparticipants.Thelatestresults(August2012)providedfindingsbasedon331projectsthatweresubjecttoM&Vanalysis.Onaverage5.64megawatt‐houror9.3percentenergysavingswereachievedfromeachproject.Thisanalysisalsoidentifiedsignificantdifferencesintheamountofsavingsaccordingtothetechnology:lightingretrofitsresultedinthebiggestsaving(13percent)comparedtorefrigerationthathadthelowest(3.2percent).BecauseofthebroadbasistheseestimatescanbeconsideredasrepresentativeforallEESBPparticipants.TheyconfirmpreviousestimatesofsavingsthatwereusedtoinformthereviewofdeemedsavingsaspresentedinTable3‐2.

Anecdotalevidencefromprogramstaffshowsthatbetterresultsinimplementingrecommendationsareachievedforsometypesofbusinesseslikehairdressers,cafes,dairiesorfranchises.

Feedbackfromprogramstakeholderssuggeststhatotherimpactsarebeingachievedforparticipatingbusinesses,includingincreasedknowledgeandexpertiseintheenergyefficiencyarea,butthesearemoredifficulttomeasure.

3.2.4 Conclusion

EESBPhasdevelopedaneffectiveapproachforworkingwiththesmallbusinesssector.ItbeganasanewprogramforNSWandthefirsttimesmallbusinesseshadbeendirectlytargetedinthisway.Itsreachhasexceededexpectationswith17,185registeredbusinessestoendofJune2012comparedwiththeinitialtargetof6,000participants,suggestingthatithasreachedbeyondtheearlyadopters.Initsearlystagesakeychallengewasthelowconversionratefromparticipationtorebatesforretrofits.However,significantchangestotheprogramdesignhadaverypositiveimpactonthecumulativeconversionratethatwentfrom2percentofregisteredbusinessesrequestingrebatesasattheendofJune2010to15percenttotheendofJune2012,withevidenceofcost‐effectiveenergysavings.Theprogramhasprovedtobeeffectiveandcost‐effectiveinworkingwiththesmallbusinesssector,withthepotentialforgeneratingsimilarresultsonalargerscale.

OEHComment

ThecomplementarityreviewinformedgovernmentdecisionstoreformtheEESBPbymergingitwiththeESPandceasingrebatesforenergyefficiencyactions.ThereviewemphasisedgreateruseoftheESSasafinancialincentiveforsmallbusinessestoimplementenergyefficiencyactions.

TheNSWEnergyEfficiencyActionPlanincorporatesthesedecisionsandevaluationfindings.Forexample,implementationratesincreasedramaticallywhenauditsarefollowedupwithtechnicalsupportandfinancialincentives.TheEnergySavingsSchemewillneedsimplemethodstostreamlineaccessforserviceproviderstosmallbusinesses,


44

3.3 EnergySaverProgram(ESP)


TheESPtargetsmediumandlargesitesusingbetween160megawatts‐hourto10GWhperannuminelectricity.ItispositionedbetweentheSmallBusinessProgram(EESB)thattargetsbusinessesthatusebelow160megawatts‐hour(wheremostelectricitymeterscannotrecordintervaldata)andlargesitesusingabove10GWhthatareobligedtotakepartintheNSWEnergySavingsActionPlan(ESAP)program.

TheESPhadanoriginaltargetof800siteauditsbyJune2013,nowextendedtoJune2014.TheESPbudgetis$20millionoverthefiveyears2008/09to2013/14.

TheESPprovidessubsidisedenergyauditsandfacilitationtoguide,promoteandpreparebusinesscasesforinvestmentinenergyefficiency.Italsosetupapanelofenergyefficiencyauditorswhorecommendupgradesandimprovedprocedures,identifypotentialEnergySavingSchemefundingandsupportbusinessestoactontherecommendations.

Overtheperiodtodate,thestoryoftheESPhasbeenacontinuousadaptationoftheinitialsettingstoaddresschallengeswithreach,delivery,timelinessandturningauditsintoenergysavings.ThishasbeeninformedbyprogramexperienceandresearchcommissionedbyESPonotherenergyauditingprograms(InstituteforRuralFutures2011),andontheengagementofbusinessesintheESP(Databuild2011).

3.3.2 Reachanddelivery

Theprogrambeganinearly2009andhadaslowstart‐up,butbyJune2012itreportedtrackingwelltotargetwith366auditscompleted,approximately50percentatregionalorruralsites(Table1).Programexpenditureof$11.1millionwasonforecastfortheJune2014completion.

assite‐specificengineeringmeasurementofenergysavingsisnotfeasibleforsmallbusinesses.

Basedonthe15,000assessmentsundertakenbyJune2012,thetypesofenergyusageandopportunitiesforenergyefficiencywithinsectorsareknowntoberelativelyconsistent.Hence,identificationofopportunitiesandcalculationofsavingscanbestreamlined.

Akeyfindingisthatverifiedbillsavingsacrossalargenumberofsmallbusinessesdeliverequivalentorgreaterpeakdemandsavings.Futureprogramscanbuildonthisfindingtoimprovealignmentbetweenenergyefficiencyprogramsandmanagementofpeakdemand.


45

Table3‐3. ESPuptakeandimplementationovertimetoendofJune2012

2009 2010 2011 2012 *

AuditsCompleted Yearly 14 82 119 151

Cumulative 14 96 215 366

Organisationsimplementedoneormoreprojects

Yearly 6 40 15 ‐

Cumulative 6 46 61 ‐

Implementationrate(implementedsavings/totalestimatedsavings)

Yearly 5.5% 11.3% 4.6% ‐

Cumulative 0.3% 5.0% 7.5% ‐

Source:OEH,ESPmonitoringdatabase,June2012;*toendofJune2012

AnearlyadaptationwastheeasingofrequirementsforEnergySaverparticipantstoundertakethewiderSustainabilityAdvantageProgram,whichincludedreplacingthe$2,000‐$3,000joiningfeewitha$500feeatsign‐up.In2010eligibilitywaswidenedtoincludegovernmentsites.Toaddressbarrierstoimplementingenergyefficiencyprojects,theESPaddedImplementationSupportin2010(below).Marketingmaterialswereconstantlyimprovedandgoodrelationsbuiltwithindustrybodies.Oneofthelargestdelayswithanenergyauditisthecollectionofenergydata,soinearly2010ESPaddeda‘kick‐off’meeting,facilitatedbytheenergyauditor,andmadethisapaymentmilestonefortheauditor.

Amajoradaptationwasmovingthefocusfromtargetingbusinessesingeneraltoalsoincludingasectortransformationapproachfor1)selectedtechnologies(lighting,HVACandindustrialrefrigeration,andin2012multi‐generationandsub‐metering);and2)keyindustrysectors(agedcare,registeredclubs,hotels,foodprocessors,schools).Thisallowsmorespecificmarketing,targetinghighenergyusers,andspecialisedauditsforsimilarbusinessesortechnologies.In2012ESPisfurtherfocussingtechnologyprojectsbyofferingtrainingontechnologicalsolutions,andhasreportedahighdemand.

In2011,ESPformedacollaborationwithCityofSydneyfortheSmartGreenApartmentsproject(target30audits)andthemediumbusinesspilot(12audits–tobeevaluated2012).

OnthesupplysidetheESPhasalmostdoubledtheauditpanelto46organisationswithover300individualauditors,asignificantproportionofenergyauditingconsultantsinNSW.ESPleveragesofftheauditorsthroughgrantingexclusiverightswhereanauditorbringsabusinesstotheprogram,providingpricingisconsistentwiththeirtenderapplicationandinlinewiththeaveragepriceforsimilaraudits.Businessesrecruitedbyauditorsnowaccountsforthemajorityofnewaudits.

Accordingtothe2011Databuildsurvey,mostparticipatingbusinesseshavebeensatisfiedtoverysatisfiedwiththeESPprocess(auditors80percent,ESPteam92percent,n=38‐39).Thisstudyalsofoundthatwhilebusinessessawsubstantialbarriersto


46

investinginenergyefficiencyprojects,theimportantfeaturesofESPwere:(i)credibilityofagovernmentprogram(ii)subsidisedaudits;and(iii)theresultingbusinesscasethatwasneededtosecureabudgetforinvestment.

Siteswithinthetargetgroupcanvaryinenergyusebyafactoroveraround60,sowhilethenumberofauditsisaKeyPerformanceIndicator(KPI)itdoesnotreflectthedegreeofuptake,themegawatt‐hourvalueofenergyassessedorlikelysavings.TheESPcanprovidemoredetaileddatabyindustrysectorsonreachanddeliveryfordifferentprojecttypesfromtheESPdatabase,butnofurtheranalysishasbeencontractedyet.

3.3.3 Outcomes

ByJune2012theprogramhadgeneratedestimatedannualsavingsof45,432MWhofelectricityand186,155Gjofgasleadingtoasavingsinparticipantsenergybillsofover$10.3million.Theenergysavingshavealsoresultedin60,367tonnesofavoidedCO2emissionsforoneyear(Table3.4).

Table3‐4. EnergySaverProgram–estimatedsavingsforoneyearfromactivitiesimplementedtoJune2012

Reach Electricitysaved

(MWh)pa

Gassaved(Gj)pa

CO2tonnessaved


Participants$savingsgasbillspa

Participants$total

savingspa

386entitiesaudited

45,432 186,155 60,357 $7,996,068 $2,345,552 $10,341,620


Notes:Thesavingswerecalculatingby:identifyingacohortof113auditsthatwerecompletedmorethan18monthsearlier(datasetextracted19June2012)andhavereportedatleastonceweretakenasconservativelyindicativeofimplementationundertheprogram.Includingbusinessesthatreportednoimplementation,thisgroupachievedreportedaverageelectricitysavingsof5%andnaturalgassavingsof6%againsttheirbaselines(note:the6%figureincludesbusinessesthathadnonaturalgasuse,thiswasdonetoallowthefiguretobeappliedtoallbusinessesthathadparticipated).Theaveragebaselineforallauditscompletedmorethan6monthsearlierwastakentobetheaveragebaselineforallparticipants(averagebaselinesare2,401MWhand8,477GJ).The5%and6%savingswereextrapolatedtoallbusinessesthathavereceivedanauditundertheprogram(366at30June2012).Thisfigureisconservativebecause:theimplementationrateistakenfromearlierintheprogramfrombusinessesthatdidnotprovidemultiplereports.Itdoesnotreflecttheimpactofimplementationsupport,otherimprovementstoauditlayout,auditmanagementprocessesandbusinesscasequality,ortheintroductionofCommonwealthfundingforimplementation.Thebillsavingsusethetariffsdevelopedforthe2010‐11ClimateChangeFundannualreport(naturalgas,business‐$12.60/GJ;electricity,businesseswithmediumsizebaselines‐$176/MWh).

TheESPevaluationreportusesdatafromthecurrentprojectsandassumesa45percentimplementationratetoestimatesavingsinelectricityuseof122,400megawatts‐hourperyearacrossallthebusinesses,equivalenttosavingsoverthe10yearlifeoftheimplementedprojectsof1,224,000megawatts‐hour,leadingtoacost‐effectivenessof$16.33permegawatt‐hourofenergysaved.


47

CasestudiesdemonstratethattheESPapproachcandeliversubstantialenergysavings.TheESPevaluationreportdescribesthesuccessoftheIndustrialRefrigerationTechnologyProjectwheresavingsupto70percentenergyconsumptionforrefrigerationwereidentifiedatvarioussites.Forexampletwolargeprojects(TamburlaineWinesandSwireColdStorage)aresavingatotalofover$123,500peryear.SimilarlytheLightingTechnologyProjecthasalreadyledtotwomajorbusinesses(SydneyMasonicCentre&Diageo)committingover$500,000incapitalinvestmentforlightingprojectswhichwillsaveover$275,000annually.TheM&VcasestudyofthelightingretrofitprojectinSydneyMasonicCentreisintheAppendix2.

Itisclearthattheprogramhasdevelopedamodelthatcanachievesubstantialenergysavingsandcutenergybillsatparticipants’sites.Butatthisstagethereisalowreportedrateofimplementationafteranaudit(10percentatMarch2012,13percentatJune2012),comparedwiththeexpectedrateofbetween40and50percentachievedoncompletionbyotherauditingprograms(ISF2011).Onefactorisgreatersupportforimplementation,whichtheESPaddressedbyaddingupto30hoursfortheauditteamstoassistbusinessesinimplementingtheauditrecommendations.

Moreimportantlythelowrateislargelyanartefactofreportingduetothelagtimeforenergyefficiencyprojectswhichtakebetween6‐24monthsormoretoimplement(forexampleprojectsundertheNSWEnergySavingActionPlanstook3yearsformaximumimplementationofauditopportunities).Aroundhalfofthe250completedESPauditshadonlyfinishedwithin6monthsofthe2012ESPreport.TheESPexpectsthattheimplementationratewillrisedramaticallyoverthecoming12monthsasbusinessesactontheexistingaudits,anditisontracktoreachthe40‐50percentachievedbyotherprograms.Reportingonimplementationisarelatedchallenge.Participantscommittoreportprogresspost‐auditbutitisavoluntaryself‐reportwithnoexternalverificationofcostsorsavings.OEHcreatedaRelationshipOfficerrolewithintheteaminmid‐2011tofillinthisgap,andgatherpost‐auditinformation.The95organisationswhohavesubmittedreports12monthsafterthe‘sign‐off’oftheirauditrevealaverageannualsavingsof$45,800.Thisisexpectedtoriseconsiderablyoverthenext1‐2yearsasthetimeandcapitalisfoundtoimplementadditionalcost‐effectiveenergyefficiencymeasures.

