ML12334A547

Official Exhibit - NYS000063-00-BD01 - Optimal Energy, Inc., Achievable Electric Energy Efficiency Potential in New York State (2008) Excerpted: Pp. 5-6 (2008 Optimal Report)

ML12334A547
Person / Time
Site:	Indian Point
Issue date:	11/30/2008
From:	American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy, Optimal Energy
To:	Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel, State of NY, Dept of Public Service
SECY RAS
References
RAS 21536, 50-247-LR, 50-286-LR, ASLBP 07-858-03-LR-BD01
Download: ML12334A547 (3)

Text

NYS000063 United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Official Hearing Exhibit Submitted: December 14, 2011 Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.

In the Matter of:

(Indian Point Nuclear Generating Units 2 and 3) EXCERPT c.\.t.pr.RREGU<..q" ASLBP #: 07-858-03-LR-BD01

!~\:

Docket #: 05000247 l 05000286

< 0 Exhibit #: NYS000063-00-BD01 Identified: 10/15/2012

~

~ -'

~

Admitted: 10/15/2012 Withdrawn:

.....,1-- O~ Rejected: Stricken:

?

.. ** .... '" Other:

Integrated Energy Resources ACHIEVABLE ELECTRIC ENERGY EFFICIENCY POTENTIAL IN NEW YORK STATE Prepared for New York Department of Public Service by:

Optimal Energy, Inc., Bristol, VT Vermont Energy Investment Corporation, Burlington, VT American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy, \,\/.",hin DRAFT November

~ ................................................

OAGI0001111_00001

Achievable Electric Energy Efficiency Potential in New York State Appendix C provides detail on the codes and standards impacts, including the combined impacts projected by regional zone and by year. NYSERDA recently performed an analysis of codes and standards impacts as part of the States EEPS proceedings 8. NYSERDA's analysis projected savings from codes and standards that were somewhat lower than those projected by the ACEEE analysis. A comparison of these two analyses is also provided in Appendix C (Table 16).

ACHIEVABLE PROGRAM POTENTIAL The tables below provide a variety of summary-level outputs from the analysis. Note that all savings and forecast energy values are at the "point of purchase" as opposed to at meter."9 II Table 1 shows the overall Statewide and zonal results for 2015 in terms of energy and demand savings and economic effects.

Table 1. Statewide and Zonal Savings for 2015 and Program Lifetime Economic Effects 2015 2015 Cumulative Cumulative Benefits Net Energy 2015 Demand (PV) Costs (PV) Benefits Savings Forecast % of2015 Savings 2008$, 2008$, (PV) 2008$

(GWh) (GWh) Forecast (MW) Millions Millions Millions BCR Residential 4,414 59,844 7.4% 863 2,777 1,115 1,662 2.49 NYC 1,408 18,119 7.8% 206 $787 $279 $508 2.82 Long Island 779 8,115 9.6% 149 $557 $264 $293 2.11 Rest of State 2,227 33,610 6.6% 509 $1,432 $571 $861 2.51 Commercial 18,205 108,896 16.7% 4,420 15,990 6,703 9,287 2.39 NYC 7,845 41,665 18.8% 2,037 $7,886 $3,197 $4,689 2.47 Long Island 2,330 13,323 17.5% 590 $2,146 $849 $1,297 2.53 Rest of State 8,030 53,908 14.9% 1,794 $5,958 $2,657 $3,301 2.24 Industrial 3,381 16,443 20.6% 491 2,020 186 1,834 10.85 NYC 571 2,893 19.7% 83 $378 $37 $341 10.17 Long Island 494 2,194 22.5% 72 $303 $33 $270 9.16 Rest of State 2,316 11,356 20.4% 337 $1,338 $116 $1,222 11.55 Total 26,000 185,183 14.0% 5,775 20,786 8,004 12,783 2.60 NYC 9,824 62,677 15.7% 2,326 $9,051 $3,514 $5,538 2.58 Long Island 3,603 23,633 15.2% 810 $3,007 $1,146 $1,860 2.62 Rest of State 12,573 98,874 12.7% 2,639 $8,729 $3,344 $5,385 2.61 Table 2 shows the Statewide reference case forecast and efficiency savings by sector and year. Note that post-program market effect years are shaded (savings decrease in the market 8

9 Point-of-purchase level savings reflect the savings at the point of power purchase (corresponding to the avoided costs) and include savings in transmission and distribution line losses. Meter level savings would reflect end use savings at the customer meter and would be less because no line losses are considered.

Optimal Energy, Inc. 5 DRAFT November 2008 OAGI0001111_00009

Achievable Electric Energy Efficiency Potential in New York State effect years due to lack of program spending and the loss of savings from measures installed in previous years at the end of those measures' lives). Table 3 shows Statewide efficiency savings as a percent of the total forecast, including codes and standards. Table 4 shows Statewide efficiency savings as a percent of the reference forecast, excluding the impact of codes &

standards.

Table 5 and Table 6 show Statewide cumulative annual energy savings and summer peak demand reductions by program for each year, respectively.lO lOWe use the term cumulative annual to refer to the total impacts resulting in a gi ven year from the current year program and any savings still occurring from measures installed in prior program years. This is the reduction expected in that year's forecast load.

Optimal Energy, Inc. 6 DRAFT November 2008 OAGI0001111_00010