Renewable Power and Energy Efficiency: Policies in Iowa and Other States (original) (raw)
Related papers
Energy Efficiency Program Financing: Where it comes from, where it goes, and how it gets there
2016
Systems Analysis (EPSA) under Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231. Any questions or feedback may be directed to Jeff Deason, project lead, jadeason@lbl.gov. We thank Eric Hsieh and Claire Zeng of EPSA for their support and contributions to this product, and recognize Claire in particular for her help with graphics. We thank Sandy Fazeli of the National Association of State Energy Officials and Kristina Klimovich and Michael Centore of PACENation for their invaluable assistance with data collection, as well as the numerous program administrators who responded to our data requests. We also thank the individuals named above, as well as Don Gilligan of the National Association of Energy Services Companies and Erin Boyd of EPSA, for helpful comments on a draft of this brief. If you would like to receive notifications of similar energy policy publications, join the LBNL Electricity Markets and Policy mailing list here. T E C H N I C A L B R I E F L B N L 1...
2020
Non-energy impacts (NEIs) of energy efficiency are impacts not directly, or commonly recognized as, associated with energy production, transmission, and distribution. On balance, researchers have found that NEIs have positive impacts for utility systems, consumers, and society. Sometimes, they represent substantial benefits-for example, for grid reliability, comfort, air quality, and public health. Considering whether and how to include NEIs is an important component of cost-benefit analyses (CBA) for energy efficiency, potentially leading to acquisition of more cost-effective energy choices than otherwise would be achieved. This report is for state public utility commissions (PUCs), utilities, and stakeholders engaged in CBA for energy efficiency programs funded by utility customers. The information also is relevant for assessing energy efficiency in utility resource planning and acquisition. Section 1 describes NEIs, explains why they are important, and offers practical considerations for PUCs as they decide which NEIs to include and how to determine appropriate NEI values for their jurisdiction. Section 2 identifies NEIs used in 30 states, with a focus on NEIs for energy efficiency programs targeted at the general public, then offers considerations on transferability of both NEI values and methods used to develop values, based on publicly available documents. States can use such NEI research conducted in other jurisdictions as a starting point for advancing their own CBA practices. The references section provides citations to these studies and other NEI-related documents. Appendix A summarizes NEI information in the reports reviewed. Appendix B describes study methods for this report.
Avoided Energy Supply Costs in New England
2007
This 2007 Avoided-Energy-Supply-Component (AESC) report provides projections of marginal energy supply costs which will be avoided due to savings in electricity, natural gas, and other fuels resulting from energy efficiency programs offered to customers throughout New England. These projections were developed in order to support energy efficiency program decision-making and regulatory filings during 2008 and 2009. The program administrators will use these projections in their efficiency program decisionmaking and regulatory filings in 2008 and 2009.
Energies
This study analyzed the cost performance of electricity efficiency programs implemented by 116 investor-owned utilities between 2009 and 2015 in 41 states, representing about three-quarters of the total spending on U.S. efficiency programs. We applied our typology to characterize efficiency programs along several dimensions (market sector, technology, delivery approach, and intervention strategy) and report the costs incurred by utilities and other program administrators to achieve electricity savings as a result of the programs. Such cost performance data can be used to compare relative costs of different types of efficiency programs, evaluate efficiency options alongside other electricity resources, benchmark local efficiency programs against regional and national cost estimates, and assess the costs of meeting state efficiency policies. The savings-weighted average cost of saved electricity for the period was $0.025/kilowatt-hour (kWh). The cost of saved electricity for programs ...
UTILITY CONNECTION CHARGES AND CREDITS Stepping Up the Rate of Energy Efficiency Implementation
2004
One of the most severe barriers to implementation of cost-effective energy conservation is the fact that the person or company making the decision of what type of equipment to install in a building, or even of what building to construct, is often not the same person who will pay the energy bills over the life of the building. Because the builder will not have to pay the energy costs resulting from these decisions, they have little incentive to invest in energy-conserving measures.