22 - Laserfiche WebLink

Macroeconomic Impacts As Table 2 shows, Scenario 4 would have a 1.7-fold CCA renewable capacity investment compared to Scenario 3, with almost 5-fold local project investment($3.2 billion of county-sited projects versus $0.67 billion). Table 2. Initial Comparison of Proposed CCA Scenarios 2017 to Million$ Million $ nominal DEMAND 2030 nominal PG&E CCA Renewable Offset CCA Renewable O&M Investment Renew. Bill O&M Scenario Savings* PG&E Alameda Rest of offset RE Alameda Rest of Alameda CA invest. CA Rest ofCA 1 $1,574 $623 $1,676 -$1,946 $47 $133 -$153 2 $1,513 $623 $2,217 -$2,446 $47 $190 -$206 3 $522 $674 $2,514 -$2,785 $51 $200 -$219 $521 $3,222 $2,217 -3,325 $252 $190 -$278 *Bill savings are net of PCIA and customer out-of-pocket for renewable and energy efficient improvements. As can be seen from Table 3,the initial local investment that would result from building and operating additional renewable projects in Alameda County between the years 2017 to 2030 represents a very small portion of the County's total expected economic activity, ' even assuming all of the project costs are directed locally (usually 56%of the project costs would be funneled outside the county due to procurement of equipment from outside the county). By contrast bill savings for Scenarios 1 and 2 provide over three fold the benefits of initial local investment. These bill savings indirectly stimulate the economy and ultimately create jobs. ' Forecast to be$3,500 billion(nominal).Source REMI Policy Insight model,Alameda County forecast. 6