ESPisalsodevelopingmorerobustdataonsavingsusingM&V,withapilotinearly2011at10sites.Inmid‐2012ESPusedtheOEHM&Vguideandanindependentspecialistat10‐20sitestoconfirmimplementation,actualenergyandcostsavings,andcomparerealsavingswithinitialfindingsintheauditreports.TheexpectedfindingsshouldallowESPtomoreaccuratelyextrapolatefindingsacrossparticipatingbusinessesandsub‐sectors.

AsignificantpositiveimpactoftheESPhasbeenpositioningNSWbusinessestoattractfundingforfurtherenergyefficiencyactivities.ForexampleinJune2012fourESPparticipantswongrantsinthefirstroundoftheCommonwealthCleanTechnologyInvestmentProgram(CTIP),receiving86%ofthenationalallocation,andafurther20sitesareapplying.AccordingtoAusIndustryakeyfactorwasthecomprehensiveESPauditthatcoveredtheCTIPcriteriaanddeterminedthebestoptions.Anotherexample


48

islinkingeachsitetoanACPwithintheEnergySavingsSchemetogeneratingEnergySavingCertificates(ESCs)forbusinesseswhichimplementprojects.

3.3.4 Conclusion

TheESPprogramhasbeenoperatingeffectivelydespiteaslowstart‐up;growthandprogramparticipationhasbeensteadyandestimatesindicatethattheprogramisontracktocost‐effectivelymeettargets.Manychangeshavebeenmadetomaketheprogrammorestrategicandtargeted.

Itisclearthattheprogramhasacost‐effectivemodelthatcanachievesubstantialenergysavingsandcutparticipants’energybills.Theextentofsavingsislikelytobeclearerasmorebusinessesimplementauditrecommendationsovertime,andtheprogrammeasuresandreportsonthis.TheincreaseduseofM&VshouldprovidefirmevidenceofenergyandcostsavingsandallowESPtomoreaccuratelyextrapolatefindingsacrossparticipatingbusinessesandsub‐sectors.

OEHComment

ThecomplementarityreviewinformedgovernmentdecisionstoreformtheESPbyintegratingitwiththeEESBPandthenon‐duplicativecomponentsoftheEETP.ThereviewalsoemphasisedgreateruseoftheESSasafinancialincentiveforallbusinessestoimplementenergyefficiencyactions.

TheNSWEnergyEfficiencyActionPlanincorporatesthesedecisionsandevaluationfindings.Someofthesearesimilartothefindingsforsmallbusiness,forexample,theconsistencyofenergysavingsopportunitieswithinbusinesssectorsandtheopportunitytostreamlineaccesstotheEnergySavingsScheme.Streamlinedmethodsalsoprovideanopportunitytoovercomethedelaysinprojectimplementationfollowingstand‐aloneauditswithoutfinancialincentives.

Animportantdifferencetothesmallbusinesssectoristhatagreateruseofmeasurementandverification(M&V)isrequiredtoprovideevidenceofenergysavingsandanongoingbusinesscaseforinvestmentinenergyefficiency.

3.4 EnergyefficiencycomponentofNSWGovernmentSustainabilityPolicy(EEGSP)


TheEEGSPisdifferentfromotherenergyefficiencyprogramsinthatitisnotaprogrambutapolicycoveringarangeofprogramsthatsettargetsforNSWGovernmentagenciesfor:greenhousegasemissionsfrombuildingenergyuse,water,environmentalperformanceofbuildings,cleanergovernmentfleet,waste,recyclingandpurchasing.


49

FiveprogramsrelatingtoenergyconsumptionwereconsideredtobepartoftheoverarchingEnergyEfficiencyStrategy:

TheSchoolsEnergyEfficiencyprogram NABERSratingofofficebuilding Greenleaseschedulesfortenantedbuildings TreasuryLoanFund–SustainableGovernmentInvestmentProgram(TLF‐SGIP) GovernmentBuildingRetrofitProgram(GBRP)

Whileindividualprogramsweredevelopedtoaddressspecificpurposesanddifferinsettings,targetgroup,timeframeandrequirements,theyhadsomecommonfeaturesandweregroupedundertheEEGSPumbrellawithcoordinationandfacilitationthroughOEH.AllfiveprogramsaretargetingNSWGovernmentagenciesthatwererequiredtomeetwholeofgovernmenttargetstoreducegreenhousegasemissions.OEHprovidedexperttechnicaladvicetogovernmentagencies,tohelpthemtakecosteffectiveactionstomeetthetargets.

ThissynthesisoffindingsforEEGSPprogramsismainlybasedonaself‐assessmentreportdraftedinMarch2012byOEH.Whileinformedbystakeholders’feedbackandmonitoringdataavailableforeachprogramthismainlyreflectsaninternalperspectiveonthestrengthsandweaknesses.Therewouldbebenefitinamorecomprehensiveindependentevaluationthatcouldbuildupexistingmonitoringandevaluationinformationexistingatprogramlevel.

3.4.2 Progressofindividualprograms

SchoolsEnergyEfficiencyProgram

TheSchoolsEnergyEfficiencyProgramprovidesfundingtohelpreducegreenhousegasemissionsfromNSWpublicschools(primaryandsecondary).The$20millionprogramisopento225NSWpublicschoolsuntil2012.Theprogramofferslightingretrofitforeachparticipatingschoolandupto$18,000perschoolforstudentstoselectandfundtheirownenergyefficiencyprojectsthroughtheStudentSavingsFund.7ImplementationiscoordinatedbytheDepartmentofEducationandCommunities(DEC)withtheassistanceofOEH.Deliveryisconductedthroughsub‐contractors.

ThedesignisaturnkeyprogramtoaddresstheageinglightinginfrastructureinNSWGovernmentschools,particularlyforlightfittingswithlampsnolongermanufactured.ParticipatingschoolswerechosenbytheDEC,basedontheirneedforalightingupgrade,thoughthosealreadyearmarkedforupgradesthroughforwardcapitalprogramswereexcluded.

7http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/grants/ssep.htm


50

AccordingtoOEHfeedback,theprogramwasdeliveredin‐timeandonbudget.Atotalof126schoolswillhavereceivedlightingretrofitsbyJune2012,whichrepresentshalfoftargetedschools.Deliveryfacedsomedifficulties,especiallyinrelationtotheinstallationofnewlights.Installationhadtooccurduringschoolholidaysandatthebeginningoftheprogramitwasnotpossibletousethefirstsetofholidaysbecauseanumberofapprovalshadtobesoughtbeforehand.Forthefinalyear(2012)theprogrammadesuretoobtainstakeholderapprovalearlierthanfundingapprovalinordertobeabletostartinstallationduringthefirstschoolholidays.Feedbackfromparticipatingschoolssuggeststhatparticipantsaresatisfiedwiththeprogram.OnebarrierwaswhereimplementationoverlappedwiththeCommonwealth’sBuildingtheEducationRevolutionprogramwhichresultedinsomesitesbeingpartiallyretrofittedbyeachprogram.ImprovedcommunicationbetweenCommonwealthandStateprogramdeliverersreducedthisoverlap.

Intermsofoutcomes,estimatedannualsavingsacrossthe126schoolsare$1,330,000offpowerbills(schoolsareonlyinuse200outof365daysayear,whichincreasestheprojectpaybackperiod),6,150megawatts‐hourofelectricityandmorethan6,500tonnesofcarbonpollution.Howevernoevidenceisavailableonactualsavings.

OEHComment

TheSchoolsEnergyEfficiencyProgramisnowcompleted.ResultsfromitwillinformtheDepartmentofEducationandCommunitiesontheviabilityoffutureschoolenergyefficiencyprojectstobefundedundertheSGIPorthroughcapitalexpenditure.

NABERSratingsofofficebuildings

TheEEGSPsetcleartargetsinrelationtoenvironmentalperformanceofbuildingsforgovernmentownedortenantedofficebuildingsover1000m²to

obtainaNABERSratingby31December2008, achieveandmaintainaNABERSratingof4.5starsforenergyandwaterby1July

2011,wherecosteffective,and whereneworrefurbished,achieveandmaintain2011targetsfrom18monthsof

thefirstoccupancy,wherecost‐effective.

OEHidentifiedofficesrequiringNABERSrating(NationalAustralianBuiltEnvironmentRatingSystem)buteachagencywasresponsibleforobtainingtheirNABERSratings.Tomeetthosetargets,agencieswereofferedsupport.TheStatePropertyAuthority(SPA)establishedapaneloftwoNABERSassessorsthroughatender,whichwasaccessibletoallthesites,andOEHprovidedadviceandfacilitation.AccordingtoOEHfeedback,effortsremainedfocusedonhavingallthesitesobtainaNABERSrating.HoweverattheendDecember2011only77percentofthesitehaddonesodespitecontinuousimprovementfrom2007/08(seefiguresacrossfinancialyearsuntilendofJune2011in


51

Table3‐5).OEHstaffidentifiedseveralreasonsthatcouldexplaintheslowuptakeinrequiredsitestoobtainratings.

DelaysintheinitialreleaseoftheEEGSPincludingtheNABERStargetmeantthatthedeadlinewasunrealistic.

AnumberofagenciesinitiallybelievedthatSPAwasgoingtoorganisetheirratings.Clearandearlycommunicationdirectlywiththesitesrequiredtoobtainaratingwouldhavemitigatedthis.

Table3‐5. NABERSratingsobtainedfrom2007/08to2010/11

NABERSratings 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 2010/11

Numberofratings‐cumulative 35 66 75 100

ProportionofeligiblesitesNABERSrated 18% 40% 45% 69%

Source:OEH,NABERSextract,June2012

OEHidentifiedsomekeysuccessfactorsthatcontributedtoimprovetheuptakeaccordingtothesitescharacteristics.

LocalsitecontactshaveproventobethemosteffectiveatfacilitatingNABERSratingsforsmallagencies

CentralcontactswerethekeycontactforlargeagenciessuchasNSWPolice Letterstoexecutivesofagencieswhohadfailedtoobtainratingsresultedinan

increaseinactivity.

WhenconsideringthesecondtargetthatshouldhavebeenachievedbyJuly2011,only37percentofthe100ratedsiteshadmetorexceededthe4.5startargetasofDecember2011.

Thereisverylittleevidenceofoutcomesintermsofreducedenergyconsumption.Theratingmayhaveprovidedmotivationforeachsitetoreducetheirenergyconsumptionbutanecdotalevidencesuggeststhattheratingalonedoesn’tprovideapathwayforimprovement.

GreenLeaseSchedules(GLS)fortenantedbuildings

TheEEGSPincludedanothertargetrelatedtoenvironmentalperformance:allgovernmenttenantedbuildingshadtoincludeaGreenLeaseScheduleinallnewornegotiatedleasesorwhenexercisingaleaseoption,wherepractical.AGreenLeaseScheduleisaformalcommitmenttoenergyefficiencyandsetsaminimumongoingoperationalbuildingenergyperformancestandardmeasuredbytheNABERS.

TheStatePropertyAuthority(SPA)hadresponsibilityundertheEEGSPto‘implement’GreenLeaseSchedulesatthosetenanciesinwhichSPAwastheheadlessee.OthertenantedsiteswereabletoaccesstheGreenLeaseschedule.


52

AtMarch2012,noGreenLeaseScheduleshadbeenattachedtotheleaseofaNSWGovernmenttenant.OEHstaffidentifiedsomekeyreasonsforthis.

AgaindelaysintheinitialreleaseoftheEEGSPincludingNABERStargetsmeantthatthedeadlinewassignificantlycondensed.ThiswasalsoduetothedevelopmentofaNationalGreenLeaseScheduleatthesametime.SPAdelayedthereleaseoftheNSWscheduletoensureitalignedwiththeNationalGreenLeaseSchedule,whichintheendhadlowerrequirementsthantheNSWschedule.

TheGreenLeasesufferedfromthecompetinggoalofreducingrentsforcontractmanagers:becausebuildingownersperceivedGLSasasourceofadditionalcoststheydroppeditearlyinleasenegotiations.

Inlate2011,SPAsentalettertoOEHsayingthatbycreatingtheGreenLeaseScheduleithadfulfilleditscommitmentto‘implement’,althoughnoGreenLeaseScheduleshadbeenattachedtoNSWGovernmentleases.

AccordingtoOEHstaffanimportantareaforimprovementforthisprogramisthecommunicationandcollaborationwiththeSPAthatcouldhavebeenbettertoensureanappropriateprogramdesignandeffectiveimplementation.

TreasuryLoanFund–SustainableGovernmentInvestmentProgram(TLF‐SGIP)

TheTreasuryLoanFundhasbeendesignedtohelpagenciestomeettheup‐frontcostsofimplementingenergyefficiencymeasures.Itprovidesgovernmentagenciesaccesstofundingtoimplementcosteffectiveenergyandwaterefficiencyupgradeswithborrowingsfromthefundrepaidwiththesavingsgenerated.Eligibleagenciesarebudgetdependentagencieswithbuildingupgradeprojectstotalling$10,000‐$500,000($1,000,000forNSWHealth).

OEHprovidessupporttoagenciesintheformoftechnicalassistancetoidentifycosteffectiveactions,auditsandbusinesscasedevelopment.OEHorganisesworkshopsandone‐on‐oneassistancetoagencies.Acontractorwasalsoengagedin2009tomaketheapplicationformeasiertofollow.TLF‐SGIPapplicationsroseslightlyfrom2010‐11asshownintheFigure3‐1below.


