Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: City of Glendale
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-05-13
Prepared by:
TRC Companies, Inc
Prepared for:
Amy Discher, Codes and Standards Program, Southern California Edison Last modified: 2024/5/13
Revision: 1.2
2022 CODE CYCLE :
Custom Cost Effectiveness Analysis:
City of Glendale - Nonresidential
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: City of Glendale
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-05-13
Legal Notice
This report was prepared for Southern California Edison and funded by the California utility customers under the auspices of the California Public Utilities Commission.
Copyright 2022 , Southern California Edison. All rights reserved, except that this document may be used, copied, and distributed without modification.
Neither PG&E nor any of its employees makes any warranty, express or implied; or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any data, information, method, product, policy or process disclosed in this document; or represents that its use will not infringe any privately -owned rights including, but not limited to, patents, trademarks or copyrights.
Acronym List
B/C – Benefit-to-Cost Ratio
CBECC - California Building Energy Code Compliance
CBSC - California Building Standards Commission
CEC - California Energy Commission
CZ – Climate Zone
GHG - Greenhouse Gas
IOU – Investor-Owned Utility
POU – Publicly Owned Utility
PG&E – Pacific Gas & Electric (utility)
SCE – Southern California Edison (utility)
SCG – Southern California Gas (utility)
SDG&E – San Diego Gas & Electric (utility)
CPAU – City of Palo Alto Utilities
LADWP – Los Angeles Department of Water and Power
kWh – Kilowatt Hour
NPV – Net Present Value
PV - Solar Photovoltaic
TDV - Time Dependent Valuation
Title 24 – California Code of Regulations Title 24, Part 6
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: City of Glendale
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-05-13
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................................................ 1 2 Methodology and Assumptions ............................................................................................................................... 4
2.1 Reach Codes ........................................................................................................................................................................ 4
2.1.1 Benefits ......................................................................................................................................................................... 4
2.1.2 Costs ............................................................................................................................................................................. 4
2.1.3 Metrics .......................................................................................................................................................................... 4
2.1.4 Utility Rates ................................................................................................................................................................... 5
2.2 Greenhouse Gas Emissions ................................................................................................................................................. 5
2.3 Nonresidential Occupancies ................................................................................................................................................. 5 3 Results ........................................................................................................................................................................ 8
3.1 Nonresidential Occupancies ................................................................................................................................................. 8 4 Summary .................................................................................................................................................................. 11 5 References ............................................................................................................................................................... 14 6 Appendices .............................................................................................................................................................. 15
6.1 Map of California Climate Zones ......................................................................................................................................... 15
6.2 Utility Rate Schedules ......................................................................................................................................................... 16
6.2.1 Glendale Water & Power (GWP) ................................................................................................................................. 16
6.2.2 Southern California Gas (SCG) ................................................................................................................................... 16
6.2.3 Fuel Escalation Rates ................................................................................................................................................. 19
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Nonresidential Building Utility Tariffs in City of Glendale ........................................................................................................ 5 Table 2: Nonresidential Prototype Characteristics ................................................................................................................................ 6 Table 3. Medium Office Cost-Effectiveness Summary .......................................................................................................................... 8 Table 4. Medium Retail Cost-Effectiveness Summary .......................................................................................................................... 9 Table 5. Quick-Service Restaurant Cost-Effectiveness Summary ........................................................................................................ 9 Table 6. Small Hotel Cost-Effectiveness Summary ............................................................................................................................ 10 Table 7. Summary of Medium Office Packages .................................................................................................................................. 12 Table 8. Summary of Medium Retail Packages .................................................................................................................................. 12 Table 9. Summary of Quick Service Restaurant Packages ................................................................................................................ 12 Table 10. Summary of Small Hotel Packages ..................................................................................................................................... 12 Table 11: Real Utility Rate Escalation Rate Assumptions ................................................................................................................... 19
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Map of California climate zones. .......................................................................................................................................... 15
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: City of Glendale 1
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-05-13
1 Introduction
The California Codes and Standards (C&S) Reach Codes program provides technical support to local governments considering adopting a local ordinance (reach code) intended to support meeting local and/or statewide energy efficiency and greenhouse gas reduction goals. The program facilitates adoption and implementation of the code when requested by local jurisdictions by providing resources such as cost-effectiveness studies, model language, sample findings, and other supporting documentation.
