AgdaPkt 2020-01-13 Joint - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

7.A. - Page 73 of 285 2019 Energy Efficiency Ordinance Cost-effectiveness Study i abie "/: 1'V fir. Battery sizing vetans Dy YacKa a -1 pe Package I Mixed Fuel All -Electric Efficiency (Envelope & Equipment) PV Scaled @ 100% electricity Std Design PV Efficiency & PV n/a PV Scaled @ 90% PV Scaled @ 100% electricity PV Scaled @ 100% Efficiency & PV/Battery SkWh / SF home SkWh / SF home 2.75kWh/ MF apt 2.75kWh/ MF apt A sensitivity analysis was conducted to determine the appropriate battery and PV capacity for the Efficiency & PV/Battery Packages using the 1 -story 2,100 square foot prototype in Climate Zone 12. Results are shown in Figure 2. The current version of CBECC-Res requires a minimum battery size of 5 kWh to qualify for the self - utilization credit. CBECC-Res allows for PV oversizing up to 160% of the building's estimated electricity load when battery storage systems are installed; however, the Reach Code Team considered this high, potentially problematic from a grid perspective, and likely not acceptable to the utilities or customers. The Reach Code Team compared cost-effectiveness of 5kWh and 7.5kWh battery systems as well as of PV systems sized to offset 90%, 100%, or 120% of the estimated electrical load. Results show that from an on -bill perspective a smaller battery size is more cost-effective. The sensitivity analysis also showed that increasing the PV capacity from 90% to 120% of the electricity use reduced cost- effectiveness. From the TDV perspective there was little difference in results across all the scenarios, with the larger battery size being marginally more cost-effective. Based on these results, the Reach Code Team applied to the Efficiency & PV/Battery Package a SkWh battery system for single family homes with PV sized to offset 100% of the electricity load. Even though PV scaled to 90% was the most cost-effective, sizing was increased to 100% to evaluate greater generation beyond the Efficiency & PV Package and to achieve zero net electricity. These results also show that in isolation, the inclusion of a battery system reduces cost-effectiveness compared to the same size PV system without batteries. For multifamily buildings the battery capacity was scaled to reflect the average ratio of battery size to PV system capacity (kWh/kW) for the single family Efficiency & PV Package. This resulted in a 22kWh battery for the multifamily building, or 2.75kWh per apartment. Benefit -to -Cost Ratio No Battery, I V Scaled L@ 90% 5 kWh Battery, PV Scaled @ 9D% 5 kWh Battery, PV Scaled 0 100% 7.5 kWh Battery, PV Scaled @ 90% 7.5 kWh Battery, PV Scaled CHP 100% S kWh Battery, PV Scaled & 120% 7.5 kWh Battery, PV Scaled C@ 120% Figure 2: B/C ratio comparison for PV and battery sizing 20 2019-08-01 325