53

Figure3‐1. TreasuryLoanFunduptake

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1998‐99 1999‐00 2000‐01 2001‐02 2002‐03 2003‐04 2004‐05 2005‐06 2006‐07 2007‐08 2008‐09 2009‐10 2010‐11 2011‐12(so far)

2012‐13

$ m

illions

Funds drawn from the Treasury Loan Fund for retrofits (as at 1 May 2012)

Actual $(Million)

Projected

Source:OEH,TLFexpenditure,May2012

Feedbackfromagenciesidentifiedtwomainbarrierstoloantakeup:thelackoftechnicalknowledge(engineeringandfinancial)andtimeorstafftopreparethecomplexapplicationform,butespeciallythelackofresourcestoidentifyappropriateopportunitiestobefunded.ToaddressthisOEHdevelopedtheGovernmentBuildingRetrofitProgramfromJuly2010tosupportthisfirststepforagencies.UptakeoftheTLF‐SGIPbyNSWGovernmentagenciesforbuildingretrofitswentfromlessthan$84,000overJuly2007‐June2010toover$2.5millionin2011/12asaresultoftheGBRP.AccordingtofinancialdatafromprojectsthatwereatanadvancedstageofplanninginMay2012itisexpectedthatagencieswilldraw$23.9millionfromthefundin2012/13(Figure3‐1).

OEHstaffidentifiedanotherkeyrequirementtoimprovetheuptakeoftheTreasuryLoanFund:theagencyfinanceapprovalchainhastobeactivatedasearlyaspossibletoensurethatprojectsidentifiedinafinancialyearcanprogressinthatsameyear.

GovernmentBuildingRetrofitProgram(GBRP)

In2010,theMinisterfortheEnvironmentapprovedthe2yearGovernmentBuildingRetrofitProgram(GBRP).Theprogramhastwostreams,onethatcoversauditcostsforlargesitesontheprovisiontheagencyagreestoapplytoTLFfunding;andtheotherthatcoverbothauditandimplementationcostsforsmallfrontlineservicedeliverysites(thathasbeenpilotedintheLowerHunter,IllawarraandCircularQuayprecinctuntiltheendofJune2012).Underthelargesitesstream,OEHcoordinatesandfundsanaudittoidentifycost‐effectiveprojects.TheresultingauditreportprovidestheagencywiththespecificationsandbusinesscaserequiredintheTLF‐SGIPapplicationform.


54

Facingtheriskthatparticipatingagenciesmaynotprogresstoimplementation,OEHlearnedfromtheexperienceoftheWaterandEnergySavingActionPlan(WESAP)thatwascompulsoryforlargeenergyandwaterconsumersinNSWfrom2007.FifteenNSWagencieswererequiredtodevelopaWESAP;theyidentified77cost‐effectiveactionsbutonly8wereimplemented.Themainreasonwasthattherewasnorequirementtoimplementthoseactionsandannualreportingrequirementscouldstillbemetbyreportingnoactivity.ToavoidsuchresultsOEHchangedtheinitialprogramdesigntorequiretheagencytocommittoapplyforaTLF–SGIPloantoreceivetheaudit.Theprogramalsoinitiallyunderestimatedthetimerequiredforagencyapprovalswhichresultedinsomedelaysincommencingworksandimplementation.Thisprocessisnowlaunchedasearlyaspossible.

AsattheendofMarch2012,112smallsiteshadbeenaudited,butsevenauditsdidnotprogresstoapprovedretrofits;implementationhadcommencedorbeencompletedin7;20applicationsforlargesiteswerealsointheapplicationprocessfortheTreasuryLoanFundatthattime.Feedbackfromagencyrepresentativesisverypositive:theyappreciatedtheexpertiseandfundingprovidedtoundertakebuildingretrofitsandultimatelysavetheorganisationmoney.

Keysuccessfactorsofthisprogramhavebeentoprovideagencieswithaturnkeyprograminordertocompensatetheirlackoftechnicalknowledge,timeandbudgetforauditsaswellastofocusonlyonasmallnumberofactionsofferingopportunitiesforgreatersavings.Identifyingthekeysitecontacthasalsogreatlycontributedtosuccessfulimplementationastheyhavethesiteknowledgesuchasmaintenanceandcontractrequirements.

TheGovernmentRetrofitProgramistheonlyEEGSPprogramthathasresultsavailableonactualsavingsachievedbyparticipantsandverifiedthroughsbeforeandaftermeasurement.MeasurementandVerification(M&V)hasbeenappliedtotwoprojects,chillerretrofitinWestmeadHospitalandlightingretrofitinSydneyOperaHouse.SavingsfortheWestmeadHospitalrepresented12.4percentreductioninchilledwaterplantenergyuseanda3.6percentreductionoftotalsiteelectricityuse.TotalelectricitysavingsfortheSydneyOperaHousewasestimatedintherangeof3to5percentoverallbyaddingupsavingsachievedfromsixspecificareas.TheCentralPassageisoneoftheseareasandithassaved32percentinelectricityconsumptionasconfirmedintheM&Vtrial. WhiletheexamplesarenotrepresentativeofallGBRPprojects,theyprovideanindicationofsavingsparticipatingagenciescanachieve.

ByJune2012thesmallsitescomponentoftheGovernmentBuildingRetrofitProgramhadgeneratedestimatedsavingsof4,011MWhofelectricityand1,561Gjofgasleadingtoasavingsinparticipants’energybillsofover$.657million.Theenergysavingshavealsoresultedin4,354tonnesofavoidedCO2emissions(Table3.6).


55

Table3‐6. GovernmentBuildingRetrofitProgram–smallsitescomponent‐estimatedsavingsforoneyearfromactivitiesimplementedtoJune2012

Reach Electricitysaved(MWh)pa

Gassaved(Gj)pa

CO2tonnessaved


Participants$savingsgasbillspa

Participants$totalsavingspa

105sites,567projects

4,011 1,561 4,354 $637,749 $19,669 $657,418

Source:StrategyandAnalysis,OEH,fromprogramdataprovided22June2012

Notes:Thesavingswerecalculatedforthe105governmentownedsitesreceivedasiteassessmentanddetailedspecificationsforworksandpotentialenergysavings.Siteassessmentsidentified567energysavingmeasures.Implementationisunderway/expectedforallidentifiedmeasures.Thebillsavingsusethetariffsdevelopedforthe2010‐11ClimateChangeFundannualreport(naturalgas,government‐$12.60/GJ;electricity,government‐$159/MWh).

3.4.3 Overalllearnings

Fromtheperspectiveofcoordinatorandfacilitator,OEHstaffidentifiedoveralllessonsfromtheimplementationoftheGovernmentSustainabilityPolicyasanensembleofenergyefficiencyprogramstargetinggovernmentagencies.

Thedesignofthefiveprogramsunderthisumbrellaprovedtobenotequallyappropriatetoreachthegovernmentagenciesandeffectivelyengagethemintheprogramrationale.Settingtargetswasnotsufficient.‘Outclauses’includedinthepolicy,suchas“wherepractical”or“whererelevant”meanstargetwerenotmandatory.Basedonfeedbackfromagencies,OEHstaffidentifiedthathavingaclearpolicymandate,agency‐specifictargetsandaccountabilityrequirementspossiblywithpublicreportingwouldsupportthesuccessfulimplementationofprograms.

Effectivenessofimplementationoftheprogramsvariedsignificantly:somehadsomegoodresultsliketheGovernmentRetrofitBuildingProgramwhilesomeothersdidnotproduceanyimpactliketheGreenLeaseprogram.Allprogramshadcommonbarrierstoengageeffectivelywithagencies:thelackoftechnicalknowledge,timeandfinancialresourcesforauditstoapplyforthesupportoffered.Somestrategiesprovedtobemoresuccessful.

Targetandengagewiththerightcontactsoneachsiteandwithinthefinancialchainhasbeenakeyrequirementforprogram’suptake.

Getearlyapprovalfromdecisionmakersateachlevelisessentialforsmoothdelivery.Theapprovalprocessescantakealongtimeandshouldbeanticipatedintheprogramdeliverytimeframe.

EEGSPmanagementidentifiedanotherkeyareaforimprovement:EEGSPprogramswouldbenefitfrombettercoordinationandalignmentwithotherNSWenergyefficiencyprograms,forexampletheGreenSkillsTrainingProgram,tobuildcapacityofagencies


56

staffortheEnergySavingsSchemetominimisetheprogram’supfrontcostsforparticipatingagencies.

OEHComment

ThecomplementarityreviewinformedgovernmentdecisionstoretaintheEEGSP.TheGBRPandSchoolEnergyEfficiencyProgramwereceasedasplannedin2012.

TheNSWEnergyEfficiencyActionPlanincorporatesthesedecisionsandevaluationfindings.

Thefindingshighlightedbarriersthatmayslowuptakeofgovernmentenergyefficiencyprojects.Forinstance,whiletheTreasuryLoanFundcanprovidefinanceforgovernmentenergyefficiencyprojects,itonlyappliestoasmallnumberofagencies,hasrulesthatforceagenciestorepayloansbeforeprojectsareimplemented,andhascomplexadministrativeprocedures.

Thefindingsindicatedthatuptakeofenergyefficiencywithingovernmentcouldbeimprovedthroughearlycommunicationbetweengovernmentagenciestoensureinternalapprovalsareobtainedandthatthereisexecutivebuy‐inforprojects.Existingprogramsthathavenomandatedtargetsorpenaltiesalsosufferfromsignificantnon‐compliance,indicatingthatagenciesneedacleardriverforprojectimplementation.

AswiththeEnergySaverProgram,thefindingsindicatedthatthereisaneedforstrongmeasurementandverificationofenergyefficiencyprojectsinthegovernmentsectortoestablishevidenceoffinancialbenefitforongoingparticipation.

3.5 EnergyEfficiencyTrainingProgram(EETP)


TheEETPisjointlymanagedandimplementedbyOEHandtheNSWDepartmentofEducationandCommunities(DEC).TheEETPhasabudgetof$20millionacrossfiveyearsandcommencedinJuly2009.Theprogramaimsatbuildingtheknowledgeandskillsofkeytradespeopleandprofessionalswhofacilitateanddeliverenergyefficiencypractices,productsandservicesinNSW.LiketheCommunityAwarenessprogram,EETPisalsointendedtosupportthedeliveryofotherNSWenergyefficiencyprogramsinensuringthattheappropriateskilledworkforcewillbeavailabletodeliverthoseprogramsintothefuture.

Theprogramwasdesignedtoaddressskillsshortagesthatcouldcontributetobottlenecksinthemarketforenergyefficiencyservicesandcreateupwardcostpressuresandsupplydelays,obstructingtheuptakeofenergyefficiencymeasuresinNSW.EETPwasintendedtotacklefurtherkeyissues.


57

Thecurrenttrainingofferforenergyefficiencyisfragmented,andsupplyanddemandaremismatched.

Energyefficiencytrainingcontentisoftennotindustry‐relevantorreachingqualitystandards.

Industryawarenessofandsupportfornewmarketopportunitiesassociatedwithenergyefficiencyarelimited.

ToaddresssuchissuesEETPtargetedprioritysectors,rolesandprofessionsasidentifiedbynationalresearch(NationalCentreforSustainability,2009,MatchingEnergyEfficiencyPolicyandTrainingandJobs).Theseindustrysectors,rolesandprofessionshavebeenconfirmedaskeytoimprovingenergyefficiency(TheAllenConsultingGroup,2012ReviewofEnergyEfficiencySkillsDemandsandTrainingProvisionacrosstheTradesandProfessions.Asaresultofthenationalresearchandconsultation,theEnergyEfficiencyTrainingProgramisstructuredaroundfivecomponents:

– VocationalEducationandTraining(VET)– ProfessionalDevelopmentforVETeducatorsandtrainers– IndustryPartnershipProjects– HigherEducationprojects– ResearchandEvaluation.

TheprogramcontractedUrbistoconductacomprehensiveindependentevaluationoverthreeyears.Yearoneevaluationreport(July2011)focusedonthedevelopmentoftheevaluationframeworkandtheassessmentofEETPpartnershiparrangements.Yeartwoevaluationreport(draftversioninJune2012)presentsfindingsandrecommendationsabouttheprogramdeliveryandoutcomestodate.Themainmethodsusedwerestrategicworkshopswithprogramstaff,interviewswithexternalstakeholders,documentaryreviewandanalysisofdataprovidedbyOEHandDEC.


ThefirstninemonthsoftheprograminvolveddevelopingthepartnershiparrangementbetweenOEHandDECasasoundplatformforsharedprogramdelivery.InthisinitialstageEETPexperiencedchallenges,especiallyinrelationtodifferencesbetweenthetwomanagingagenciesinprogramfocusandoperatingphilosophy.Asanexample,DEC’scentralmandateistosupportaccreditedtrainingthatleadstorecognisedqualifications,whilstOEHhassoughttotargetdirecttrainingtomeetbusinessrequirements.ExtensivediscussionsandnegotiationsresultedinasharedunderstandingandagreedprioritiesfortheProgram.

Internalstakeholdersnowagreethatthepartnershiparrangementhascontributedkeystrengthsoftheprogram:combinedcapability,expertiseandnetworks,formalstructuretofocusopportunities,resourcesharingandcapacitybuilding,strengthenedrelationshipsandunderstandingacrossagencies,aswellaseconomicandstrategic


58

benefitssuchasgoodwillandcooperationingovernment,oraccesstofundingandresourcesthatwouldnothavebeenavailableotherwise.

ByApril2012stakeholdersreportedthattheprogramhadincreasedthecapacityoftheeducationsectortoprovideenergyefficiencytrainingtoprioritysectors,tradesandprofessions.Fundingsupporthasfacilitatedthedevelopmentofasuiteoftrainingcoursesandmaterials,andtheProfessionalDevelopmentcomponenthastargetedskillsdevelopmentfortheeducationworkforcetodeliverthetraining.Theprogramassistedinthedevelopmentofanumberofpilotcoursesandtrainingresourcesthathavebeensuccessfullytakenupbyindustryassociations,individualcompanies/employersandthevocationaltrainingsectorforongoingdeliveryand/orintegrationintoexistingtrainingcourses.Throughwell‐designeddisseminationandknowledge‐sharingstrategies,includingplacingontheOEHwebsite,EETPresourceshavebecomeavailableacrossindustrygroups,individualcompanies/employers,RegisteredTrainingOrganisations(RTO)andpractitionersnotdirectlyinvolvedinpilottraining.