The California Building Energy Efficiency Standards Title 24, Part 6 (Title 24) (CEC, 2022) is maintained and updated every three years by two state agencies: the California Energy Commission (the Energy Commission) and the Building Standards Commission (BSC). In addition to enforcing the code, local jurisdictions have the authority to adopt local energy efficiency ordinances—or reach codes—that exceed the minimum standards defined by Title 24 (as established by Public Resources Code Section 25402.1(h)2 and Section 10-106 of the Building Energy Efficiency Standards). Local jurisdictions must demonstrate that the requirements of the proposed ordinance are cost-effective and do not result in buildings consuming more energy than is permitted by Title 24. In addition, the jurisdiction must obtain approval from the Energy Commission and file the ordinance with the BSC for the ordinance to be legally enforceable.
This report is an addendum to the 2022 Nonresidential New Construction Reach Code Cost Effectiveness Study modified to accurately represent the City of Glendale, California. The study analyzes cost-effectiveness of measures and measure packages that exceed the minimum state requirements, the 2022 Building Energy Efficiency Standards, effective January 1, 2023, in newly constructed buildings. This report was developed in coordination with the California Statewide Investor-Owned Utilities (IOUs) Codes and Standards Program, key consultants, and engaged cities - collectively known as the Reach Code Team (or “the Team” in short).
The prototype building designs analyzed in this study are newly constructed:
• Medium Office
• Medium Retail
• Quick-Service Restaurant
• Small Hotel
The Reach Code Team performed cost-effectiveness analysis based on the prescriptive 2022 Title 24 code requirements:
• For the retail building type, the prescriptive code minimum is all-electric. Fuel substitution packages revert to mixed-fuel appliances.
• For all other building types, the prescriptive code minimum is mixed-fuel. Fuel substitution packages switch to all-electric appliances.
The methodology, prototype characteristics, and measure packages are retained from the main studies referenced above except for the energy costs are calculated using local City of Glendale utility rates. Measure packages include combinations of energy efficiency, electrification, solar photovoltaics (PV) with results evaluated for California Climate Zone 9.
This report presents measures or measure packages that local jurisdictions may consider adopting to achieve energy savings and emissions reductions beyond what will be accomplished by enforcing minimum state requirements, the 2022 Building Energy Efficiency Standards (Title 24, Part 6), effective January 1, 2023.
Local jurisdictions may also adopt ordinances that amend different Parts of the California Building Standards Code or may elect to amend other state or municipal codes. The decision regarding which code to amend will determine the specific requirements that must be followed for an ordinance to be legally enforceable. Although a cost-effectiveness study is only required to amend Part 6 of the CA Building Code, it is important to understand the economic impacts of Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: City of Glendale 2
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-05-13
any policy decision. This study documents the estimated costs, benefits, energy impacts and greenhouse gas emission reductions that may result from implementing an ordinance based on the results to help residents, local leadership, and other stakeholders make informed policy decisions.
Model ordinance language and other resources are posted on the C&S Reach Codes Program website at LocalEnergyCodes.com
. Local jurisdictions that are considering adopting an ordinance may contact the program for further technical support at [email protected].
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: City of Glendale 3
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-05-13
Summary of Revisions
Date Description Reference (page or section)
10/11/2022 Original Release -
5/13/2024 Updated Utility rates - GWP Electricity and SCG gas.
Baseline for retail prototype is updated to all-electric to align with most recent updates in main report after
the original release of Glendale custom report.
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: City of Glendale 4
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-05-13
2 Methodology and Assumptions
The Reach Codes Team analyzed four nonresidential prototypes to represent a variety of common building types using the cost-effectiveness methodology detailed in this section below. The general methodology is consistent with analyses of other prototypes, whereas some specifics such as utility rate selection are customized for the City of Glendale rates.
2.1 Reach Codes
This section describes the approach to calculate cost-effectiveness including benefits, costs, metrics, and utility rate selection.
2.1.1 Benefits
This analysis used both on-bill and time dependent valuation (TDV) of energy-based approaches to evaluate cost- effectiveness. Both on-bill and TDV require estimating and quantifying the energy savings and costs associated with energy measures. The primary difference between on-bill and TDV is how energy is valued:
• On-Bill: Customer-based lifecycle cost approach that values energy based upon estimated site energy usage and customer on-bill savings using electricity and natural gas utility rate schedules over a 30-year duration for residential and 15 years for nonresidential designs, accounting for a three percent discount rate and energy cost inflation per Appendix 6.2.3.
