greenbanc Home Energy Scores in SF Bay Area, California Presentation for City of Albany Sustainability Committee October 2018

Transcription

1 Home Energy Scores in SF Bay Area, California Presentation for City of Albany Sustainability Committee October 2018

2 About Greenbanc is catalyzing investments in residential building energy efficiency and renewable energy with Home Energy Score research, communications and marketing Leading provider of Home Energy Scores in California in More than 100 completed Home Energy Scores City of Berkeley has called Greenbanc s Home Energy Score offering the gold standard Transformative partnership with leading financing provider to be announced late 2018 Focused on innovative ways of using building energy labels to achieve efficiency gains and decarbonization Provides Energy Freedom Plans, preliminary roadmaps for zero energy retrofits Certified B Corporation with a commitment to a positive social and environmental impact Contractor independent with ability to work with diverse contractors depending on best fit with needs Business history Founded at Urban Future Lab in Brooklyn, New York in 2016 Winner of InspireSpace contest provided by Green Mountain Power in Vermont Leading provider of Home Energy Scores in Vermont in 2017 with 55 Home Energy Scores Relocated to Berkeley in mid-2017, because of the BESO mandate, and California s leadership in energy efficiency policies, renewables and innovation 2

3 Executive Summary Energy consumption in Albany s buildings generate a significant amount of the City s GHG emissions 89% of residential stock was constructed prior to Title 24 energy efficiency standards 42% was developed prior to 1939 and has minimal insulation, old furnaces and poor performance A proactive strategy is required to catalyze investments in energy efficiency and renewable energy at existing buildings to reduce emissions Albany has experience with Home Energy Scores (HES) with mixed results Draft of BEADO outstanding Pre-survey of 136 homeowners, pilot HES assessments of 20 homes and post-survey with 17/20 responses Noted limitations regarding timing of process, homeowner communications and recommendations that drive measureable GHG impact Greenbanc has completed over 100 assessments in the Bay Area and seeks to share Summary of data collected from 100 Home Energy Scores Lessons learned from HES in the Bay Area and Berkeley BESO Revisions in research, communications, and marketing to accelerate efficiency projects / electrification Pathways forward for maximum carbon reductions in residential buildings Albany s CAP 2.0 is an opportunity to incorporate building energy scorecards, joining leading efforts in Portland, OR, Connecticut and Colorado (yet way behind the 28 member states of the European Union) 3

4 Summary of First 100 Home Energy Scores in SF Bay Area 4

5 Greenbanc has completed over 100 scores in the SF Bay Area Data collected has been meticulously added to a dynamic database

6 Map of Home Energy Scores Note: As of 6/7/18. 6

7 Home Energy Score Scores are evenly-distributed with an average score of Average: 4.7 Even homes with score of 10 have all gas systems More efficient homes Median Recommended level Average modern homes Year Original condition or poor design Note: For all pages, comments reflect first 100 Scores and graphs are as of 6/7/18. 7

8 Carbon impact is not determined by home size; design and equipment matter 8

9 Attic insulation is less than R-30 at 87% of homes and R-0 at 27% Recommended level Note: For all graphs, comments reflect first 100 Scores and graphs are as of 6/7/18. 9

10 Wall insulation is low and 67% have no wall insulation Recommended level 10

11 Floor insulation is low and 80% of homes have no floor insulation Recommended level 11

12 Water heaters are old and inefficient; 44% are beyond 10-year expected life Replacement often happens near time-of-sale, prior to receiving energy analysis, representing a lost opportunity to discuss other options Recommended min. age Note: 1900 is NA. 12

13 Water heaters are still primarily gas storage tanks, ripe for HPWH replacement Default EF for gas storage tanks is 0.55 Default EF for tankless/instant gas is 0.80 Heat pump water heaters have EF >3 13

