22 - Laserfiche WebLink

Community Choice Aggregation Feasibility Analysis Alameda County Table 21.Annual Funding Models for Non-bypassable Electric Charges Annual Funding Models for Non-bypassable Estimated Value Electric Charges Program Administrator-CCA and PG&E customers $3,941,000 Program Administrator-CCA customer only $3,350,000 The cost of energy was determined by analyzing the 2015 PG&E portfolio to identify the costs per first year net kWh for programs that are likely to be the most representative of programs administered by an Alameda County CCA. An analysis the PG&E portfolio, including the programs presented in Table 22, indicates that $0.61 per net first year kWh is a reasonable estimate of the current unit cost of energy efficiency. Table 22. Select Unit Costs for Energy Efficiency($/net kWh) Percent Program Cost Per First Year Program Savings that are Net kWh Administrator Sub-Program Name Electric Equivalent PG&E Commercial Energy Advisor 18% $0.18 MCE MEA 02-Small Commercial 79% $0.37 PG&E Lighting Programs Total 100% $0.38 MCE MEA01 2013-14 MF-Multifamily 36% $0.59 PG&E East Bay 93% $0.59 Third Party RightLights 100% $0.75 PG&E Energy Savers 100% $0.81 Third Party Energy Fitness Program 100% $0.84 The MRW teams defined the level of energy efficiency input into the REMI model by dividing the available funding by the units cost of energy efficiency as defined above, using the following assumptions; • Available annual budget for energy efficacy programs is based on the maximum funding equation provided in R.09-11-014, and assuming programs are administered only to CCA customers. As discussed in Table 21, this represents approximately$3.5M annually. • The cost of energy efficiency programs most likely to be offered under and a CCA would be $0.61 per net first year kWh. July,2016 49 MRW&Associates,LLC