Laserfiche WebLink
2013 -2014 Energy Efficiency Programs <br />Local Government Partnership Program <br />Program Implementation Plan <br />to program designers. )27" The Strategic Plan recognizes that regulatory policies are not yet in <br />place to support the success of market transformation efforts 28, but also reflects the CPUC's <br />directive to design energy efficiency programs that can lay the groundwork for either market <br />transformation success or for codes and standards changes. <br />Above all else, the hallmark of a successful market transformation program is in the <br />coordination of efforts across many stakeholders. The most successful MT programs have <br />involved multiple organizations, providing overlapping market interventions 29. The Strategic <br />Plan calls for coordination and collaboration throughout, and in that spirit the utilities look <br />forward to working with the CPUC and all stakeholders to help achieve market <br />transformation while meeting all the immediate energy, demand, and environmental needs. <br />Drawing upon lessons learned from past MT efforts, the Energy Center of Wisconsin's guide <br />for MT program developers 30 suggests that the first step is not to set end -point definitions, <br />progress metrics or goals. Rather, the first steps include forming a collaborative of key <br />participants. As the Strategic Plan suggests, these may include municipal utilities, local <br />governments, industry and business leaders, and consumers. Then, with the collective <br />expertise of the collaborative, we can define markets, characterize markets, measure <br />baselines with better access to historical data, and define objectives, design strategies and <br />tactics, implement and then evaluate programs. The collaborative will also provide insights <br />that will set our collective expectations for the size of market effects we can expect, relative <br />to the amount of resources we can devote to MT. No one organization in the collaborative <br />will have all the requisite information and expertise for this huge effort. This truly needs to <br />be a collaborative approach from the start. <br />The metrics and baselines described below in Tables 2 and 3 are presented for the purposes <br />of starting the much - needed discussion between all key participants. These are suggestions, <br />intended to allow key participants to pilot -test processes for establishing baseline metrics, <br />tracking market transformation progress, and for refining evaluation tools. Early trial of these <br />evaluation metrics will reveal any gaps in data tracking so that we may refine our processes <br />before frill -scale market transformation evaluations take place. <br />The set of metrics we selected is intentionally a small set, for several reasons. First, as <br />mentioned, the full set of metrics and baselines need to be selected by key participants. <br />Second, we anticipate that market share data for many mid- and low- impact measures will be <br />too sparse to show MT effects and not cost - effective to analyze. Third, we selected core <br />measures and metrics that would both be indicative of overall portfolio efforts. These <br />measures are also likely to be offered on a broad level by other utilities, providing a greater <br />base of sales and customer data that could be analyzed for far- reaching MT effects. <br />Therefore, for the Local Government Partnerships the following approach to quantitative <br />baseline and market transformation information is presented as follows. <br />The utilities recommend development of a baseline, and tracking the number of cities, <br />counties and government institutions that have plans for written energy efficiency provisions. <br />27 Peters, LS., MaskB., Ignelzi, P., Megdal, L.M. (1998). Market Effects Summary Study Final Report: Volume 1. "Available at <br />http: / /calmac.org/ publications /I 9981215CAD0001 ME.PDE <br />ze CPUC (2008) Strategic Plan, p. 5. <br />29 Nadel, Thorne, Saehes, Prindle & Elliot (2003). <br />30 Peloza & York, (1999). <br />