• TDV: TDV was developed by the Energy Commission to reflect the time dependent value of energy including long-term projected costs of energy such as the cost of providing energy during peak periods of demand and other societal costs including projected costs for carbon emissions and grid transmission impacts. This metric values energy use differently depending on the fuel source (gas, electricity, and propane), time of day, and season. Electricity used (or saved) during peak periods has a much higher value than electricity used (or saved) during off-peak periods. This refers to the “Total TDV” that includes all the energy end uses such as space-conditioning, mechanical ventilation, service water heating indoor lighting, photovoltaic (PV) and battery storage systems, and covered process loads.
The Reach Codes Team performed energy simulations using California’s Building Energy Code Compliance Software CBECC 2022.1.0 (1250) (June 8, 2022) for 2022 Title 24 code compliance analysis. . This version was used for the 2022 statewide reach code analysis, and the Reach Code Team didn’t update the models to the most recent software version (CBECC 2022.3.1) for this analysis update.
2.1.2 Costs
The Reach Codes Team assessed the incremental costs and savings of the energy packages over the lifecycle of 15 years for the nonresidential buildings. Incremental costs represent the equipment, installation, replacements, and maintenance costs of the proposed measure relative to the 2022 Title 24 Standards minimum requirements or standard industry practices. The Reach Code Team obtained baseline and measure costs from manufacturer distributors, contractors, literature review, and online sources such as RS Means.
2.1.3 Metrics
Cost-effectiveness is presented using net present value (NPV) and benefit-to-cost (B/C) ratio metrics. • NPV: The Reach Codes Team uses net savings (NPV benefits minus NPV costs) as the cost-effectiveness metric. If the net savings of a measure or package is positive, it is considered cost effective. Negative net savings represent net costs to the consumer. A measure that has negative energy cost benefits (energy cost Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: City of Glendale 5
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-05-13
increase) can still be cost effective if the costs to implement the measure are even more negative (i.e., construction and maintenance cost savings).
• B/C Ratio: Ratio of the present value of all benefits to the present value of all costs over 15 years (NPV benefits divided by NPV costs). The criterion for cost-effectiveness is a B/C greater than 1.0. A value of one indicates the savings over the life of the measure are equivalent to the incremental cost of that measure. A value greater than one represents a positive return on investment.
Improving the energy performance of a building often requires an initial investment. In most cases the benefit is represented by annual on-bill utility or TDV savings, and the cost by incremental first cost and replacement costs.
However, some packages result in initial construction cost savings (negative incremental cost), and either energy cost savings (positive benefits), or increased energy costs (negative benefits). In cases where both construction costs and energy-related savings are negative, the construction cost savings are treated as the benefit while the increased energy costs are the cost. In cases where a measure or package is cost-effective immediately (i.e., upfront construction cost savings and lifetime energy cost savings), B/C ratio cost-effectiveness is represented by “>1”.
Because of these situations, NPV savings are also reported, which, in these cases, are positive values.
2.1.4 Utility Rates
In coordination with the City of Glendale, the Reach Codes Team determined appropriate tariffs for each package, summarized in Table 1, based on the annual load profile of the prototype and the corresponding package, and the most prevalent rate for each building type.
This version of report is updated with more recent utility rates as applicable to City of Glendale. The analysis is updated with Glendale Water & Power (GWP) electricity rate forecasted for Phase 1 July 2024 and current Southern California Gas (SCG) natural gas rates as of April 2024. For a more detailed breakdown of the rates selected refer to Appendix 6.2 Utility Rate Schedules.
Table 1. Nonresidential Building Utility Tariffs in City of Glendale Electric / Gas Utility Electricity Natural Gas
GWP / SCG LD-2-B TOU GN-10
Utility rates are assumed to escalate over time, using assumptions detailed in Appendix 9.2 of the main report. Please see the main 2022 Nonresidential New Construction Reach Code Cost Effectiveness Study for further details on methodology.
