NSW Energy Efficiency Programs 2012 Evaluation Report · NSW Energy Efficiency Programs 2012 Evaluation Report ... Hospital case study ... of the Sydney Opera House case study ...

NSWEnergyEfficiencyPrograms

2012EvaluationReport

FinalReportto

OfficeofEnvironmentandHeritage,

NSWDepartmentofPremierandCabinet

August2012IncludesOEHresponsesatJune2013

FinalReport–August2012 2012evaluationofNSWenergyefficiencyprograms

ARTDPtyLtdABN75003701764Tel0293739900Fax0293739998

Level4,352KentStSydneyPOBox1167QueenVictoriaBuildingNSW1230Australia

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:info@environment.nsw.gov.auWebsite:www.environment.nsw.gov.auReportpollutionandenvironmentalincidentsEnvironmentLine:131555(NSWonly)orinfo@environment.nsw.gov.auSeealsowww.environment.nsw.gov.auISBN9781743593868OEH2014/0052February2014

ARTDPtyLtdABN75003701764Tel0293739900Fax0293739998

Level4,352KentStSydneyPOBox1167QueenVictoriaBuildingNSW1230Australia

Acknowledgments

ThisworkwascompletedwiththeassistanceoftheDataandEvaluationTeamintheOfficeofEnvironmentandHeritage,DepartmentofPremierandCabinet.

WewouldalsoliketothanktheOEHmanagersandstafffortheirtimeandinsightsandtrustthattheirviewsareadequatelyrepresentedinthisreport.

ARTDConsultancyteam

ChrisMilneFlorentGomez‐Bonnet

OEHCommentBoxes

TheOfficeofEnvironmentandHeritage(OEH)hasprovidedcommentboxesattheendofeachsectioninthisreport.

Thesecommentboxes: providedetailsonthestatusofOEHenergyefficiencyprogramssincethecompletion

ofthereportuptoJune2012;and commentontheevaluationfindings.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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)

improvementsinthereliabilityofenergysavingsestimates

Theevaluationisbasedonasynthesisofevaluationsandreportsontheprograms.Quantitativedataonreach,uptakeandenergysavingswascollectedbytheprogramsandanalysedbytheOEHStrategyandAnalysisteam.Eachprogramundertookarangeofevaluationandreporting.MethodstoverifyenergysavingsweredevelopedandimplementedthroughtheDataandEvaluationProgram.

Weareconfidentthatthefindingsofthisevaluationrepresenttheoverallpatternsofdeliveryandoutcomestodate.Thefindingsfromdifferentsourceswereconsistent,andmorereliabledataonenergysavingswasavailable(seebelow).Somecautionisneededassomeoftheevaluationsandthemeasurementprojectsareworksinprogressatthisstageandsomeuncertaintiesremain.

Overallfinding

Theseenergyefficiencyprogramsarelargelybeingdeliveredeffectively.Thishasrequiredmanyadaptationswithinprogramswhichhaveledtoincreasinglystrategicandeffectiveapproaches.Alltheevidenceindicatesthattheprogramsaregenerallywellreceivedbyparticipants.

OEHnowhasmorereliablemeasuresofenergysavings,withtheapplicationofnewmethodssubstantiallyimprovingestimatesovertheperiod.

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

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

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.

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.

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

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.

MostOEHmanagersinvolvedwiththeseenergyefficiencyprogramswantedamoresystematicandstructuredprocessforoverallgovernanceandinformationsharing,whilerecognisingtheneedtoavoidprocessburdensandtomaintainprogramflexibility.

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

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.

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

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

Otherenergyefficiencyinstruments

(Cwlth,NSW)

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

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

reportsfromtheDEPmeasurementandverificationprojects

interviewswithOEHmanagersbyARTDinMay‐June2012tocollectfeedbackontheapproachtogovernance,coordinationandinformationsharing

feedbackfromOEHstakeholdersonearlierreports.

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

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).

studieshavebeencommissionedtoanalysemeasurementdatacollected.Section3.7providesdetailedinformationonmethodsusedtoestimategrosssavingsforeachprogram.

Figure2‐1. Improvedreliabilityofenergysavingsestimates

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

Engineeringassessment…

...basedontargetuptake

…basedonactualuptake

Beforeandafteranalysis…

...basedoncasestudiesorasmallsample

…basedonarepresentativesample

Excludingfree‐ridership

Accountingforpersistence

…coveringallprojects

EESBPESP

2009‐10 2011‐12

Reliability

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.

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

Home Power Savings Program

Energy Efficiency for Small Business Program

Energy Saver Program

Government Building Retrofit Program

FinalReport– August2012 2012evaluationofNSWenergyefficiencyprograms

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.

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.

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

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).

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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

(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.

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.

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

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.

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.

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,

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.

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

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.

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

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.

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

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

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.

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.

Figure3‐1. TreasuryLoanFunduptake

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

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.

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).

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

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

– 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.

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).

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

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.

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

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

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

ThefollowingtablepresentsasummaryofthemethodsusedformeasuringsavingsasperJune2012.Detailsofthemethodsforeachprogramareprovidedinthefollowingparagraphs.

Table3‐8. SummaryofmethodsusedtoestimateenergysavingsforeachprogramtoendofJune2012

Deemedsavings Grosssavings Netsavings

Basedontargetuptake

Basedonactualuptake

Casestudy GBRP

Smallsample ESP

Representativesample

HPSPEESBP

Allprojects ESPGBRP

Source:OEH,DataandEvaluationProgram,August2012

Twoprimarymethodshavebeendevelopedandtrialled:

Analysisofbillingdataforrelativelysmalluserssuchashouseholdsandsmallbusinesses

Measurement&Verification(M&V)thatusesindustrialmeasuresandismostsuitedformediumtolargesites.

Billingdataanalysisisamethodtomeasureparticipants’energyusebasedonstatisticalanalysisofbillingdataprovidedbyenergydistributors.Thislowcostmethodismostsuitableforrelativelysmallandhomogeneoususerssuchashouseholdsandsmallbusinesseswheremoderatesavingsareexpected,typicallyoverlargenumbersofusers.

NegotiationsbetweenDEPandNSWenergydistributorsfordatasharingtook1.5years,withtheneedtosatisfytheirconcernsaboutcustomerprivacyandprovidethemwithbusinessbenefits.ThisresultedinarrangementsforvariousenergysavingsquantificationtaskstoaccessthemostcomprehensiveenergyusedataevermadeavailabletoagovernmentagencyinAustralia.Theapplicationsinclude:

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

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).

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.

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

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.

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

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.

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.

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

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

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

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/

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%

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%

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.

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000M

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 %

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%

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.

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 Evaluation Report ... Hospital case study ... of the Sydney Opera House case study ...

Documents

Energy Efficiency and Alternative Energy Programs

Third-Party Electric Energy Efficiency Programs · 1....

Operating Theatre Efficiency Guidelines - NSW Agency for

Energy Efficiency Programs and Policies

2013-2014 SCG Energy Efficiency Programs

Optimizing Residential HVAC Efficiency Programs

NSW Energy Efficiency Programs 2012 Evaluation Report ·...

NSW Energy Efficiency Action Plan (EEAP)

Interactions between Energy Efficiency Programs funded...

PNM Energy Efficiency - Start Saving Today …...Business...

IOU Energy Efficiency Programs Collaborative

Energy Efficiency Programs - (Metro) is

Arizona Energy Efficiency Programs and Efforts

REPORT TO NSW OFFICE OF ENVIRONMENT AND HERITAGE, … ·...

NSW Government Resource Efficiency Policy (GREP) · NSW...

Review of Existing Energy Efficiency Programs