14 Case Study: Alameda and Contra Costa counties HPWH $1500 incentive Pilot program funded through East Bay Energy Watch (EBEW), a local government partnership between PG&E, StopWaste, and the cities within the counties of Alameda and Contra Costa Heat Pump Water Heater EBEW offered heat pump water heaters (HPWH) to replace gas storage water heaters with a $1500 rebate Greenbanc was able to search database of homes to find old gas storage water heaters to homeowners resulted in referrals to EBEW Scheduled in-person assessments of HPWH suitability at several homes and specific cost estimates are on-going Having the Home Energy Score data allows for special offers to homeowners to catalyze equipment replacements 14

15 Heating systems are old and inefficient; 43% are beyond 15 year expected life Replacement often happens near time-of-sale, prior to receiving energy analysis, representing a lost opportunity to discuss wholistic solutions HVAC contractors often recommend larger gas furnaces than required without evaluating insulation or airtightness first Recommended min. age Note: 1900 is NA. 15

16 Solar installed on 9% of homes but undersized given dependence on gas 16

17 Comparison with Albany s 20 score pilot results Characteristic 20 Score Average 100 Score Average Year Built Square Footage 1,572 1,671 Number of Bedrooms Home Energy Score Carbon Emissions (tons) NA 4.7 Utility Bills $1,444 $2,036 Attic Insulation at R-0 32% 27% Wall Insulation at R-0 100% 67% Floor Insulation at R-0 100% 80% Single Pane Windows 42% 39% Gas Heating 100% 100% Gas Water Heating 100% 99% Solar Present? 20% 9% Similar to Albany s 20 score pilot, Greebanc s data on 100 homes confirms that Bay Area homes are old, have minimal insulation, and are highly dependent on gas for space and water heating Greenbanc s larger sample size included more homes with wall and floor insulation, but fewer with solar Significant differences in calculation of average utility bills, carbon impact and recommendations DOE Upgrade Score Similar DOE Upgrade Score 17

18 Lessons Leaned From HES in Bay Area and Berkeley BESO 18

19 The Albany SC identified limitations/challenges with the HES execution Albany Comments Timeliness of process, most notably generation of the final report for homeowners Lag of many days between assessment/report Data entry QA process Reports may be vague, unclear or inaccurate R-values No information on costs Inaccurate data Concerns with effectiveness of recommendations DOE upgrade score not high Energy and cost savings low No fuel switching to electric recommendations Additional limitations No recommendation of renewables Asset-based score that does not address behavior No actual requirement to upgrade Greenbanc Comments Homeowner attention span is limited and immediacy is important Data entry needs to happen on day of assessment and reports approved faster than current lag of 5-10 business days Report requires homeowner education Basic energy literacy is lacking Benefits to independent analysis There can be confusion about inputs DOE and BAYREN recommendations are different BAYREN recs are extensive and not reflected in DOE upgrade score Assessors must be electrification advocates HES reports and process can be improved 100% of Greenbanc reports include solar Asset-based score is important and could have behavioral additions Upgrade requirements are determined by policy and should apply to lower 10% 19

20 Home Energy Scores in Bay Area have two parts: DOE report The first part of the Home Energy Score report for the Bay Area is a standard DOE output that comes from the DOE tool and includes the building facts collected in the assessment The standard report includes recommendations that are calculated to be cost-effective, however, the recommendation page is removed for the Bay Area 20

21 Home Energy Scores in Bay Area have two parts: recommendations The second part of the Home Energy Score report for the Bay Area is a recommendations page that is specific to the Bay Area and includes a carbon impact calculation Includes breakdown by energy type, carbon footprint and custom recommendations with some flexibility at the discretion of the assessor 21