2.2 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
The analysis uses the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions estimates built-in to CBECC software. There are 8,760 hourly multipliers accounting for time dependent energy use and carbon emissions based on source emissions, including RPS projections. There are 32 strings of multipliers, with a different string for each California CZ and each fuel type (metric tons of CO
2 per kWh for electricity and metric tons of CO2 per therm for natural gas).
2.3 Nonresidential Occupancies
Table 2 describes the basic characteristics of each nonresidential prototype design.
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: City of Glendale 6
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-05-13
Table 2: Nonresidential Prototype Characteristics
Medium Office
Medium Retail
Quick-Service Restaurant
Small Hotel
Conditioned floor
area (ft2) 53,628 24,563 2,501 42,554
(77 guest rooms)
Number of stories 3 1 1 4
Window-to-Wall
Area ratio 0.33 0.07 0.11 0.14
Window U-
factor/SHGC
U-factor:
CZ 1-8, 10, 16 – 0.36
CZ 9, 11-15 – 0.34
SHGC:
CZ 1-8, 10, 16 – 0.25
CZ 9, 11-15 – 0.22
U-factor:
CZ 1-8, 10, 16 – 0.36
CZ 9, 11-15 – 0.34
SHGC:
CZ 1-8, 10, 16 – 0.25
CZ 9, 11-15 – 0.22
U-factor:
CZ 1-8, 10, 16 – 0.36
CZ 9, 11-15 – 0.34
SHGC:
CZ 1-8, 10, 16 – 0.25
CZ 9, 11-15 – 0.22
Nonresidential:
U-factor:
CZ 1-8,10,16 – 0.36
CZ 9, 11-15 –0.34
SHGC:
CZ 1-8,10,16 – 0.25
CZ 9, 11-15 – 0.22
Guest Rooms:
U-factor: 0.36
SHGC: 0.25
Solar PV size 123 kW – 204 kW
Depending on CZ
64 kW – 87 kW
Depending on CZ None 17 kW – 25 kW
Depending on CZ
Battery Storage 217 kWh – 360 kWh
Depending on CZ
70 kWh – 94 kWh
Depending on CZ None 16 kWh – 24 kWh
Depending on CZ
HVAC System
VAV reheat system with
packaged rooftop units,
gas boilers, VAV terminal
units with hot water
reheat
CZ 1
Heat recovery for Core
Retail space only
CZ 1, 16
< 65 kBtu/h: SZAC with gas
furnace
> 65 kBtu/h and < 240
kBtu/h: SZHP and gas
furnace (i.e., dual fuel heat
pump). VAV.
> 240 kBtu/h: SZAC VAV
with gas furnace
CZ 2-15
< 65 kBtu/h: SZAC with gas
furnace
> 65 kBtu/h and < 240
kBtu/h: SZHP VAV
> 240 kBtu/h: SZAC VAV
with gas furnace
< 65 kBtu/h:
SZAC + gas furnace
> 65 kBtu/h:
SZAC VAV
Nonresidential and Laundry:
VAV reheat system with
packaged rooftop units, gas
boilers, VAV terminal units
with hot water reheat
Guest Rooms: SZAC with gas
furnaces
SHW System 5-gallon electric resistance
water heater
5-gallon electric resistance
water heater
100-gallon gas water
heater
Nonresidential: 30-gallon
electric resistance water
heater
Laundry Room: 1 20-gal gas
storage water heater
Guest rooms: Central gas
water heater, 250 gallons
storage, recirculation loop
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: City of Glendale 7
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-05-13
The Reach Codes Team evaluated mixed fuel efficiency and all-electric packages for each prototype and climate zone, as described below.
Mixed Fuel + Efficiency Measures: Mixed-fuel prescriptive building per 2022 Title 24 requirements, including additional efficiency measures.
Al l -Electric Code Minimum Efficiency: All-Electric building to minimum Title 24 prescriptive standards and federal minimum efficiency standards. This package has the same PV size as mixed-fuel prescriptive baseline. Al l -Electric Energy Efficiency: All-Electric building with added energy efficiency measures related to HVAC, SHW, lighting or envelope.
Al l -Electric Energy Efficiency + Load Flexibility: All-Electric building with added energy efficiency and load flexibility measures.
All-Electric Energy Efficiency + Solar PV: All-Electric building with added energy efficiency and additional Solar PV. The added PV size is larger than prescriptive 2022 Title 24 code requirements and accounts for roof space availability.
