Laserfiche WebLink
7.A. - Page 71 of 285 <br />2019 Energy Efficiency Ordinance Cost-effectiveness Study <br />Less information was available for the costs associated with gas infrastructure for low-rise multifamily <br />development. The typical cost in Table 6 for the On -Bill methodology is based on TRC's City of Palo Alto 2019 <br />Title 24 Energy Reach Code Cost-effectiveness Analysis (TRC, 2018). These costs, provided by the City of Palo <br />Alto, are approximately $25,100 for an 8 -unit new construction building and reflect connection to an existing <br />main for infill development. Specific costs include plan review, connection charges, meter and manifold, <br />plumbing distribution, and street cut fees. While these costs are specifically based on infill development and <br />from one municipal utility, the estimates are less than those provided by PG&E reflecting the average cost <br />differences charged to the developer between single family and multifamily in an undeveloped area (after <br />accounting for deductions per the Gas Main Extensions rule). To convert costs charged to the developer to <br />account for the full infrastructure upgrade cost (costs applied in the TDV methodology analysis), a factor of <br />2.0616 was calculated based on the single family analysis. This same factor was applied to the multifamily cost of <br />$3,140 to arrive at $6,463 (see Table 6). <br />2.7 Greenhouse Gas Emissions <br />Equivalent CO2 emission savings were calculated based on outputs from the CBECC-Res simulation software. <br />Electricity emissions vary by region and by hour of the year. CBECC-Res applies two distinct hourly profiles, one <br />for Climate Zones 1 through 5 and 11 through 13 and another for Climate Zones 6 through 10 and 14 through <br />16. For natural gas a fixed factor of 0.005307 metric tons/therm is used. To compare the mixed fuel and all - <br />electric cases side-by-side, greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions are presented as CO2 -equivalent emissions per <br />square foot of conditioned floor area. <br />3 Results <br />The primary objective of the evaluation is to identify cost-effective, non -preempted performance targets for <br />both single family and low-rise multifamily prototypes, under both mixed fuel and all -electric cases, to support <br />the design of local ordinances requiring new low-rise residential buildings to exceed the minimum state <br />requirements. The packages presented are representative examples of designs and measures that can be used <br />to meet the requirements. In practice, a builder can use any combination of non -preempted or preempted <br />compliant measures to meet the requirements. <br />This analysis covered all sixteen climate zones and evaluated two efficiency packages, including a non - <br />preempted package and a preempted package that includes upgrades to federally regulated equipment, an <br />Efficiency & PV Package for the all -electric scenario only, and an Efficiency & PV/Battery Package. For the <br />efficiency -only packages, measures were refined to ensure that the non -preempted package was cost-effective <br />based on one of the two metrics applied in this study, TDV or On -Bill. The preempted equipment package, which <br />the Reach Code Team considers to be a package of upgrades most reflective of what builders commonly apply to <br />exceed code requirements, was designed to be cost-effective based on the On -Bill cost-effectiveness approach. <br />Results are presented as EDR Margin instead of compliance margin. EDR is the metric used to determine code <br />compliance in the 2019 cycle. Target EDR Margin is based on taking the calculated EDR Margin for the case and <br />rounding down to the next half of a whole number. Target EDR Margin for the Efficiency Package are defined <br />based on the lower of the EDR Margin of the non -preempted package and the equipment, preempted package. <br />For example, if for a particular case the cost-effective non -preempted package has an EDR Margin of 3 and the <br />preempted package an EDR Margin of 4, the Target EDR Margin is set at 3. <br />16 This factor includes the elimination of the 50% refund for the main extension and adding back in the appliance <br />allowance deductions. <br />LU., <br />2019-08-01 <br />323 <br />