EETPmanagementnotedthelargeeffortneededtoensurehighlevelsofquality,butlimitedcontrolonimplementation.Thebiggestimpactonthequalityofcourseswasthelevelofinvolvementandexpertisebyindustryandtrainersandenergyefficiencycontentspecialistandindustry/businessconsultation.Thisvariedstronglyfromlowtoveryhighcommitment,expertiseandresources.

BetweenJuly2009andApril2012,atotalof5,290participantshadundertakenenergyefficiencytraining,networkingorprofessionaldevelopment,including:

2,695committedplacesintheVETsystem 179participantsinthePD4VETworkshops 629participantsinotherVETPDtrainingornetworkingevents 1,233participantsin30IndustryPartnershipsprojects 544participantsinHigherEducationcourses

ThefollowingtablegivesanoverviewofthereportedlevelofinterestanddemandforthetrainingsandcoursesassummarisedintheEETPyear2evaluation.

Table3‐7. Reporteddemandanduptakecomparedtoexpectations

Component Reporteddemandanduptake

VET Demandappearstohavegrownstronglyinanumberofcourses,suchascarbonaccounting(105coursesfromJuly2009toApril2012)andcarbonmanagement(499courses).

Instabilityinregulatorydriversandgovernmentprogramshasreducedtheongoinglevelofdemandinothercourses(suchassolarPV).

Spendandenrolmentdatashowsstronggrowthoverthelasttwoyears,withDECmanagingtoexhaustthefullbudgetfortrainingsubsidies.


59

Component Reporteddemandanduptake

VETPD DemandforsubsidedplacesintheVocationalGraduateCertificateatSwinburnehasoutnumberedtheavailableplaces.

UptakeanduseofthePD4VETresourcesbypractitionersandRTOsmaynothavebeenasstrongasanticipated.

IndustryPartnerships

Thelevelofindustryandemployeeinterestinthetrainingprojectshasvaried. Anumberofprojectsreportedhighlevelsofindustryengagementand

participation. Othersindicatedthatfillingthecoursehadprovedchallenging,includingcases

wherethosewhoinitiallysignedupbutwereunabletoattendduetoworkcommitments.

HigherEducation

AnumberoftheengineeringPDcourseshavebeendelayedduetoinsufficientenrolments.

Demandhasbeenhighestamongundergraduateandpostgraduatestudents(evenforcoursesdesignedprimarilyforworkingengineers)

Thefirstsetofaccountingcoursespilotedhavehadreasonablystronguptake,withflexibledeliverymodes(interactiveseminars)reportedtobemorepopularthanthelongercourse.

Source:Urbis,EvaluationoftheEnergyEfficiencyTrainingProgram–Year2Annualreport,Draftreport,June2012

Theevaluationidentifiedthetimerequiredtobeawayfromworkasthemainbarrierforuptakeandparticipation.Instabilityintheregulatoryenvironmentandothergovernmentprogramshasalsoreducedthedemandinsomesectors.Programstaffandprojectpartnersdevelopedstrategiestoaddressthosechallenges,especiallyindevelopingflexiblemodesoftraininglikeonlinemodulesorthroughcloseengagementwiththeindustrytoalignthecoursestotheexistingindustrycultureandtrainingmechanisms,e.g.accreditedtrainingorContinuingProfessionalDevelopment(CPD)requirements.

Theprogramstartedwithabroadapproachandatthisinterimstageislookingtohavemorecontroloverthedeliverymechanismsandmorestrategicfocuswiththestakeholdersthathavebeeninvolvedintheprogram.

3.5.3 Outcomes

TheevaluationfoundthattheIndustryPartnershipandUniversityProjectshavecontributedtowardsastructuralchangewithinindustryandtheeducationsectorwithrespecttoawarenessandunderstandingoftheopportunitiespresentedbyenergyefficiency.FeedbackfromparticipantsontherelevanceandqualityoftrainingdeliveredwaslargelypositiveforIndustryPartnershipprojectsandmixedforVETcourses.

Themajorityofparticipantsforbothtypesofprojectsintendtoapplytheirlearninginpractice.AcommonlynotedcoretrainingoutcomeacrossallEETPcomponentsisparticipants’increasedconfidencetoengagewithenergyefficiencyandcapacitytoworkwithenergyefficiencytechnicalexpertstoensureadviceisappliedappropriatelytotheirbusiness.


60

SomebarrierstotheapplicationoflearningacrossVETandIndustryPartnershipshavebeenidentified:lackofmanagementsupportintheformofcommitmentfromseniorlevelsoftheorganisationandprioritisationofenergyefficiencyinitiatives;timeandresourcinglimitations;challengestodemonstratethebusinesscaseforchange;andashort‐horizonforbusinessdecision‐making.Possiblemechanismstoaddresssuchbarriershavebeenidentifiedsuchasensuringsufficientcustomisationtothebusinesscontext,includingworkplaceprojectsinthetraining,involvingdirectlythemanagementinthetraining,continuingasystemsapproachtotraining(targetingbothtechnicalskillanddecision‐makingrequirements),andprovidingend‐to‐endtrainingandimplementationsupport.

TheevaluationdidnotreportontheextentthatEETPhasatthisstagebeenabletosupportadevelopmentofaskilledworkforceinvolvedthedeliveryofotherNSWenergyefficiencyprogramsasittakesyearstoincreaseskillsandseetheresultsintheworkforce.

Atthisstage,whilemanyofthenewtrainingcourseswereonlydeliveredinthepast18months,thereissomeevidencethatanumberoftrainingparticipantshavedemonstratedchangedorganisationalpractices,operationsand/ortechnologiesandsomewereabletoestimateormeasureresultingenergysavings.ForexampleoneIndustryPartnershipsprojectproponentsaid‘We’reintheprocessofmeasuringsavings–nominallyexpectthesetobearound$1,200amonthbutmightactuallyrealisealotmorethanthis.We’rethenhopingwecanexpandthistootherplantsaroundNSW.’

Otherexamplesofsavingshavebeendocumentedincasestudies,forexampletheGPTtrainingandthatconductedforCommercialKitchens(ontheOEHwebsite).Outcomesfrommorerecentprojectshavehighlightedtheenergyefficiencyinitiativesundertakenandtheresultingenergyreductionse.g.UniversityofWollongongreportedsavingalmost$200,000perannumfromanITshutdownprocedure;CompassHousingeducationfortenantsandstaffledtolightingupgradesandtenantsinstallingshadesandfans;andtheCasinoClubreportedpowerusagedownbyalmost20%asaresultofmonitoringappliances.Theseorganisationsreportedthatthetrainingwascrucialtotheseequipmentandbehaviourchanges.

3.5.4 Conclusion

Theprogram’spartnershipanditsstrategicapproachtostakeholderengagementhaveputenergyefficiencyontheskillsdevelopmentagendaoftheindustry.Basedonastrongframeworkforcollaborationbetweengovernment,industryandtheeducationsector,EETPhascontributedtostrengthenthequalityandrelevanceofenergyefficiencytrainingforprioritysectors.Participantsreportedthattrainingwasuseful,relevanttotheirroleandcontributedtogrowingconfidenceandengagementwithenergyefficiency.Thereisemergingevidenceofenergysavingsfromthetrainingprojects.Thelongertermsavingsfromchangedpracticesresultingfromthetrainingwillonlybecomediscernibleinfutureyears.


61

OEHComment

ThecomplementarityreviewinformedthegovernmentdecisiontoceasethevocationaltrainingelementsoftheEETPasitduplicatedfundingfromtheCommonwealthforenergyefficiencyvocationaltrainingaspartoftheCleanEnergyFuturepackage.

Thenon‐duplicativecomponentsoftheEETPhavebeenmergedintotheESP.

3.6 EnergyEfficiencyCommunityAwarenessProgram(EECAP)


TheEECAPisacommunicationandeducationprogramtargetingthebroadcommunitytoimprovecommunityknowledge,understandingandmotivationtoactinrelationtoenergyefficiency.InitialresearchindicatedthatNSWconsumerslackedinformationonhowtheirchoicesoftechnologiesandbehavioursrelatetotheirelectricityuse.TheprogramwasdesignedtoaddressthisandtosupportthebroaderobjectivesoftheEnergyEfficiencyStrategyusingacomprehensive,multi‐strategyandongoingapproachthatreflectsbestpracticeinsocialmarketing.ThedesigndrewupontheexperienceofpreviousNSWGovernmentbehaviourchangeprograms,suchasroadsafety,healthandwaste.Itaimedtoreacharangeofdifferentaudiencesincludinghouseholds,culturallyandlinguisticallydiversecommunities,smallbusinesses,andyoungpeople,andundertookformativeresearchtounderstandtheirneedsandwantsandhowbesttopitchthebehaviourchangemessage.Thecampaigndesignalsohadtoaccountforanumberofissues:startingfromvirtuallyazerobase(therehadbeennopriormasseducationrelatingtoenergyefficiency);energyusewascomplexandseasonal(requiringtwophasesperyear);sustainedandregularengagementwasneededtobegintoestablishanewsocialnorm.

This$15millionprogramhadthreemaincomponentswithmultipleprojects:

Massmediacommunication(80percentofthebudget)usingtheSavePowermass‐mediaadvertisingcampaign(blackballoons)throughavarietyofcommunicationchannels(bothaboveandbelowtheline)andpublicrelations,sponsorship,onlinemediaandpublicengagementactivities.Thewebsitewasdesignedtobeanongoinginformationhubforenergyefficiencytips,apledgetool,e‐news,SMStipssubscriptionandaportaltootherenergyefficiencyinitiativessuchastheEESBP,EETPandEnergySaverandHPSP.

Educationandtraining(15percent)coveredthreekeyinitiatives:

– TheNSWEnergymarkproject,apartnershipwithCSIROthatgatheredsmallgroupsofhouseholderseachweekinpeople’shomestolearnabouttheenvironmentalimpactsofenergyusage,andhowtobemoreenergyefficientintheirlives.


62

– TheSavePowerlibrarykitswhichenabledborrowerstoself‐assesstheirhouseholdenergyuse,costsandgreenhousegasproduction.

– TheRetailerEngagementProject(REP),apartnershipwithmajorapplianceretailersthatincludedtrainingoftheirsalesstaffandprovisionofpointofsaleinformationtoassistcustomerstoincludeconsiderationofenergyefficiencyintheirpurchasingdecisionmakingprocesses

Researchandevaluation(5percent).Thiscomponentwascriticaltoinformtheinitialprogramdesign.Italsocontributedtorefinetheprogramdeliveryalongtheway,inparticularthemassmediacampaignthroughtrackingresearch.

UndertheresearchandevaluationcomponentOEHcontractedInstinctandReasontoconductcomprehensivemonitoringandtrackingresearchforthemassmediacampaign.In2011OEHcommissionedDatabuildtoundertakeacomprehensiveevaluationofalltheprogramcomponentswiththebroadaimofascertainingtheimpactofEECAPontheknowledge,attitudesandbehavioursoftheNSWcommunity,drawinguponthetrackingresearch.TheDatabuildreportisnotcompleteatthetimeofwriting,however,preliminaryfindingshavebeenobtainedandarepresentedbelow.ThemethodsbeingusedbyDatabuildinthereportincludeatelephonesurveyof200NSWresidentsidentifiedthroughthetrackingresearchandanonlinefollow‐upsurvey.OEHalsohadthefinalreportbytheCSIROonNSWEnergymarkaswellasinternalevaluationreportsfortheSavePowerKitsprojectandtheRetailEngagementProject.

ThepreliminaryresultsindicatethattherationaleforEECAPandtheholisticprogramlogicwasclear,logicalandalignedwithgoodpracticesdrawinguponpreviousexperienceandextensiveresearch.The$15millionbudgetoverthreeyearswasconsideredcomparablewithbudgetsforsimilarprograms(e.g.$5‐6millionannuallyfortheVictorianGovernment’s‘blackballoons’energyefficiencycampaign),althoughresourceswereoneofthekeychallengesinthedeliveryoftheprogram.WhilethereweresomeissuesinmanagingpartnersandtheCSIROworkfortheEnergymarkproject,EECAPengagedeffectivelywithaverybroadrangeofstakeholders.EECAPprogrammanagersmentionedtwodifficultieswithimplementation,firstlythedifferenttimeframesofthecomponentsandsecondlythedualprogramstructurewithtwomanagers,oneforprogramsupportandoneforcommunityeducation.

3.6.2 Reachanddelivery

Themass‐mediacampaignachievedahighlevelofreach.Ittargetedanoverallpopulationof5.8millionpersons(approximateNSWadultpopulation),andoverthefivecampaignsthetrackingresearchestimatedover15millionadultviewingsoftheadvertisingontelevisionatleastonce(dependingonthephase,between35and53percentofthosewhosawitsaytheysawtheadvertisingsixormoretimes).Atthefinalmeasure(postsummer,2010/11),3.7millionadultsor63percentoftheNSWpopulationhadseentheSavePoweradontelevision,andofthese,44percentsawitsixormoretimes.


63

TheSavePowerwebsitealsoachievedasubstantiallevelofexposure.Inthreeyearsithadover246,750uniquevisitors(72%fromNSW);over1millionpagesviewed(1,040,267)andover3,500SavePowerwebsitemembers;650SMSsubscribersforseasonaltips;andover3,800subscriberstoinformationupdates.Over9,000actionswerepromisedfrom819individuals,withpotentialtosave$966,600offpowerbillsand4,935tonnesofcarbon.EECAPreportthatitwasrankedinthetop10ofenvironmentalwebsitesinJanuary2011.