For Quick Service Restaurant (QSR), the Reach Code Team has analyzed two scenarios for All-Electric packages, one with electric cooking and the one with gas cooking (the latter of which is referred to as the “HS” package to reflect all- electric HVAC and SHW).
For Small Hotel, the Reach Code Team also analyzed an alternative scenario with PTHP instead of SZHP in All-Electric scenario. It is denoted by the “PTHP” in parenthesis in package name.
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: City of Glendale 8
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-05-13
3 Results
Results are presented as per the prototype-specific Measure Packages described in Section 4. Overarching factors impacting the results include:
• Designation of a ‘benefit’ or a ‘cost’ varies with the scenarios because both energy savings, and incremental construction costs may be negative depending on the package. Typically, utility bill savings are categorized as a ‘benefit’ while incremental construction costs are treated as ‘costs.’ In cases where both construction costs are negative and utility bill savings are negative, the construction cost savings are treated as the ‘benefit’ while the utility bill negative savings are the ‘cost.’
• Most all-electric packages will have lower GHG emissions than equivalent mixed-fuel packages in all cases, due to the clean power sources currently available from California’s power providers.
• The Reach Codes Team coordinated with the City of Glendale to select the most prevalent tariffs for each prototype given the annual energy demand profile. The Reach Codes Team did not compare a variety of tariffs to determine their impact on cost-effectiveness although utility rate changes or updates can affect on-bill cost-effectiveness results.
3.1 Nonresidential Occupancies
Table 3 through Table 6 shows results for the four nonresidential prototypes for all the evaluated packages for climate zone 9. The On-Bill cost-effectiveness for all-electric packages have been affected negatively due to increase in GWP electricity rates and decrease in SCG gas rates. • Across all prototypes and climate zones, the Reach Code Team identified cost effective energy efficiency measures when added to the mixed-fuel baseline model except for Medium Retail, which has an all-electric baseline.
• The Team identified both On-Bill and TDV cost effective packages for all-electric Medium Office and Medium Retail with Glendale rates. The Team could not identify any cost effective all-electric packages for Quick Service Restaurant in terms of either the On-Bill or TDV metric. For Small Hotel, all-electric packages are only On-Bill cost effective with PTHP instead of SZHP system type, however, all-electric packages are all TDV cost effective.
Table 3. Medium Office Cost-Effectiveness Summary
Package
Annual
Elec
Savings
(kWh)
Annual
Gas
Savings
(therms)
Annual
GHG
savings
(tons)
Eff TDV
Margin
Total
Compliance
Margin
Source
kBtu
Margin
Upfront
Incremental
Package
Cost
Lifecycle
Energy
Cost
Savings
Lifecycle
$-TDV
Savings
B/C
Ratio
(On-bill)
B/C
Ratio
(TDV)
NPV
(On-bill)
NPV
(TDV)
Mixed-Fuel +
Efficiency Measures 10,560 (46) 0.9 4% 7674% 9% $715 $33,672 $24,992 47.1 35.0 $32,957 $24,277 All Electric Code
Minimum Efficiency (23,780) 1,119 (0.3) -8% -12217% -2% ($39,415) ($17,224) ($39,789) 2.3 1.0 $22,192 ($373) All Electric Energy
Efficiency (14,205) 1,119 0.6 -3% -4992% 7% ($38,700) $15,249 ($16,257) >1 2.4 $53,949 $22,443 All-Electric Energy
Efficiency and Load
Flexibility
(6,098) 1,119 2.9 3% 5033% 27% ($38,700) $78,267 $16,391 >1 >1 $116,967 $55,091 Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: City of Glendale 9
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-05-13
Table 4. Medium Retail Cost-Effectiveness Summary
Table 5. Quick-Service Restaurant Cost-Effectiveness Summary Package