22 Background for context on asset-based ratings systems and goals Asset-based building energy scorecards Energy Performance Certificates (EPC) have been required in the 28 Member States of the European Union since 2009, providing a letter grade rating on efficiency/impact for buyers and renters EPCs are valid for 10 years, and some countries require 5 year testing Each state has minimum building energy performance requirements Research indicates correlation between energy performance and market prices Studies in Dublin, England, Germany, the Netherlands found homes and apartments with a green label sell for a premium Effectiveness of EPCs is dependent on proper implementation To impact consumer behavior, EPCs have to be mandatory and available for viewing early on in the transaction process Public opinion and media portrayal appear to be highly important factors in the adoption rate of the energy label in housing transaction (exemption options have greatly reduced the adoption rate) In 2016, the European Commission concluded that the program will directly contribute to the EU s proposed target of a 30% increase in energy efficiency by 2030 Certification of the energy performance of buildings is delivering a demanddriven market signal for energy efficient buildings and is achieving its aim of encouraging consumers to buy or rent more energy efficient buildings; Source: MA-DOER Memo: EU Energy Performance Certificates, July 10,

23 Building energy scorecards effectiveness is cyclical; higher standards raise bar Stakeholder Impact Program Stakeholder Impact State/City Government Lowers carbon emissions Cost-neutral Buyers make energy improvements that lower carbon emissions, increase building energy scores Government wants lower carbon emissions, passes scorecard law with minimum requirements Building owners / sellers need energy assessments and benchmark carbon analysis Home Sellers Ability to get credit for upgrades, if performed Qualified assessors and contractors perform energy assessments Cost is minor in comparison to sale proceeds (Bay Area median home prices exceed $1.3 million vs. cost of score at $222) Homebuyers Additional info for better decisions Better homes with lower operating costs Buyers get energy performance information and make better buying decisions Scores sent to database and real estate market, influence valuation Energy Contractors More customers, jobs, projects Strengthens efficiency & solar industries 23

24 Lessons learned from more than 100 Home Energy Scores in Bay Area While many people know about climate change, there is low awareness that solutions require changes in buildings Studies show homeowners spend just 6 minutes a year thinking about energy Attractive technologies to lower emissions such as insulation, rooftop solar, heat pump water heaters, heat pumps and electric cars are available today Bay Area has a moderate climate, abundant solar, environmentally-conscious population and yet is completely dependent on fracked gas from Canada and Midwest BESO policy was first in US, but allowed for a 12 month deferral that makes it peculiar for HES Approximately 90% of sellers defer, and buyers don t have the scores when selecting which home to buy City of Berkeley s application fee for deferral is $48 compared to $79 to submit the completed assessment; a disincentive for sellers to get the score Implementation of the program in the City of Berkeley is poorly suited for the Home Energy Score Scores rarely done by sellers in Berkeley Deferral is an exemption from compliance from program characteristics shown to be successful No MLS integration to share scores with buyers Scores are not shown to buyers and do not influence their behavior Very low public awareness about building energy scorecards purpose or value Every buyer calls asking for BESO inspection and wants to know if improvements are required Difficult environment to catalyze improvements without minimum performance requirements, clear market value implications, and/or social proof 24

25 X X X X US: Berkeley s program implementation is poor because of the deferral Stakeholder Impact Program Stakeholder Impact State/City Government No control of report No minimum requirements Carbon impact? Government wants lower carbon emissions, passes scorecard law with minimum requirements Building owners / sellers need energy assessments and benchmark carbon analysis Home Sellers Don t have to pay for report Realtors ignore scores in selling materials Buyers make energy improvements that lower carbon emissions, increase building energy scores Buyers don t get the analysis until it s too late New home is selected High priority renovations planned Already moved in Already completed mortgage financing with huge down payment No pressure to report score or get another score later Qualified assessors and contractors perform energy assessments Homebuyers Pay for report within 12 months Get it too late Buyers get energy performance information and make better buying decisions Scores sent to database and real estate market, influence valuation Energy Contractors Favors traditional, low volume approach 25

26 Scores need to be done by sellers to impact buyers and real estate market Owner/Geography Time of Listing Time of Sale Seller buys Score Portland HES Seller Time of Listing for Sale or Rent Green Button to MLS Listings / RE Market / Mortgage Providers What serves the buyer? Having the score done by seller or later? Buyer Buyer buys Score Berkeley BESO Direct comms 28 EU Member States Public Disclosure Window 12 Month Deferral Does the Berkeley BESO program reduce carbon emissions? Yes, but it is not a fully functioning energy scorecard program Does Portland HES program reduce carbon emissions? Too soon to tell. It started in 2018 and the City of Portland expects to have data on impact in 2-3 years Does European Union program reduce carbon emissions? Yes, and there is data from all the participating countries with that shows effectiveness, which is the reason it has been required throughout the EU since

