Buildings and Facilities Working Group Proposals

1
Buildings and Facilities Working Group Proposals

• Submitted to the Stakeholder Committee, 12
  February 2003

2
Program Slate

• Commercial/Industrial Fossil Fuel Retrofit
• Performance Contracting Program
• Efficiency Targeting in Industry
• Monitoring and Targeting Initiative
• Tax Credits for Energy Efficiency
• Sales Tax Credit for Qualifying Energy-Efficient
  Purchases

3
Proposal 1Performance Contracting Program

• How PCP works

• ESCo contracts w/ Customer for capital efficiency
  enhancements
• Energy savings are used to pay the ESCo
• Performance risk is borne by the ESCo

• Attributes

• Riskless capital improvements for Customer
• Alternate revenue stream for the ESCo
• Substantial GHG reductions

4
PCP in Rhode Island
GHG Screens
NE Gas, Fuel Oil, NECo, State Offices
ID Customers 1st batch
RFP ESCOs
For pre-qualified. Could be one or several ESCOs
Energy Office
Rounds 2, 3, etc
Tax Credits?
Retrofits
Tracking and Evaluation
Aggregating facilities represents an innovation
in RI
Supplemental Money
5
Implementation Details

• Recruit ESCos to participate SEO
• Recruit target customers NECo, NEGCo, SEO, Oil
  Heat Dealers
• See Fig 1
• Prepare Conduct ESCO Solicitation SEO
• 4. Monitor and evaluate program results

6
Implementation Challenges

• Develop Program Funding
• Necessary to encourage deeper penetration by
  ESCos to reach GHG goals.

7
Proposal 2 (Draft) Industrial Monitoring and
Targeting

• Like PCP, but process- focused instead of
  capital-focused.

• Case Results Unilever Canada (annual)
• 4.2 million kg reduction in CO2 Emissions
  annually
• 1.3 m savings in 2001
• 1.9 million kWh Electricity Savings
• 2.2 million m3 Natural Gas Savings
• Projected

8
Proposal 3 (Draft) Sales Tax for Energy
Efficiency

• Implement a tax credit to incent purchases of
  energy-efficient products
• Design Issues (with Groups present proposals)
• Qualifying Products Energy Star
• When to implement In a better fiscal climate
• Interaction w/ SBC Use to pay tax?
• Would regional standards be a better approach or
  a complimentary approach?
• What level of incentive is sufficient?