Annual
Elec
Savings
(kWh)
Annual
Gas
Savings
(therms)
Annual
GHG
savings
(tons)
Eff TDV
Margin
Total
Compliance
Margin
Source
kBtu
Margin
Upfront
Incremental
Package
Cost
Lifecycle
Energy
Cost
Savings
Lifecycle
$-TDV
Savings
B/C
Ratio
(On-
bill)
B/C
Rati
o
(TD
V)
NPV (On-
bill) NPV (TDV)
Mixed-Fuel +
Efficiency Measures 3,764 444 3.1 11% 11% 18% $16,150 $20,134 $21,426 1.2 1.3 $3,984 $5,276 All Electric HS Energy
Code Minimum
Efficiency
(29,886) 2,233 6.2 -14% -14% 48% $22,106 ($39,561) ($26,069) -1.8 -1.2 ($61,667) ($48,176) All-Electric HS Energy
Efficiency (20,124) 2,233 8.2 0% 0% 56% $38,256 ($12,283) $820 -0.3 0.0 ($50,539) ($37,436) All-Electric HS Energy
Efficiency + Load
Flexibility
(20,702) 2,233 9.0 2% 2% 59% $43,666 ($15,673) $3,539 -0.4 0.1 ($59,339) ($40,126) All-Electric HS Energy
Efficiency + Solar PV 11,939 2,233 9.8 0% 34% 62% $88,664 $64,348 $62,638 0.7 0.7 ($24,316) ($26,025) All Electric Code
Minimum Efficiency (126,307) 9,687 28.7 -11% -11% 48% $148,937 ($264,784) ($113,479) -1.8 -0.8 ($413,721) ($262,415) All Electric Energy
Efficiency (115,801) 9,687 30.9 4% 4% 57% $165,086 ($235,715) ($84,863) -1.4 -0.5 ($400,802) ($249,950) All-Electric Energy
Efficiency + Load
Flexibility
(116,494) 9,687 31.7 5% 5% 60% $170,496 ($234,069) ($82,432) -1.4 -0.5 ($404,566) ($252,929)
Package
Annual
Elec
Savings
(kWh)
Annual
Gas
Savings
(therms)
Annual
GHG
savings
(tons)
Eff TDV
Margin
Total
Compliance
Margin
Source
kBtu
Margin
Upfront
Incremental
Package
Cost
Lifecycle
Energy
Cost
Savings
Lifecycle
$-TDV
Savings
B/C
Ratio
(On-bill)
B/C
Ratio
(TDV)
NPV (On-
bill)
NPV
(TDV)
Mixed Fuel Code
Minimum 226 (495) (2.1) -3% -6% -13% $9,020 ($23,299) ($12,981) -2.6 -1.4 ($32,319) ($22,000) Mixed-Fuel +
Efficiency Measures 22,532 (583) 0.9 11% 21% 5% $21,820 $45,716 $48,072 2.1 2.2 $23,896 $26,252 All Electric
Energy Efficiency 21,051 495 5.4 14% 27% 20% $12,800 $69,976 $60,736 17.0 19.5 $60,583 $69,937 Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: City of Glendale 10
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-05-13
Table 6. Small Hotel Cost-Effectiveness Summary
Package
Annual
Elec
Savings
(kWh)
Annual
Gas
Savings
(therms)
Annual
GHG
savings
(tons)
Eff TDV
Margin
Total
Compliance
Margin
Source
kBtu
Margin
Upfront
Incremental
Package
Cost
Lifecycle
Energy
Cost
Savings
Lifecycle
$-TDV
Savings
B/C
Ratio
(On-bill)
B/C
Ratio
(TDV)
NPV (On-
bill)
NPV
(TDV)
Mixed-Fuel +
Efficiency Measures 9,535 1,661 10.5 13% 16% 17% $21,214 $74,900 $82,450 3.5 3.9 $53,686 $61,236 All Electric Code
Minimum Efficiency (170,301) 10,246 41.7 0% 0% 51% ($178,858) ($414,414) ($47,270) 0.4 3.8 ($235,556) $131,587 All Electric Energy
Efficiency (145,720) 10,246 43.5 10% 12% 54% ($157,644) ($294,250) $13,998 0.5 >1 ($136,606) $171,642 All Electric Code
Energy Efficiency +
Solar PV
(53,022) 10,246 47.4 10% 44% 60% ($11,515) ($82,861) $187,360 0.1 >1 ($71,346) $198,876 All-Electric Code
Minimum Efficiency
with PTHP
(170,479) 10,246 41.6 0% 0% 51% ($650,843) ($418,202) ($46,533) 1.6 14.0 $232,641 $604,309 Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: City of Glendale 11
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-05-13
4 Summary
The Reach Codes Team developed packages of energy efficiency measures as well as packages combining energy efficiency with solar PV generation, simulated them in building modeling software, and gathered costs to determine the cost-effectiveness of multiple scenarios. The Reach Codes Team coordinated with multiple utilities, cities, and building community experts to develop a set of assumptions considered reasonable in the current market. Changing assumptions, such as the period of analysis, measure selection, cost assumptions, energy escalation rates, or utility tariffs are likely to change results.
