WHPA Working Group Residential Upstream Program 13th Meeting July 16, 2013

Transcription

1 Call to Order The meeting was called to order at 1:05 p.m. DT by Chair (HARDI). Attendance Industry articipants First Last AHRI (Air-Conditioning, Heating, and Refrigeration Institute) Cade Clark A AHRI (Air-Conditioning, Heating, and Refrigeration Institute) Michael O'Halloran A AHRI (Air-Conditioning, Heating, and Refrigeration Institute) Warren Lupson Air Cold Supply (a Ferguson Enterprise) Mike Camarena Distributor Air Cold Supply (a Ferguson Enterprise) Steve Adams Distributor AN Strategies Austin rimiano rincipal ASHRAE Bob Baker ASHRAE Appointed Rep Beutler Corporation Rick Wylie Contractor (Nonresidential) Bristol Compressors International Doug Blankenship A Carrier Dick Lord A HARDI (Heating, Airconditioning & Refrigeration Distributors A-proxy to HARDI Distributor International) Indio Cooling and Heating Supply Tim Mann Distributor A Johnson Controls Chris Forth A Johnson Controls Wayne Guelfo A Lennox Industries Julie Humes MSDC (Mechanical Systems Design & Consulting) Jeff Henning Educator, Trainer A Sigler Wholesale Distributors-Carrier Jon Malkovich Distributor Specialty A/C-Trane Mark Waters Tru Tech Tools Bill Spohn Distributor A TURN (The Utility Reform Network); Vice-Chair of Res Upstream Working Group UA (So.Calif. United Union of lumbers, Fitters, Welders, and HVAC Service Techs) Cynthia Mitchell Other Stakeholder A Don Tanaka Organized Labor A US Air Conditioning Distributors John Staples Distributor A IOUs First Last acific Gas and Electric Company (G&E) James Tuleya California IOU A acific Gas and Electric Company (G&E) Julie Colvin California IOU A acific Gas and Electric Company (G&E) Keith Forsman California IOU Southern California Edison (SCE) Jonathan Budner California IOU A Southern California Edison (SCE) Lorraine Espinosa-Nall California IOU A Southern California Edison (SCE) Matt Horwitz California IOU A Southern California Edison (SCE) Mel Johnson California IOU A Southern California Edison (SCE) Roland Mollen California IOU A Southern California Edison (SCE) Samantha Nicely California IOU A San Diego Gas & Electric (SDG&E) Jeremy Reefe California IOU A San Diego Gas & Electric (SDG&E) Jo Jo Unverferth California IOU Southern California Gas Company (SoCalGas) Harvey Bringas California IOU Southern California Gas Company (SoCalGas) Yvonne Mejia California IOU First Last Other articipants CUC Energy Division Hazlyn Fortune California UC A CUC Energy Division Nils Strindberg California UC A CSG (Conservation Services Group) Elizabeth DeSouza Energy Efficiency rogram Energy Solutions Jim Hanna Energy Efficiency rogram WHA Staff First Last Better Buildings Inc. (BBI; WHA Staff ) Bonnie Gustavson Energy Efficiency rogram Key Marketing Group (KMG; WHA Staff) Judy Johnson Other Stakeholder Resource Solutions Group (RSG; WHA Staff) aul Kyllo Energy Efficiency rogram Res Upstream WG Mtg. # of 5

2 Review Agenda AGENDA ITEM Roll Call Introduction; presentation of materials developed Discussion Adjourn DISCUSSION LEADER Judy Johnson Roll Call A roll call was taken. Attendance is indicated above. AHRI gave its proxy to HARDI for this meeting. Introduction and resentation of Materials (All materials listed below are posted on WHA website and they were sent to meeting invitees in advance of the meeting) The following documents were provided by to meeting invitees for discussion during the meeting: 1. Residential Upstream Side-by-Side Comparison of What the IOUs Filed Versus What the Working Group Recommended July 16, 2013 (prepared by HARDI). The document has the following sections: a. Common Five equipment types with some common elements between the IOU roposal and the WHA roposal b. Differences Thirteen equipment types with differences between the IOU roposal and the WHA roposal c. rogram Mechanics Side-by-side comparison of seven program mechanics of the IOU roposal and the WHA roposal d. All Data Comparison of IOU roposal and WHA roposal for thirteen equipment types 2. The IOU Filing: SDG&E s AL 2498-E_2210-G, et al.pdf dated July 1, 2013 (HARDI; Chair of Working Group) provided an introduction. The Utilities have filed their proposed Res Upstream program to the UC. Because of the filing, the utilities have informed us that they will not be commenting on this discussion. The objective of this call is not to come to consensus as a Working Group or to file comments as a WHA Working Group but rather to exchange ideas and provide feedback from Working Group members and see if the Working Group members want to engage in this program if approved. A document was developed by HARDI as a side-by-side comparison of the Working Group Recommendation Report (which was accepted by the WHA Executive Committee), to the IOU Advice Letter, to the CUC. Utilities did not include Tier 1 and Tier 2 in their filing as was proposed in the Working Group report. The IOUs kept Tier 3 in their filing to the CUC. QUESTION TO INDUSTRY ATTENDEES by (HARDI; Chair of Working Group) What is your view of the possible impact of elimination for Tiers 1 and 2? Anyone interested in commenting has until the end of this week to comment with this filing, to say what you agree or disagree with. The UC will make the ultimate decision as to what the program looks like. Discussion John Malkovich (Sigler Wholesale Distributors) Tier 1 and 2 are reachable; Tier 3 is a pipe dream stretch. Mike Camarena (Air Cold Supply, a Ferguson Enterprise) Agree with John Malkovich s comments. To put some numbers on it, if the program expectations based on the WHA recommendation are for X number of units with incentives for Tiers 1, 2, and 3, then I predict that with the Tier 3-only program as proposed by the IOUs that less than 10% of those Tier 1, Tier 2, and Tier 3 units will be sold. The following industry meeting attendees added that they agreed with Mike s estimate of 10%: Mark Waters (Specialty A/C- Trane), Julie Humes (Lennox Industries), and (HARDI; Chair of Working Group). Res Upstream WG Mtg. # of 5