Inadditiontothemainstreamadvertising,thecampaignachievedarangeofmediaexposureandengagement,throughfeaturesinconsumerlifestyleandhomepublicationsandradio;theSavePowerChallengepartnershipwithNewsLimited;directengagementwithconsumersthroughe‐news,SMSandothermedia;distributionofpromotionaltools;grantsto36councilstopromotetheHPSPandawarenessofSavePower;andgrantstoninecouncilstopromotethemessagewithafocusonAboriginalandCALDcommunities.

AnillustrationofoutreachunderSavePoweristheworkthroughtheSustainableLivingProgram,apartnershipwiththeEthnicCommunitiesCouncil.15bi‐lingualeducatorsreceivedtrainingonthekit,and13receivedthe1½daystrainingprogram,resultingin57energyworkshopsdeliveredto1044participants.Anewresource(flipchart)isbeingfinalisedwithSavePowerinformationandmessagingdesignedforeducators,councilstaff,andmigrantcentrestaff.Anewprogramin2012willrecruit20EnergyChampionsand50LeadersfromacrossCALDcommunitiestoencourageparticipationandactiontoreduceenergy.

TheEnergymarkprojectwasaNSWtrialofanationalprogramdevelopedandmanagedbytheCSIRO.SinceactivecommencementinNovember2010,112convenorscompletedgroups(withanother19convenorsandgroupsstillinprogress).Withanaverageoffivepeopleineachgroup,517participantshadcompletedagroupbyApril2012.TheNSWEnergymarkFinalReport(CSIRO,June1012)notedthattheprogramdisproportionatelyattractedmiddle‐aged,university‐educated,professionalwomen,andmostparticipantsalreadyheldpositiveattitudestowardstheenvironment,typicalofAustraliansingeneral.Evenwiththismorealignedandreceptivegroup,theprogramwasabletoachieveenergysavings.

ThereachofotherEECAPprojectswerealsoveryencouraging.SavePowerlibrarykits(841)wereplacedwith62CentralLibraryServicesinNSW(withupto260branchlibraries).Over6,400householdsborrowedakitinthetwelvemonthsbetweenMarch2011andMarch2012,and2,200peopleattendedalocallibraryworkshoponhowtouseit.Theborrowersweresatisfiedwiththekits(96percentoftherespondentstotheonlineborrowersurvey)andtherewasevidenceofpositiveimpactontheirknowledgeandbehaviour(e.g.75percentoftherespondentssaidthatsinceborrowingthekittheywillnowpurchaseanelectricalappliancethatuseslesspower,comparedwithonly31%beforeusingthekit).


64

TheRetailerEngagementProjecthassuccessfullyengagedmajorelectricalapplianceretailers(HarveyNorman,TheGoodGuys,DavidJones,Myer).Ithasbeeninthefieldfor18monthsandprovidedtrainingtostaffin142storesthrough1,282storevisits,resultingin78percentofstorestafftrainedand92percentsatisfactionfromstoremanagers.

3.6.3 Outcomes

PeoplereachedbythemassmediaandeducationalcomponentsofEECAPhavereportedraisedawareness,positiveresponsesandinmanycasesincreasesintheirenergysavingbehaviours.

Trackingresearchdemonstratedthatapprovalofthecampaignremainedhighovertime,fromwinter2009tosummer2010:morethan80percentofpeopleapprovedorstronglyapprovedtheNSWGovernmentadvertisingwithmessagesaboutsavingpower.Thecampaignappearstohavesomesuccessinraisingawarenessofissuesinvolvingenvironmentalconcernsaboutenergyuseandmotivatingbehaviourchange.

Thosewhohaveseenthecampaignaremorelikelytohavechangedbehaviourtosaveelectricitycomparedtothosewhohavenotseenthecampaign(46percentversus36percent).TrackingresearchfoundsignificantincreasesinmanyofthebehavioursportrayedintheSavePowercampaigncomparedwiththe2009benchmarks(suchasinstallingthickcurtains,blindsorshutterstoreduceheat;checkingthefridgeisworkingefficiently).Atthefinalmeasure(Postsummer,2010/11),almosttwo‐thirdsofNSWadults(63percent)hadseenthetelevisionadvertisement,with77percentfindingit“very”or“fairly”convincing,andathirdfeelingmotivatedtotheenergysavingactionsinthemessages.

Atthesametimeissuesaroundenergyefficiencyandparticularlyrisingelectricitycostswerefeaturingwidelyinthemedia.Toexaminetheextentbehaviourchangesrelatedtothecampaign,theDatabuildtelephonesurvey(N=200)examinedtheattributionofthechangedbehaviour,andfoundthatthecampaignhadaninfluenceuponhalfofthosewhohavetakenactionsincethecampaignandrecallit.RespondentstendedtociteSavePowerinitiativesasbeingastronginfluenceonbehaviourrelatedtoelectricalappliancesandairconditioning,lesssowashingclothes(mostrespondentswhocarriedoutthesebehaviourssaidtheyhadalwaysdoneso).

Thetrackingresearchalsosuggeststhatthebehaviourchangesaresustainedovertimeandthatthecampaignisbuildingsocialnormsaroundenergyefficiency.Notonlydopeopleperceivetheirownmindfulnessaboutelectricityuseincreasingbuttheynoteothersaroundthemarealsobecomingmoremindfulovertime.Almostsixinten(58%)claimtheywere‘very’or‘extremely’mindfulabouttheirelectricityuse(inpost‐summer2010/11measure).

WhilethefocusofEECAPwaswiderawarenessraisingandcapacitytoleadtochangingbehavioursandlongertermenergysavings,anumberofcomponentsindicateddirect


65

impactsonenergysavings.InparticulartheEnergymarkprogramappearedtoinducepositivechangesinindividualbehaviour,andreportedreductionsincarbonfootprint,andelectricityconsumptioncomparedtopre‐projectlevels.PreliminarybillinganalysisbyCSIROindicatesanaveragereductioninelectricityuseof12.3percent.OEHisintheprocesstoobtainmorecomprehensivedatatosubstantiatetheestimates.CSIROestimatesabroaderreductionincarbonemissionsof6.4%onaverageforelectricityandnaturalgasuse(combined),petrolanddieselconsumption(combined),extentofairtravel,useofwoodfires,householdexpenditureonconsumergoodsandservices,andfoodconsumption.InterestinglythereportnotesthatamongparticipantsexposedtotheEnergymarkexperience,eventhosewhocameoutoftheprocesswithoutenhancedunderstandingandsupportofsustainability,generallyreducedtheiremissionsandelectricityconsumptionasmuchasthosewhose‘green’preferencesandknowledgehadbeengreatlyaugmented.ThisfindinghasbeenreplicatedinanumberofdifferentEnergymarktrials.

TheSavePowercampaignmayalsohaveimpactedontheparticipantsintheotherenergyefficiencyprograms.Theremaybescopetoexplorethiscollectingfeedbackfromparticipants;andthroughanalysingthepatternofhitsonpagesrelatedtospecificprogramsonthewebsite.

3.6.4 Conclusion

TheEECAPsuccessfullyimplementedacomprehensive,multi‐strategyandongoingsocialmarketingcampaignoverthreeyears.InitsfinalphasetheSavePowertelevisionadvertisingreachedalmosttwo‐thirdsofNSWadults(63percent),withmost(77percent)findingitconvincingandathirdfeelingmotivatedtotheactionsinthemessages.ApprovaloftheadvertisingcampaignhasbeenpositiveamongtheNSWpopulationandresearchsuggeststhatitcontributedtoimproveknowledgeofenergyefficiencyissuesaswellassomeinfluenceinchangingenergyusebehaviours.Thepowerofthemassmediacampaigncomesfromthewidereachwhichoffersgreatpotentialforenergysavingsfrombehaviourchangesatthisscale.

TheEECAPeffectivelytrialledarangeofotherapproachestoreachdifferentaudiences.Theexperienceofdelivery,thetrackingresearchandtheevaluationsareprovidingOEHwithasubstantialevidencebasetoinformfuturesocialmarketinginthisarea.

OEHComment

TheEECAPwasceasedinJune2012asplanned.


66

3.7 DataandEvaluationProgram(DEP)


In2009OEHestablishedtheDataandEvaluationProgram(DEP)toreportonenergysavingsandbenefitsoftheprogramsandinformfuturedirections.TheDEPdirectlyaddressesthelackofreliableinformationonenergysavingsfromenergyefficiencyprogramsthatwerehighlightedbythe2007OwenInquiryintoElectricitySupplyinNSW.The$2millionDEPisground‐breakinginAustralia—nootherjurisdictionhasappliedsuchaclearcommitmenttoenergyefficiencymeasures.

Thedesigncamefromthe2010EvaluationFrameworkandProjectPlanfortheEESbutnowaimsmorebroadlytoinformpolicyanddecisionmakingforthefutureprogramsincludingtheEnergyEfficiencyActionPlan(EEAP).Ithasfourmainelementsthatareinlinewithbestpracticeinthearea(seeboxattheendofthissectionontheevaluationofenergyefficiencyinCalifornia):

Measurementandverificationofactualenergysavings Collectionofprogramdeliveryinformationandprogramevaluations(processand

impact) Assessmentofmarketandeconomicbenefits Integration,interpretationandreporting.

3.7.2 Measurementandverificationofactualenergysavings

Thisprojectaimstoprovidereliablemeasuresofenergysavingsdirectlyachievedthroughhome,businessandgovernmentprogramsbyusingevidenceofactualelectricityusetocomplementestimatesbasedondeemedsavings.8Currentfindingsonenergysavingsforprogramsareinprevioussections.

Whenthesedirectenergysavingsprogramsweredesignedtheexpectedsavingswereusuallydeemedusingengineeringcalculationsandassumptionsabouttheextentofuptakeandeffectivenessoftheuptakeinrealisingsavings.Deemedsavingsare

8Thebiggestchallengeinevaluatingenergyefficiencyprogramsisalackofdirectmeasurement.Energysavingsarewhatdidnothappen,butenergyconsumptionisactuallywhatismeasured.Thedifferencebetweenenergyconsumptionandwhatenergyconsumptionwouldhavebeenhadenergyefficiencymeasuresnotbeeninstalledprovidesameasureofenergysavings.Savingscomputationthereforeinvolvescomparingmeasuredenergydataandacalculationof“adjustments”toconvertbothmeasurementstothesamesetofoperatingconditions(i.e.abaseline).Bothmeasurementandadjustmentprocessesintroduceuncertainty.Theseprocessesproducestatistical“estimates”withreportedorexpectedvaluesandsomelevelofvariability.NationalActionPlanforEnergyEfficiency(2007).ModelEnergyEfficiencyProgramImpactEvaluationGuide.StevenR.Schiller,SchillerConsulting,Inc.www.epa.gov/eeactionplan


67

uncertainbecausetheiraccuracydependsupontheinitialassumptionswhichcanbeunderminedbymanyreal‐worldfactors.

Theprogramaddressedbarriersrelatedtomeasurementofenergysavingssuchas:

nomeasurementnomanagement‐financiers,decision‐makersandadministratorsofenergyefficiencyprojectsarehinderedbylackofevidenceshowingsavings

hightransactionalcost‐foranenergyefficiencyprojecttosourcefinancefromthemarketplace(e.g.throughESS),thelackofaconsistentandagreedmethodstoclaimandcertifysavingsincurshightransactionalcosts

lackofskills–businessesinvolvedinenergyefficiencyprojectsgenerallylackofM&Vskillswhichinturnexacerbatespreviousbarriers.

Inthefollowingboxarelistedthethreemainmethodsusedtodeterminegrossprogramenergysavingsasdescribedin2007bytheU.S.EnvironmentalProtectionAgency.

Thethreemajormethodstoestimategrossenergysavings

OneormoreM&VmethodsfromtheInternationalPerformanceMeasurementandVerificationProtocol(IPMVP)areusedtodeterminethesavingsfromasampleofprojects,andthesesavingsarethenappliedtoalloftheprojectsintheprogram.

Deemedsavingsbasedonhistorical,verifieddataareappliedtoconventionalenergyefficiencymeasuresimplementedintheprogram.

Statisticalanalysesoflargevolumesofenergymeterdataareconducted.NationalActionPlanforEnergyEfficiency(2007).ModelEnergyEfficiencyProgramImpactEvaluationGuide.StevenR.Schiller,SchillerConsulting,Inc.www.epa.gov/eeactionplanpage98.

AsenergyefficiencyprogramsinNSWarerelativelynew,thenecessaryenergysavingsdata,measurementandverificationmethodsandtoolshavehadtobedeveloped.Theactualsavingscanonlybeadequatelyestimatedusing“beforeandafter”approaches,inwhichasavingisdeterminedasthedifferenceoftheenergyusemeasuredaftertheinterventiontookplaceandabaselinerepresentingtheenergyuseiftheinterventionhadnottakenplace.Thisapproachreliesontwofactors(1)theavailabilityofmeasurementdata,and(2)acounterfactualbaselinewhichcanbeonlyestablishedthroughstatisticalmodellingwithhistoricalmeasurementdata.BothfactorsposedachallengetotheDEP.

Measurementdatacouldeithercomefrommeteredenergyuse(billingdata)regularlycollectedbytheenergynetworkserviceproviders,orfromtask‐orientedon‐sitedatalogging.OEHdoesnotownandpossessbillingdata,whiledataloggingincurssignificantcostandneedstechnicalskills/qualificationforwiring.ToaddressthisDEPhasnegotiatedarrangementswithNSWnetworkserviceproviderstosecureparticipantsbillingdatathathadneverbeenreleasedpreviously.