27 Revisions in Research, Communications, and Marketing 27

28 Greenbanc s execution of the HES has been optimized with tailored research Data collection and research can be completed in less than 1 hour HES information needs to be communicated with the homeowner fast and questions answered for continued engagement Homeowner receives Energy Freedom Plan day of or after assessment Includes recommendations for every characteristic for best performance Estimates lifetime cost of current performance vs savings from better performance Includes estimates of cost of contracting improvements Allows for fair and quantitative comparison of energy losses vs improvement costs Clear bias for electrification and zero energy retrofits Includes solar recommendation Allows homeowner to have a stronger roadmap for making improvements and path to zero emissions HES service includes time reserved for follow-up and marketing best contracting partners ClearResult also follows up independently with free home advisor service but doesn t connect or market contractors HES service includes free hypothetical calculations of the Score for different improvement scenarios HES service is still free for any homeowner in the Bay Area, excluding Berkeley 28

29 Greenbanc has added a third component: roadmap for decarbonization Energy Freedom Plans provide a preliminary roadmap to decarbonization with estimated energy impacts and contractor costs by recommended improvement 29

30 30

31 31

32 32

33 Capability to integrate with home energy saver to granulate recommendations Home Energy Score recommendations are limited to asset and equipment upgrades Official report doesn t calculate returns based on savings Home Energy Saver building model has more granular modeling controls and can offer more detailed recommendations that cover more uses of energy in the home Thermostats Lights Clothing washers / dryers Refrigerators Dishwashers The Home Energy Score could be supplemented with additional recommendations and/or financial calculations including incentives 33

34 Presenting for first time: Bay Area residential housing carbon offset price Problem: No Attic Insulation With Clear Access To Install Insulation Calculated 30 Year Energy Loss using Today s Prices Solution: Insulate to R- 30: Cost of Improvement Today Without Rebates Calculated Carbon Footprint Reduction Without Pipeline Leakage Impacts Simple number of years of savings to payback cost of investment 1340 Carleton Street $9,524 $1, x 2021 Tenth Street $19,459 $2, x 7 Virginia Gardens $5,906 $1, x 2449 Russell Street $3,159 $ x 2148 Sacramento St $10,119 $1, x 1528 Campus Drive $7,509 $1, x rd Street $9,386 $2, x 1109 Mountain Blvd $5,540 $1, x 28 Evergreen Drive $31,730 $2, x 2573 Buena Vista Way $3,434 $1, x Total $105,766 $17, Average 6.9x The cost to offset a ton of carbon emissions using improvements in residential energy efficiency is $28! Likely the cost is overstated given it does not include rebates and incentives designed to lower the cost and/or tack-on other improvements that also reduce energy usage and enable electrification This compares to the federal social cost of carbon at $41 or other research indicating social cost above $220* From a government perspective, adding insulation to the attics of Albany homes where none exists is a nobrainer * 34

35 Questions for City of Albany Sustainability Committee Does the City of Albany have the will to take a leadership position? California Energy Commission needs examples from cities to develop statewide policies Can CAP 2.0 be an opportunity to be innovative? Does a program for the City of Albany need to be the same as for City of Berkeley or Portland or entire countries? Could a city s smaller size prove an advantage? Is a market-based program required? Are mandatory improvements with a new approach possible? Could renters be included? Could the policy be crafted to minimize the time needs of City staff? Outsourced database Minimal compliance enforcement Could the policy actually be a source of revenue for the City? What is the relationship of the City with StopWaste and BAYREN? MLS integration requires broad engagement What additional demonstrations or analyses would be helpful for the Sustainability Committee? 35

36 Contact Information: North Lennox Greenbanc 1614 Campbell Street Oakland, CA (510)