Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Energy Efficiency topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
UAC approves 10‑year electric efficiency goals after debate over scope and methods
Summary
The Utilities Advisory Commission recommended council adopt new 10‑year electric energy‑efficiency targets; commissioners debated methodology, whether electrification measures should be counted as efficiency and asked for program detail to link goals to actions.
The Utilities Advisory Commission on May 7 voted 5–2 to recommend that City Council adopt updated 10‑year electric energy efficiency targets for 2026–2035. The motion passed following extended discussion about methodology and the distinction between traditional “demand‑side” efficiency measures and electrification initiatives.
The targets are based on an achievable energy efficiency potential study completed with peer public utilities and translate to annual gross savings in the range of roughly 6,500 megawatt‑hours in later years, and cumulative savings representing about 2.8% of the utility’s forecast electric load by the end of the 10‑year period, staff said. Staff noted that results assume a free‑ridership adjustment (15% reduction) to convert gross to net savings for goal reporting.
Why it matters: These targets are used for utility program planning and to inform statewide modeling. Commissioners asked whether electrification savings (for example, gains from heat pump water heaters or electric HVAC replacing gas) should be included; staff said electrification savings are not currently counted in these EE targets but that the state and utilities are in a transition over how to reconcile electrification with traditional EE metrics.
Key points from the discussion: Commissioners raised several methodological concerns: lack of a granular citywide building audit, how measures were modeled, and whether the program portfolio and costs align with the sectors that the potential study shows as largest opportunities (nonresidential lighting and commercial measures). Staff said the targets reflect achievable program potential under current policies and building‑code baselines, and they noted expected reductions in claimable lighting savings because of stricter state lighting codes.
Staff also described a potential Conservation Voltage Reduction (CVR) program tied to future advanced metering infrastructure (AMI). Staff estimated CVR savings would begin ramping around 2028 when AMI deployment would enable per‑feeder voltage optimization; the item is included in the potential study modeling as a later‑decade savings source.
Vote and next steps: The advisory commission’s recommendation (5–2) will be transmitted to City Council for adoption. Commissioners asked staff to provide additional program‑level details, cost assumptions and examples of expected measures by sector at a follow‑up meeting so the commission can better evaluate how the targets translate into concrete programs and budgets.
Ending: Staff said the targets will be submitted to the California Energy Commission once council adopts them and that they will inform the utility’s DSM (demand‑side management) program planning and budget requests.