Thesecondfactor—establishingacounterfactualbaseline—requiresstatisticalandregressionmodelling,andthesespecialistskillswerenotavailablewithinprogramstaff


68

orparticipants.Toaddressthisgap,DEPdevelopedprogram‐specificmeasurementandverificationapproachesthatbestfittedthesituationsofeachprogram,takingaccountofrobustness,capacitybuilding,andcost‐effectiveness.

ThefollowingtablepresentsasummaryofthemethodsusedformeasuringsavingsasperJune2012.Detailsofthemethodsforeachprogramareprovidedinthefollowingparagraphs.

Table3‐8. SummaryofmethodsusedtoestimateenergysavingsforeachprogramtoendofJune2012

Deemedsavings Grosssavings Netsavings

Basedontargetuptake

Basedonactualuptake

Casestudy GBRP

Smallsample ESP

Representativesample

HPSPEESBP

HPSP

Allprojects ESPGBRP

Source:OEH,DataandEvaluationProgram,August2012

Twoprimarymethodshavebeendevelopedandtrialled:

Analysisofbillingdataforrelativelysmalluserssuchashouseholdsandsmallbusinesses

Measurement&Verification(M&V)thatusesindustrialmeasuresandismostsuitedformediumtolargesites.

Billingdataanalysisisamethodtomeasureparticipants’energyusebasedonstatisticalanalysisofbillingdataprovidedbyenergydistributors.Thislowcostmethodismostsuitableforrelativelysmallandhomogeneoususerssuchashouseholdsandsmallbusinesseswheremoderatesavingsareexpected,typicallyoverlargenumbersofusers.

NegotiationsbetweenDEPandNSWenergydistributorsfordatasharingtook1.5years,withtheneedtosatisfytheirconcernsaboutcustomerprivacyandprovidethemwithbusinessbenefits.ThisresultedinarrangementsforvariousenergysavingsquantificationtaskstoaccessthemostcomprehensiveenergyusedataevermadeavailabletoagovernmentagencyinAustralia.Theapplicationsinclude:


69

HomePowerSavingsProgram‐thehighparticipantnumbersanddiversityinhouseholdcharacteristicsmakehousedatalogginginadequate.Participantsbillingdataisusedtodeterminesavingsthroughcomparingenergyusewithacontrolgroupusingrigorousstatisticalmethods.Preliminarysavingsanalysisforhasbeencompletedandfullanalysisfor2012isunderway

EESBP‐projectstypicallyhaverelativelylowinvestment,straightforwardtechnology,lackofintervalmeterdata,lackoftimeandhigherpriorityissues.WhilecomprehensiveM&Visnotfeasible,thespecificityofeachbusinessmakesithardtoidentifyasuitablecontrolgroup.TheapproachdevelopedbyDEPusesestimatedsavingsfromparticipantsbillingdataandregressionmethodsundertherigorousprinciplesofM&V.Thisprovesacost‐effectivemethodologytoverifysavingsandassistingsmallbusinessestosourcefinancefromtheESS.

QuantificationofactualsavingsisalsounderwayfortheHousingNSW’sHomeInsulationProgram(aCCFproject),andunderplanningforthecompletedNSWHomeRebatesProgram.

Measurement&Verification(M&V)‐thismethodusesbestindustrialpracticetoverifysavings,andismostsuitedformediumtolargesiteswhereenergyuseisheterogeneous,measuresarecomplexandrelativelyhighcost,andlargesavingsareexpected.

Guideforlargebusinessandgovernmentagencyprograms(industrialprojectsinESS,ESP,EEGSP)‐heavierinvestment,complextechnology,andaccessibilitytointervalmeterdatacallsforrobustsite‐specificM&Vfortheselargeparticipantsprograms.Thisrequiresspecialskillsandconsistentapproaches,soDEPdevelopedanOperationalGuideforM&Vforpractitionerstostandardiseapproachesalignedwithinternationalbestpractice.ThedraftGuidewastestedusingsupervisedtrialswithselectedretrofitprojectsineachofthethreelargeparticipantsprograms.TheprojectswillprovidecasestudiesintherevisedGuide,whichisduetobeweb‐publishedinAugust2012.TheprojectwithESPhasbeenextendedforafullM&VaimingatcreationofEnergySavingsCertificates.

EnergySavingsScheme–whileESSislegislatedandadministeredoutsidetheOEH,DEPtooktheinitiativetoworkwithIPARTtodevelopatechnicalguidebookfortheESSRulesaccreditationprocedure,basedontheM&VGuide.ThisapproachbenefitsOEHevaluationbutalsoIPART’scertificateaccreditationwhichhasbeenhamperedbythelackofstandardandeasy‐to‐followguidelines;

EnergySaverProgram–participantsactonenergysavingmeasuresidentifiedinenergyauditslargelyonavoluntarybasiswithoutgovernmentfinancialsupport,soanM&Vrequirementwouldbeviewedasanextraburden.TheESPteamstartedwithanM&Vprojectforasmallsampleofbusinessesusingtheleastcostingoption.DEPisplanningtofollowthiswithamorecomprehensiveM&VtrialtunedtohelpclaimsavingsfromtheEnergySavingsScheme;

GovernmentSustainabilityPolicy–Thisprogramcomprisesofaclusteroffundschemesdifferinginsetting,targetgroup,timeframeandrequirement.ThefundingandtheinvestmentscalemakethoseschemesparticularlysuitabletoM&Vand


70

someschemeshaveM&Vinthecontractualconditions.Thechallengetocommitmentismainlyresourceconstraintandlackoftechnicalknowledge.Apartfromthetrialprojectsabove,DEPisplanningtohelpprojectmanagerstakeupM&Vbyprovidingexpertsupervisionandassistanceformoredemonstrationprojects;

3.7.3 Collectionofprogramdeliveryinformation

Thiscomponentfacilitatesthecollectionofreports,data,viewsandlessonsfromprograms,andcomplementsquantitativeprogramreporting.Akeyelementisfacilitationofevaluationreportsfromthesevenprograms.

ThedirectenergysavingprogramsandthecapacitybuildingprogramsrecorddetailedimplementationdataindatabasesandITsystems.TheStrategyandAnalysisUnitbuiltcomprehensivedatabases,analysedtrendsandprovidedreportsfortheprograms,aswellasthebroaderClimateChangeFundAnnualReportsthatincludetheseprograms.Threeprogramshavecommissionedmulti‐stageindependentevaluations(HPSP,EECAP,EETP)withdraftorinterimreportsavailableinJune2012whichhaveeachprovidedasoundbasisforconclusionsabouttheprogram’sachievementsandlessons.ESPandEESBPhavecommissionedvariousstudiesandsurveysandinJune2012providedinternalevaluationreportswhichcapturesomeoftheprogram’sexperience,achievementsandbarriers,withscopeformoredetailedanalysisoftrendsandpatternsfromtheirdata.

InJune2012ARTDcollectedtheviewsandexperiencefrommanagersoncoordinationandgovernanceacrosstheenergyefficiencyprogramstoinformcontinuousimprovement.

3.7.4 Assessmentofmarket&economicbenefits

DEPisusingmarketstudiesandeconomicmodellingtoassessimpactsoftheprogramsasawholeonenergyefficiencymarket,thenationalelectricitymarketandthestateeconomy.

Marketbenefits–theprojectaimstoevaluatetheimpactoftheenergyefficiencyprogramsasawholeontheenergyefficiencyproductandservicemarkets.Itstartedin2011withabaselineanalysisassumingnoprograminplace,andwillundertakeafinalanalysisincorporatingalltheenergyefficiencyprograms.DEPistosupplementthisdesktopstudywithamarketsurveyintoenergyefficiencyserviceandproductmarket.

Economicbenefits‐thisprojectistoestablishcost‐benefitmetricsoftheenergyefficiencyprogramsasawholefortheelectricitymarketandthestateeconomy,coveringpublicaswellasprivatecosts.ItinvolvesenergymarketandeconomywidemodellingandwilltransfersomeofthemodellingcapacitytoOEHatthecompletion(currentlyunderprocurement).


71

3.7.5 Integration,interpretationandreporting

Theprojectwasdesignedtointegrateandinterpretprograminformationandevaluationfindingsofthesevenenergyefficiencyprogramsandotherprojectsintoanoverallassessment.

Integrationandreporting‐theprojecthasevolvedtofocusonannualoverallreportsontheprogressandoutcomesoftheprogramsandinterpretingthefindingsintopolicymessages.DEPengagedARTDin2010astheevaluationpartnertoundertakethisrole.

Thepresentreportisakeyoutputofthisproject,integratingfindingsattheprogramlevelintoanassessmentofthedeliveryoftheinitialEnergyEfficiencyStrategy.Thiswillbepartoftheevidencebaseforconsultationandplanningonfuturedirectionswithenergyefficiencypoliciesandprograms.EvaluationAdvisoryGroup(EAG)‐thegroupwassetuptocoordinateandreviewevaluationprocessesacrossfourbranches,andcomprisesprogrammanagersofthesevenenergyefficiencyprograms,withDEPassecretarytotheGroup.SixEAGmeetingshavebeenheldsinceDecember2010withtheseventhinJune2012.AsatisfactionsurveybyARTDin2011foundmemberslargelysatisfiedwithsharinginformationbutsuggestedimprovementsformeetingpreparation,schedulingandlocation,

3.7.6 Otherdatadevelopmentforenergyefficiency

OEHandCSIROhaveacollaborativeprojectaimingtodevelopbroad‐basedenergyusedataandenergyefficiencyscenariomodellingtosupportevidencebasedpolicydevelopmentintheresidentialsector,inparallelwiththeevaluationoftheenergyefficiencyprograms.Itcommencedin2010inpartnershipwithAusgrid,EndeavourEnergy,EssentialEnergy,JemenaGasNetwork,HousingNSWandDepartmentofPlanning.Phase1isagranularNSWhomeenergyusedatadevelopmentprojectcompletedinJune2011.CSIROiscurrentlyfinalisingPhase2dueJuly2012–modellingforthreepilotscenarios:solarphotovoltaic(PV)update,hotwatersystemreplacementandhighstarwashmachineuptake.

3.7.7 Conclusion

TheDEPisprovidingmorereliableinformationonenergysavingsandtellingthestoryoftheOEHinvestmentsinenergyefficiency,leadingtolessuncertaintyandbetterinformationtoinformfuturedirections.

DEPhasmadesignificantprogressindevelopingandapplyingbestpracticemethodstoproducemorereliableenergysavingsestimatethroughbillingdataanalysisforsmallusersandM&Vformediumtolargesitesbasedontheinternationalprotocol.Whiletheprocesshasbeenrelativelyslow—owinglargelytotheengagementofexternalparticipantsonavoluntarybasis—itisresultinginhighlycrediblemeasuresthatwillincreasinglygeneratemorereliabledataonactualenergysavings.


72

Theindividualprogramsarerecordingdetaileddeliverydataincomprehensivedatabases,supportedbytheanalyticalcapacityoftheStrategyandAnalysisUnit.Programsareincreasinglyusingthisdatatoinformimplementationandforevaluation.Theprogramswithmulti‐stageindependentevaluations(HPSP,EECAP,EETP)haveprovidedcomprehensiveassessmentsoftheirprogressandlessons.Otherprogramsundertookinternalevaluationreports,supportedbyindependentlycollectedparticipantdata.

Theintegrationandreportingofevaluationfindingsacrossthesevenenergyefficiencyprograms—asperthepresentreport—appearstobefillingagapintheOEHevidencebaseandcanprovideOEHwithaformalrecordofprogressandachievementsaswellasasourceofinformationforplanningfuturedirections.The2012evaluationprocesshasgeneratedgreaterinterestinandcommitmenttoongoingevaluationoftheprograms,andprovidesanumberoflessonsforconsideringthefutureevaluationstrategyforinvestmentsinenergyefficiency.

EvaluationofenergyefficiencyinCalifornia

TheDEPprogramhasmanysimilaritieswiththeevaluationprogramforenergyefficiencyinCalifornia,thoughatmuchsmallerscale.Californiaisaleaderinenergyefficiencyandsetsthebenchmarkforevaluation.Relevantfeaturesofthe2006‐2008evaluationcompletedin2010bytheEnergyDivision(withabudgetof$97million)were:

thestrongfocusonverifyingreportedenergysavings useofevaluationtoolsandmeasurestoapplyacrossmultipleprogramsandsites asetofrobustindependentevaluationscoveringalltheprograms focusonimpactevaluationssupportedbyprocessevaluations useofprogramtheory(programlogic)forevaluationframeworks includingcost‐effectivenessandmarkettransformationstudies increasingthefocusonbehaviouralissuesinenergyefficiencyprograms productionofastate‐wideoverallevaluationsynthesisreportwithaggregatedresults

The2010evaluationreportmadesomerecommendationsinlinewithfindingsofthisevaluation,forexample:

‐ programimplementersimproveprogramtrackingdatacollection‐ resultsfromtheevaluationsareusedforcontinuouslyimprovingsavingsestimates

andinformingfutureprogramdesign.

Sources:CalifornianPublicUtilitiesCommission,EnergyDivision(2010)2006‐2008EnergyEfficiencyReport.http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/PUC/energy/Energy+Efficiency/EM+and+V/2006‐2008+Energy+Efficiency+Evaluation+Report.htm


73

4. Cross‐programcoordinationandstrategy‐widegovernance

Thissectionreviewsthestrategy‐widegovernanceandthecross‐programcoordinationandinformationsharingfortheNSWenergyefficiencystrategyinordertoidentifylessonsforthefuture.Itisbasedonareviewoftheprogramevaluationreports;andinterviewsinMay‐June2012withmanagersinvolvedintheEESabouttheirexperiencewiththeinternalgovernancearrangementsandtheirviewsaboutitsstrengthsandweaknesses.