3 Rick Wylie (Beutler Corporation) Would expect to see more than 4% in the new construction segment if Tier 3 is properly supported/incented. Julie Humes (Lennox Industries) Based on her analysis of the data, she expects the total program proposed by the IOUs would only drive 4% of the participation of the complete WHA-recommended program. Mike Camarena (Air Cold Supply, a Ferguson Enterprise) Most contractors have trouble pushing 18 SEER; 16 is reasonable and less for 17. As we reduce the program (based on the IOU Filing) to only Tier 3, the results of 4% participation would be what we expect. (HARDI; Chair of Working Group) QUESTION to group. Taking the IOU proposal for A/C Split Systems, with 18 SEER, 13 EER, and an incentive range of $89 to $268 a ton, let s assume the incentive is $268 a ton. How much of a market mover is that at the highest Tier? Mark Waters (Specialty A/C-Trane) That is not a market mover. When you get to 18 SEER, you are stretching already. Climate zones (HARDI; Chair of Working Group) We can t figure out why there would be ranges in the potential incentives. Take A/C ackaged 16 SEER, 12 EER on the chart $89/ton to $268/ton. Maybe the IOUs are looking for different incentives by different climate zones. Mark Waters (Specialty A/C; Trane) It sounds like that is what the IOUs are trying to do. In the Bay Area alone, we have 10 climate zones. They vary within a single street. Can you imagine the hassle for the contactor trying to figure out who can get what incentive? It will be hard for us as distributors to find any motivation to invest in a program if we don t think the contractors will participate. If the demand is not there, we will not make the investment. Julie Humes (Lennox Industries) I agree with Mark s comment. It is hard for contractors to turn in paperwork. If it becomes any more confusing, the contactors won t participate. A/C with Evaporative Cooling (HARDI; Chair of Working Group) Looking at Line 3 on the Differences chart, the IOU proposal for A/C with Evaporative Cooling is only for 14.5 EER, $227/ton to $681/ton. erhaps the IOUs are responding to the (California Energy Efficiency) Strategic lan directive of climate-specific technologies and decided to include 14.5 SEER Evaporative Cooling Unit. Comments? Rick Wylie (Beutler Corporation) Beutler Corporation manufacturers the AquaChill unit. We have rebates for the product now with SMUD and SCE. We are trying to get it into other programs statewide. It is a higher end expensive product and is especially valuable in a very hot climate. For this equipment, it does not seem like you would get enough return with an incentive of $227/ton to $681/ton. (And) not everyone is agreeable to that type of technology. We would rather see Tier 1 and/or Tier 2 brought back and see more mainstream usage. Rick Wylie (Beutler Corporation) As far as water cooled, it is apples and oranges (to other types of units) EER water cooled holds up well with minimal falloff. We see significant peak load reduction in the heat storms. There are two CA incentive programs currently in place for this unit SCE is $450 per ton and SMUD $2,000 per unit scaling down over next few years. Mark Waters (Specialty A/C-Trane) Central Valley to alm Desert are good cases for A/C with Evaporative Cooling. Extreme hot temperature product testing and rating Julie Humes (Lennox Industries) If Lennox has a new product that hits 15 SEER or 16 SEER, is it included if it s not evaporative? Or is any product 14.5 EER and above included? Rick Wylie (Beutler Corporation) If the product aligns with SEER, it stops at 95 degrees F temperature. What about 105 degrees and 110 and 115? The industry is not always doing a good job testing its products in severe conditions. The utilities are testing products in some of those extremes. Rick Wylie (Beutler Corporation) Beutler has a study of US climates where the temperature hits 100 degrees with some frequency. I believe the utilities are adamant in promoting climate-appropriate technology. One-third of California is in extreme hot climate zones; anywhere on or east of Interstate 5 is applicable. Res Upstream WG Mtg. # of 5