Effectivegovernanceprocessesarealwaysachallenge.Theyneedtobalanceformalandinformalarrangements,andthetimeandresourcesforstrategy‐widegovernancewiththoseforprogrammanagement.Theidealapproachwillvarywiththestageofthestrategy,issuesaroundintegration,andthestructureandcultureoftheorganisation.

4.1 Theinitialdesignhadlimitedscopeforintegration

TheEnergyEfficiencyStrategyisacross‐organisationandtosomeextentcross‐agencysetofprogramsandpolicies.Theinitialdesignallowedforadegreeofcross‐impact:directenergysavingprogramswithsimilarapproachesthattargeteddistinctsectors(lowincomehouseholds,businesses,andgovernment);programsprovidingcapacity‐buildingsupporttotheindustryandthecommunity;andthemarket‐basedinstrumentoftheEnergySavingsScheme(ESS).TherewereexpectationsthatthedirectenergysavingprogramswouldutilisetheESSovertime,andthatthecapacity‐buildingprograms—EECAP,EETPwouldcontributeindirectlytothedeliveryofotherprogramsbyprovidingafavourableenvironmentforenergyefficiencyinitiatives.

Inpracticethescopeforintegrationwaslimited.TheEESitselfwasdevelopedandapprovedquickly,beforeadetailedunderstandingofhowprogramswouldfunction.NotallOEHenergyefficiencyprogramswereincluded,andinternalstakeholdershaddifficultieswiththerationaleforwhichprogramswereinandwhichprogramswerenot.Programsinthestrategyrarelyhaddirectlinkstootherprogramsembeddedintheirrespectiveobjectivesandsettings.InparticulartheESSwasmanagedbyIPARTnotOEHandinvolvementwiththeOEHprogramshasonlycommencedrecently.Thetwocapacitybuildingprograms(EECAP,EETP)wereexpectedtosupporttheotherprogramstosomedegree,butinpracticethishasbeenlimitedastheirtimeframesdidnotalwaysmatchtheimplementationtimeframeoftheotherprograms.EETPinparticularwhichissupportingthedevelopmentofaskilledworkforceforenergyefficiencywilltakesmanyyearstofullyrealisetheseresults.


74

4.2 Organisationalsiloswereabarriertointegration

AnimportantpointisthattheEESsatontopoftheexistingOEHprogrammanagementandreportingarrangementsandtheseexistingarrangementswerelargelyrelieduponforthegovernanceofthestrategy.Thepolicyandoperatingenvironmentoverthisperiodwasamajorfactor,withaveryvolatilepolicycontext,theorganisationwithacontinuinghistoryofstructuralchange,andthetransitionofmanyseniormanagers.

Inthiscontextakeyconstraintonstrategy‐widecoordinationidentifiedbyanumberofmanagerswastheorganisationalstructurethathadsilosformanagementofenergyefficiencyprograms.AsrepresentedintheFigure4.1below,twosiloswerethetwomainbrancheswhereenergyefficiencyprogramsweresitting—WaterandEnergyprogramsontheonehandandBusinessandCommunityprogramsontheother.ThiswasheightenedbythegeographicsplitbetweenthefirstbranchlocatedintheCityandtheotherinParramatta.Intheabsenceofmoreformalarrangements,coordinationandinformationsharingreliedheavilyoninformalandpersonalrelationshipswherephysicalproximityisakeyfactor.

Theothersiloswerethesplitbetweenpolicyandprogramimplementation.Someprogrammanagersregrettedthelackoffeedbackdownthereportinglinethatwouldhaveofferedopportunitiesforlearningfromotherprograms.

Figure4‐1. OrganisationalchartofOEHunitsinvolvedinenergyefficiency

Environment&HeritagePolicyand

Programs

SustainabilityPrograms

Water&EnergyPrograms

HomePowerSavingsProgram

NSWGovernmentSustainabilityPolicy

Othersections:ClimateChangeFunding,Communications,

strategy&analysis,etc.

Business&CommunityPrograms

BusinessPartnership

EnergyEfficiencyforSmallBusiness

Program

EnergySaverProgram

CommunityEducation

EnergyEfficiencyCommunityAwareness

Program

EnergyEfficiencyTrainingprogram

Othersections:beachwatch,Localgov&wastestrategy,etc.

ClimateChange,AirandNoise

Emissionsreductions

DataandEvaluationProgram

Othersections:AirPolicy,NoisePolicy,etc.

Otherdivisions:GroupCoordination&Strategy,Heritage

Branch,etc.

Residential‐Govt /City

Business‐Community/Parramatta

Policy

Programimplementation

Source:ARTDaccordingtoOEHorganisationalchart,June2012


75

4.3 Coordinationwouldhavebeenimprovedbymorestructuredopportunities

EEShadanumberofarrangementstosupportstrategy–widecoordinationandinformation‐sharingincluding:

– SavePowercampaign(blackballoons)andtheEESwebsite– ProgramdatacollectionandreportingthroughtheClimateChangeFund– Aninformation‐sharingforumforOEHprogramsin2010– ComprehensiveEESevaluationframework– DEPactivitiesandthemeetingsoftheEvaluationAdvisoryGroup(EAG)

TheDEPinparticularhasanexplicitmandateforcross‐programsupportandintegration.OEHstaffwelcomedtheopportunityofferedbyEAGmeetingstosharelearningsfromotherprograms.Howevercoordinationofevaluationactivitiesdidnotfeedintoawiderstructureforcoordinationorgovernance.

Accordingtomanagerstherewaslittleattentiontocross‐programcoordinationorinformationsharingduringtheinitialdevelopmentanddeliveryphase,whereeachprogramwaslargelyfocusedonrefiningitsmethodsanddeliveringitsoutputs,

Howeverprogramsidentifiedopportunitiesforcoordinatedactivitiesalongtheway.ForexampleHPSPandEECAPhadcoordinatedinitiatives,forinstanceinregardtoacommonCALDstrategyandcouncilgrants.Whiledevelopingtheseinitiativestooktimeandcouldhavegonefurther,bothprogramsacknowledgedthebenefitsandwishedthereweremoresimilarinitiatives.Intheresidentialsector,aninternalhouseholdreferencegroupwascreatedtopromotecoordinationincludingaresearchcomponentthatprovidedsomekeyinsightintobehaviourchangesissues,butthishasnotcontinued.

Otherexamplesofsuccessfulcoordinationincludecross‐programinitiativeswithinthebusinesssectorbetweenEESBPandESP,bothworkingoutofthesamebranch.Theycollaboratedonthepanelsofserviceprovidersusedforretrofitsandtechnologyseminars.EETPhasalsoworkedcollaborativelywiththeESPprogramandthedevelopmentoftechnologyguides.Thetwobusinessprogramsalsohavearrangementsforbusinessesthatfallinthe‘grey’areabetweenthem.TheseprogramsareworkingtodevelopsynergieswiththeEnergySavingsSchemewhichisapotentialsourceofprojectcapitalforparticipatingbusinessesthroughthegenerationofESCs.ProgramstaffregrettedthelackofformalarrangementsforcoordinationwiththeESSthoughrecentlyprogramshavebeendevelopingtheseopportunities.

Oneoftheconsequencesoflimitedcoordinationhasbeenriskssuchasinconsistentmarketsignalsfromdifferentinitiativesormarketsaturation.Therewerealsocaseswhendifferentprogramsworkedquiteseparatelywiththesameexternalstakeholderssuchasgovernmentagencies,councilsorNGOs.


76

Atthesametimemanagershighlightedthegoodwilloftheircolleaguesandtheinstancesofinformalsharingthatoccurred.ForinstanceEEGSPhascalledonthetwobusinessprogramstoassistittoaddressimplementationissuesexperiencedbyparticipantagencies.Butinpractice,mostmanagerssawlostopportunitiesforworkingmorecloselytogetherandsharinginformation,resources,andevenstaff.Feedbackfromprogrammanagershighlightedthepotentialforimprovingimplementationthroughamorestructuredapproachtocoordination.

4.4 Managersseekmoreoverarchinggovernance

TheEnergyEfficiencyStrategydidnothaveanoverallgovernanceframeworkoracross‐programmanagementgroup.Themainmanagementfocuswasondeliverybyeachprogram,throughthenormalprogrammanagementcontrols,andreportingthroughtheClimateChangeFunddatasystem.

Managershadmixedviewsaboutthecommunicationoftheoveralldirectionforthestrategy,withseniormanagersmorepositivethantheothers.Programmanagerswantedmoreinformationontheoverallstrategicagenda,howtheprogramswerepositioned,andlikelyfuturedevelopments,particularlyintherapidlychangingenvironment.

Overallmostmanagerswantedamoresystematicandstructuredprocessforstrategy‐widegovernanceandinformationsharingatthestrategicandprogramdeliverylevels.Theyalsorecognisedthepotentialburdenassociatedwithexcessivegovernancearrangementsandthevalueofretainingprogramflexibility.

OEHComment

OEHhasestablishedtheEnergyEfficiencySteeringGrouptocoordinateenergyefficiencypolicydevelopment,programdeliveryandevaluation.

ImprovedgovernanceandcoordinationisalsoafeatureofOEH’snewcorporatestructureasofearly2013.


77

Appendix1. Evaluationreportsusedforthesynthesis

EachNSWEnergyEfficiencyprogramhasbeenconductingevaluationactivitiesaspartoftheoverallevaluationstrategyand/ortheirownevaluationstrategy.ToinformthepresentreportARTDrequestedinformationfromeachprogramaboutthemainachievementstoearly2012,progresstowardsandlikelysuccessinmeetingitsobjectivesandtargets,andthestoryofhowtheprogramhasadaptedtoovercomebarriersandmakeimprovements.

Inlinewiththeirrespectiveevaluationarrangements,programsprovidedthisinformationasanindependentevaluationreportorasaninternalreportbasedonfeedbackanddatacollectedoverthecourseoftheprogram,includinginsomecasesindependentevaluationactivitiessuchassurveysofstakeholders.

ThefollowingtablepresentsanoverviewofprogramevaluationsandreportsthatARTDhasusedasinputforthisevaluation.Foreachprogramsitspecifiesmaindatacollectionmethods.

Table4‐1.Evaluationreportsandmaindatacollectionmethodsforeachreport

Program Evaluationreports Maindatacollectionmethods

HomePowerSavingsProgram(HPSP)

2012InterimEvaluationoftheHomePowerSavingsProgram(ARTD2012)

Reviewofprogramdocumentation,monitoringandauditdata

Quantitativeanalysisoftheassessmentsdatabase

Assessors’survey 3focusgroupswithhouseholds Interviewswithinternalandexternal

stakeholders Onepilotcasestudy


Internalinterimevaluationreport(ISF2012)EvaluationoftheProgramPhaseI(DatabuildNovember2011)EvaluationoftheProgramPhaseII(DatabuildJune2012)

Analysisofassessmentsandretrofitdatabases

Auditfindings

participantssurveyandinterviews(Databuild)

EnergySaverProgram(ESP)

Internalinterimevaluationreport(2012)EvaluationoftheDECCWESPII(DatabuildMarch2011)

Analysisoftheprojectsdatabase Participantssurvey(Databuild)

NSWGovernmentSustainabilityPolicy(GSP)

Internalinterimevaluationreport(2012)

Regularreviewofmonitoringandauditdata

Informalfeedbackfromprograms’participants


78

Program Evaluationreports Maindatacollectionmethods


EvaluationoftheEnergyEfficiencyTrainingProgram–Year2Annualreport(draft)(UrbisJune2012)

Reviewofprogramdocumentation Workshopsanddiscussionswith

programstaff Interviewswithexternalprogram

stakeholders Analysisofprojectdata

EnergyEfficiencyCommunity‐AwarenessProgram(EECAP)

PreliminaryfindingstoinformtheevaluationoftheEnergyEfficiencyCommunityAwarenessProgram(DatabuildJune2012)NSWEnergymarkFinalReport(CSIROJune2012)

Literatureanddocumentaryreview Interviewswithinternalandexternal

stakeholders Telephonesurveywith200NSW

residents

Pre‐Project,InterimandPost‐ProjectQuestionnaires(knowledge,attitudesandbehaviour)

Pre‐ProjectandPost‐ProjectCarbonFootprintQuestionnaires


79

Appendix2. Estimatesofactualenergysavings‐preliminaryresults

HomePowerSavingsProgram(HPSP)

Savingswereestimatedusingtwomethodsfrom7,000homeswhichaccountforabout18per cent of the total programparticipants at the timeof commencing the analysis.Two analysing methods were used: paired comparison with a control group, andregression.Theresultissummarisedinthefollowingtable.

Table4‐2. HPSPbillingdataanalysispreliminaryresults

Pairedcomparisonwithacontrolgroup

Regression

Averagesavingsacrossallhomes 0.6kWh/home/day(or4.0%reduction)

0.57kWh/home/day(or3.8%reduction)

Averagesavingsfromhomesthatreceivedthewholesavingkit 0.9kWh/home/day

(or6.0%reduction)


Averagesavingsfromhomesthatreceivedthesavingkititemsexceptshowerheads



Relativelyspeaking,theresultfromPairedComparisonwithaControlGrouptendstobemorereliable.Howevertheregressionmethodhasgreaterpowertoprobeindetails.

The analysis was unable to detect any statistically significant saving attributable tobehaviouralchange.

EnergySavingsScheme

Thefollowingtable isacase‐studyfromtheM&VGuideDevelopmentprojectshowingthesavingsfromamajorretailerverifiedusingInternationalPerformanceMeasurement& Verification Protocol Option B/C9 for the purpose of claiming Energy SavingsCertificates(ESC)undertheESS.AsnoprojectsunderOEHprogramshaveclaimedESC,thiscasestudywasprovidedbyEnergetics.

9OptionA–Keyparametermeasurementfortheretrofitmeasure,OptionB–Fullparametermeasurementfortheretrofitmeasure,OptionC–Measurementattheboundaryofthewholefacility


80

Table4‐3. ESSMeasurement&Verificationpreliminaryresults

Program EnergySavingsScheme Site MajorRetailer

ProjectDescription Arangeofretrofitstostorelighting,HVACandrefrigerationsystems.

M&VMethodology IPMVPOptionB/C– Regressionbasedanalysisofwholefacility,analysinginputelectricityuseagainstambienttemperature(informofcoolingdegreedays).

BaselinePeriod 12monthperiodsbetween2007and2010.

SavingsanalysisPeriod Latest12monthstoAugust2011

Store BAUUsage(kWh)

ActualUsage(kWh)

EnergySavings(kWh)

GHGSavings(@0.89kgCO2‐e/kWh)

CostSavings($@$0.125/

kWh)

Savings%againstBAU

Store1 4,013,657 3,535,775 477,882 425,315 $59,735 12%

Store2 3,058,474 2,870,810 187,664 167,021 $23,458 6%

Store3 2,629,012 2,408,866 220,147 195,931 $27,518 8%

Store4 2,886,362 2,808,521 77,841 69,278 $9,730 3%

Store5 3,059,178 2,808,955 250,222 222,698 $31,278 8%

Store6 2,831,738 2,707,505 124,233 110,568 $15,529 4%

Store7 3,008,221 2,823,100 185,121 164,757 $23,140 6%

Store8 3,259,854 2,886,208 373,646 332,545 $46,706 11%

Store9 3,274,362 2,517,750 756,612 673,385 $94,577 23%

Store10 2,747,018 2,534,275 212,743 189,341 $26,593 8%

Store11 3,108,976 2,724,971 384,005 341,764 $48,001 12%

Store12 2,511,443 2,303,222 208,221 185,316 $26,028 8%

Store13 2,208,725 2,045,200 163,525 145,537 $20,441 7%

Store14 2,212,504 1,812,628 399,877 355,890 $49,985 18%

Store15 2,767,678 2,622,685 144,993 129,044 $18,124 5%

Store16 2,964,527 2,753,039 211,488 188,224 $26,436 7%

Store17 2,506,977 2,454,609 52,368 46,608 $6,546 2%

Store18 2,332,957 2,100,988 231,969 206,452 $28,996 10%

Store19 3,034,522 2,419,343 615,180 547,510 $76,897 20%


81

Store20 2,163,252 1,579,611 583,641 519,441 $72,955 27%

Store21 2,415,475 2,339,668 75,808 67,469 $9,476 3%

Store22 3,055,294 2,693,323 361,970 322,154 $45,246 12%

Store23 2,330,794 2,000,496 330,299 293,966 $41,287 14%

Store24 2,283,027 1,972,611 310,417 276,271 $38,802 14%

Store25 2,033,274 1,685,498 347,776 309,521 $43,472 17%

Store26 1,083,103 980,395 102,708 91,410 $12,838 9%

EnergySaverProgram(ESP)

Thefollowingtable isacase‐studyfromtheM&VGuideDevelopmentprojectshowingthesavingsfromamajorlightingretrofitprojectinSydneyMasonicCentre.TheprojectwasprovidedbyEnergySaverasatrialprojectforM&V.

Table4‐4. ESPMeasurement&Verificationpreliminaryresults

Program EnergySaver Site SydneyMasonicCentre

ProjectDescription LightingupgradefromincandescenttoLEDswithinGrandLodgeRoomandBanquetHallfunctionrooms.Theoldandretrofittedlightingsystemscanbedimmedfrom0to100percent.

M&VMethodology IPMVPOptionA1. Conductloadtesttomeasureinputpowerdraw(amps)foreachlightingcircuit

andmeasurethecorrespondinglightoutput(lux).2. Developbaselineandpost‐retrofitmodelsforpowerdraw.3. EstimateoperatinghoursfromfunctiondatabetweenJanuaryandMay2012.4. Extrapolatesavingsacross12months.

BaselinePeriod December2011

SavingsanalysisPeriod

01January2012to31May2012(5months)offunctionsdataJune2012forpostretrofitpowerdraw/lightlevelreadings

Actual Savings

Electricity (kWh) Cost ($) Greenhouse Gas Emissions (t.CO2-e) (@0.89 kgCO2/kWh)

Savings %

GrandLodgeRoom 35,310 $5,296 31 78%

BanquetHall 27,253 $4,088 24 66%

Total 62,563 $9,384 56 72%


82

Context Savingsanalysiswasbasedontheassumptionthattheretrofittedlightingsystemiscontrolledusingsimilarstepsaswiththeoldsystem.However,aslightinglevelshavesignificantlyimproved,differentcontrolstepsmaybeusedwhichmayaffectthesavingsestimates.

GovernmentSustainabilityPolicy(EEGSP)

Thefollowingtable isacase‐studyfromtheM&VGuideDevelopmentprojectshowingthesavingsfromchillerretrofitinWestmeadHospital.ThisprojectwasprovidedbytheGovernmentSustainabilityProgramasatrialprojectforM&V.

Table4‐5. EEGSPMeasurement&VerificationpreliminaryresultsfortheWestmeadHospitalcasestudy

Program GovernmentBuildingRetrofitProgram

Site WestmeadHospital

ProjectDescription

Upgradeoftwoexistingchillers(installed1978and1983)to2x4000kWvariablespeeddrivecentrifugalchillers.Additionaltwocoolingtowerstomeetincreasedcapacityandprovideimprovedcondenserwatertemperaturecontrol.Newcondenserwaterandchilledwaterpumpswithvariablespeeddrives.Newintegratedcontrolsystemwithautomaticsystemoptimisationcapability.

M&VMethodology

IPMVPOptionB/C–Regressionbasedanalysisofchilledwaterplant(chillers,pumpsandcoolingtowers),analysinginputelectricityuseagainstambienttemperature(informofcoolingdegreedays).

BaselinePeriod 1July2010to30June2011(12months)

Savings analysis Period

01August2011to31March2012(8months)

ActualSavings

Electricity(kWh) Cost($) GreenhouseGasEmissions(t.CO2‐

e)(@0.89kgCO2/kWh)

Uncertainty(%)at95%confidence

1,196,680 $138,760 1,065 ±29%

Context Savingsrepresenta12.4%reductioninchilledwaterplantenergyuse(measurementboundary)anda3.6%reductionoftotalsiteelectricityuse.


83

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000M

on

thly

Ele

ctri

city

Use

(kW

h)

HVAC kWh

Modelled HVAC kWh

Savings Period:1,196 MWh$138,0001,280 t.CO2-e12.4%

The followingtable isacase‐studyfromtheM&VGuideDevelopmentprojectshowingthesavingsfromastartingphaseoftheCentralPassageofSydneyOperaHouselightingretrofit.ThisprojectwasprovidedbytheGovernmentSustainabilityProgramasatrialprojectforM&V.

Table4‐6. EEGSPMeasurement&VerificationpreliminaryresultsfortheCentralPassageoftheSydneyOperaHousecasestudy

Program GovernmentRetrofitProgram

Site SydneyOperaHouse,CentralPassage

ProjectDescription

Lightingupgradeinvolvinglamp/fixturereplacementandintroductionofcontrols.

M&VMethodology IPMVPOptionB1. Measurebaselineandpost‐retrofitenergyuseusingadataloggerforthe"Central

Passage".2. Determinesavingsforpost‐retrofitperiodbyaligningdaysandadjustingfor

changesinSunrise/Sunsettimesduetophotoelectriccellcontroloflighting.3. Determineaveragehourlyusageandsavingsfordayandnightperiods.4. Useannualdataforsunrise/sunsettoextrapolatethe2weeksofdataacross12

months.5. Assumesteadystateoperationoneverydayoftheyear.

BaselinePeriod 12thto24thJuly2011(12days)

SavingsanalysisPeriod

25thOctoberto6thNovember2011(12days). Savingsextrapolatedusing2011solardata.

ActualSavings Electricity (kWh) Cost ($) Greenhouse Gas

Emissions (t.CO2-e) (@0.89

kgCO2/kWh)

Saving %


84

58,087 $8,713 52 32%

Context ThesavingscalculatedaboveapplytotheCentralPassagepartoftheupgrade.

EnergyEfficiencyforSmallBusinessProgram

Of the1,259 rebatedbusinesses in theAusgrid andEssential Energy’s network areas,509 were matched with billing data for over 12 months both before and after theretrofit.Of the509businesses,331weresuccessfullymodelled toestablishabaselinewhich enabled an M&V analysis under the Option C (whole building) of the IPMVP(InternationalPerformanceMeasurement&VerificationProtocol).

For the 331 businesses included in theM&V analysis, a total of 1,867MWhhas beensavedinthefirstyear,or8.3%relativetothebaseline.Onaverage,everybusinesssaved5.64MWhor9.3%relativetoitsbaselineforthe1styear.Thisishighlycomparabletothe initial estimated saving by the auditors of 5.2 MWh per business per year. Thefollowing tables show theprojects groupedbybusiness types and retrofit technology,respectively.

Table4‐7. EESBPMeasurement&Verificationpreliminaryresultsbybusinessactivity

BusinessActivity Number ActualUsage(kWh)

EnergySavings(kWh)

CostSavings($@$0.20/kWh)

EnergySavings%(toBAU)

Accommodation 12 1,363,717 158,488 31,690 10.4%

Agriculture,forestry,fishing 16 905,360 61,240 12,248 6.3%

Café/Restaurant 90 7,155,684 314,870 62,974 4.2%

Communication 2 112,483 ‐1.579 ‐319 ‐1.4%

Construction 1 25,970 3,496 699 11.9%

Cultural/RecreationalService

7 774,476 14,606 2,921 1.9%

Education 2 31,257 2,969 594 8.7%

Electricity,gas&water 2 13,314 951 190 6.7%

Finance/InsuranceServices 3 41,369 9,578 1,916 18.8%

Health/Communityservice 23 1,183,512 143,246 28,649 10.8%

Manufacturing* 7 607,952 ‐145,537 ‐29,107 ‐31.5%

Personal/Otherservices 34 952,225 130,863 26,173 12.1%


85

Property/Businessservices 9 131,723 24,038 4,808 15.4%

Retailtrade 105 5,592,693 753,109 150,622 11.9%

Transport/Storage 15 1,700,393 365,616 73,123 17.7%

Wholesaletrade 3 62,278 30,843 6,169 33.1%

GrandTotal 331 20,654,406 1,866,739 373,348 8.3%

*Oneofthemanufacturingsitehasseena74%increaseinconsumption.Thisincreaseismostlikelytoberelated to some non‐EESBP factor e.g. production growth.However,without further investigation, it isbettertoleaveitintoobservetheobjectivityofM&V.

Table4‐8. EESBPMeasurement&Verificationpreliminaryresultsbytechnology

Technologysummary Number ActualUsage(kWh)

EnergySavings(kWh)

CostSavings($@$0.20/kWh)

Savings%

Aircompression 2 65,904 11,236 2,247 14.6%

Boilers 4 284,955 28,417 5,683 9.1%

Hotwater 21 966,406 68,615 13,723 6.6%

HVAC 56 2,921,560 245,469 49,094 7.8%

Insulation 3 86,777 ‐78 ‐$16 ‐0.1%

Lighting 124 6,865.519 1,030,375 206,075 13.0%

MotorsandVSDs 5 344,493 49,272 9,854 12.5%

Refrigeration 86 7,670,508 254,056 50,811 3.2%

Multiple 30 1,447,847 179,379 35,876 11.0%

GrandTotal 331 20,654,406 1,866,739 373,348 8.3%

EstimatesoutsidethecurrentOEHprograms

Billingdataanalysiswasundertakenfor1,000lowincomehomeswithceilingsinsulatedbytheHousingNSW.Unfortunatelytheprogramdidnotcollectparticipantconsentsfordisclosingtheirbillingdata.TheanalysishadtousethedataobtainedforHPSP.AstheinsulationdateandHPSPassessmentdataareentirelydis‐aligned,itsignificantlydegradedthequalityofthedataforanalysis.Asaresult,nosignificantresultcouldbeestablished.


86

Appendix3. Keyreferences

CaliforniaPublicUtilitiesCommission,EnergyEfficiencyEvaluationReport,July2010

CaliforniaPublicUtilitiesCommission,EnergyDivisionScenarioAnalysisReport,July2010

IPART,ReviewofNSWClimateChangeMitigationMeasures,May2009

IPART,Changesinregulatedpricesfrom1July2012,June2012

MirjamHarmelink,LarsNilssonandRobertHarmsen,Theory‐basedpolicyevaluationof20energyefficiencyinstruments,EnergyEfficiencyVolume1,Number2,Springer,2008

U.S.NationalActionPlanforEnergyEfficiency,ModelEnergyEfficiencyProgramImpactEvaluationGuide.PreparedbyStevenR.Schiller,SchillerConsulting,Inc,2007

U.S.NationalActionPlanforEnergyEfficiency,UnderstandingCost‐EffectivenessofEnergyEfficiencyPrograms:BestPractices,TechnicalMethods,andEmergingIssuesforPolicy‐Makers.EnergyandEnvironmentalEconomics,Inc.andRegulatoryAssistanceProject,2008

Reed,J.H.,Jordan,G.,&Vine,E.,Impactevaluationframeworkfortechnologydeploymentprograms,USDepartmentofEnergy,2007

NSW Energy Efficiency Programs 2012 Evaluation Report · NSW Energy Efficiency Programs 2012...

Documents

Transcript of NSW Energy Efficiency Programs 2012 Evaluation Report · NSW Energy Efficiency Programs 2012...