4 Eliminating Tiers 1 and 2 of the recommendation Rick Wylie (Beutler Corporation) The majority of the benefits in the Working Group proposal is from Tier 1 and 2 equipment; the least amount of share would be 18 SEER. HARDI has supplied numbers of the mix. To make the program work, 90% of the sales would have to be in Tiers 1 and 2. Rick Wylie (Beutler Corporation) May want to file one comment because of the AquaChill including the UC would want to hear that comment. Mark Waters (Specialty A/C-Trane) We have a significant investment already in Tier 1 and Tier 2 products, and we want to increase our current levels of 13 and 14 SEER inventories. I m not going to go out and buy another product when I already have investment in products. Julie Humes (Lennox Industries) We don t pay out money until the installation has happened during the promotion dates, so I am wary of that side of it. Also, for some of the higher end products, the IOU-recommended rebates would not even pay for 10% of the increased cost. aul Kyllo (RSG; WHA Staff) Unless the incentive pays the whole incremental cost from 14 SEER moving up to 18 SEER, people can t afford to move up to the 18 SEER. Rick Wylie (Beutler Corporation) A crucial question is, can I take this off my sell price to the dealer so they don t have to make up the initial price? If a normal replacement is $8,000 for a 13 SEER system and you are trying to sell a system that would cost $4,000 more, it would still cost the customer $2,000 more (if the dealer applies the rebate rather than the contractor). It comes down to the confidence of the distributors that we can sell it to the contactors. If it is just a downstream rebate administrated by the downstream folks, it won t work! Julie Humes (Lennox Industries) The IOUs are looking to the distributors to perform and to pay on performance, but they require serial numbers and installation addresses, so we can t pay up front with those requirements for reporting. (HARDI; Chair of Working Group) The question for the UC is, what are you most interested in accomplishing? The whole idea was to give an incentive for distributors to change the behavior of the market. There is not enough to do that (in the IOU filing). ackage Units (HARDI; Chair of Working Group) There are significant differences between the Working Group s recommendations and the IOUs on the package units. QUESTION Do you think the impact on the package units of eliminating Tiers 1 and 2 would be more or less than the split system? Mark Waters (Specialty A/C-Trane) Heat pumps cost more and we don t sell a lot. More incentive money for heat pumps is a better thing and could make a difference. Mark Waters (Specialty A/C-Trane) On AC package and heat pump package unit, if you eliminate Tier 1 and Tier 2, there is not enough savings to go to the high efficiency units of Tier 3. Trying to get 16 SEER out of a package unit that is already very expensive is a problem. Additionally, not all distributors can even participate as not all manufactures make it. Energy Upgrade CA; double dipping of incentives (HARDI; Chair of Working Group) They say Energy Upgrade CA already has incentives for Tier 1, and they will be adding Tier 2. I have not heard positive things about the uptake of the Energy Upgrade California program. QUESTION What are your thoughts? Julie Humes (Lennox Industries) I d put Tier 3 back in Energy Upgrade California and put in Tiers 1 and 2. (HARDI; Chair of Working Group) The distributor program needs to take precedence in saving claims. I am concerned that if there is an incentive for a product that a contactor would use for another program, such as Energy Upgrade California, then the rebate claim would be denied for the distributor program. Res Upstream WG Mtg. # of 5

5 Julie Humes (Lennox Industries) That happened in Texas and it is a nightmare. The rebate reimbursement was first-come-firstused. Lennox does not participate in those programs any more. (HARDI; Chair of Working Group) The CUC needs to understand that there may be double dipping and just accept it. If you try to manage that, you will gut the whole program. Other Comments Mark Waters (Specialty A/C-Trane) It seems like the IOUs are not wanting to spend money so (their proposal) is only for top end because they know almost no one will buy there. Julie Humes (Lennox Industries) Those are the people who will buy Tier 3 regardless of cost. (HARDI; Chair of Working Group) It was also interesting that the IOUs did not include the advance circulating fans or advanced thermostats, both of which are in the WHA proposals. Evaporative cool coil TYO the Working Group document should have written per furnace or per unit and not per ton. (HARDI; Chair of Working Group) Regarding Section 6-M&V, the IOUs are expecting distributors to present surveys and stocking levels so that they can track immediate changes in stocking percents, etc. I am concerned that they could misinterpret the data. Julie Humes (Lennox Industries) I thought the data required (in the IOU Filing) was too much intrusion and would require too much time. Summary (HARDI; Chair of Working Group) The purpose of this call was to educate the Working Group members on the status of the Res Upstream program and to get comments and interchange among the members. No vote was taken and no Working Group action items resulted from this meeting. aul Kyllo (RSG; WHA Staff) If anyone is interested in filing comments, you don t need to get into lots of details. You could say, for example, that because of the lack of middle Tiers (Tier 1 and Tier 2), you do not believe the proposed programs will significantly move the market. (HARDI; Chair of Working Group) The IOU filing document (page 4) includes instructions on how to file comments. They must be in writing and received no later than July 21. Copies of protest by to attention of Energy Division. ACTION WHA Staff Bonnie Gustavson to redistribute handouts from today, including sending the IOU filing again. (sent 7/16/13) Adjourn The meeting was adjourned at 2:08 p.m. DT. Notes by Judy Key Johnson judy@betterbuildings.com Res Upstream WG Mtg. # of 5