The combined result of cost effectiveness and code compliance across all packages are detailed in Table 7 through
Table 10 below. The tables are formatted to show:
“Both” with green highlight – for scenarios that are cost effective on both metrics and have positive compliance margin across all three compliance metrics.
“TDV/On-Bill” with yellow highlight – for scenarios that are cost effective on either one of the metrics and has positive compliance margin across all three compliance metrics. “Comp” with gray highlight – for scenarios that are not cost effective on either metric but have positive compliance margin across all three compliance metrics.
“-” with no color highlight – for scenarios that do not comply across any one code compliance metric and may or may not be cost effective.
The package names in table results columns are as follows:
Mixed fuel – EE: Mixed Fuel + Efficiency Measures
All-Electric – Code Min: All-Electric Code Minimum Efficiency All-Electric – EE: All-Electric Energy Efficiency
All-Electric – EE+ LF: All-Electric Energy Efficiency and Load Flexibility All-Electric – EE + PV: All-Electric Energy Efficiency and Solar PV All-Electric – Code Min with PTHP: All-Electric Code Minimum Efficiency with PTHP The QSR has two electrification scenarios, with and without cooking appliance electrification, which is denoted by “HS” prefix.
The Small Hotel has an extra package that evaluates a different HVAC type in the All-Electric Code Minimum Efficiency package, a Packaged Terminal Heat Pump (PTHP) instead of a Single Zone Heat Pump.
Due to the greenhouse gas savings potential, the Reach Code Team advises jurisdictions to require All-Electric packages where there is green or yellow highlight (cost effective and compliant). Jurisdictions may also consider adopting all-electric requirements where packages are shown as gray highlight (compliant but may or may not be cost effective) if they are looking to require electrification based on energy code compliance alone and less concerned about cost impacts.
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: City of Glendale 12
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-05-13
Table 7. Summary of Medium Office Packages
CZ Utility Mixed Fuel All-Electric
EE Code Min EE EE + LF
cz09 GWP Both - - Both
Table 8. Summary of Medium Retail Packages
CZ Utility Mixed Fuel All-electric
Code Min EE EE
cz09 GWP - Both Both
Table 9. Summary of Quick Service Restaurant Packages
CZ Utility Mixed Fuel All-electric All-electric "HS" (HVAC+SHW) EE Code Min EE EE + LF Code Min EE EE + LF EE + PV
cz09 GWP Both - Comp Comp - Comp Comp Comp
Table 10. Summary of Small Hotel Packages
CZ Utility
Mixed Fuel All-Electric
EE Code Min EE EE + PV Code Min + PTHP
cz09 GWP Both Comp Comp Comp Both
LEGEND KEY
Please refer to the limitations of this study, described in 2022 Nonresidential New Construction Reach Code Cost Effectiveness Study Section 3.5, while using these results to inform reach code policies.
Results support reach code adoption for energy efficiency measures over mixed fuel nonresidential building types for all four prototypes in Glendale except for Medium Retail in climate zone 9. For Medium Retail, the mixed-fuel code- minimum package is neither cost-effective nor code compliant since the baseline is all-electric. However, with added energy efficiency measures, the mixed-fuel packages are both cost-effective and code compliant.
The All-Electric packages indicate capability of achieving the greatest greenhouse savings as compared to mixed-fuel buildings. The Reach Codes Team found All-Electric code compliant new construction to be feasible and cost effective based on Glendale electricity rates for some nonresidential prototypes with added measures in climate zone 9. Here is a summary of the results:
• For Medium Office, all-electric package with added efficiency measures is cost-effective but is not code compliant due to the use of electric resistance VAV reheat systems. The most likely all-electric replacement for a central gas boiler serving a variable air volume reheat system would be a central heat pump boiler; however, this central heat pump boiler cost-effectiveness analysis report is currently in progress and will become available in the second half of 2024. As such, the Reach Code Team is treating this analysis as temporary until a compliance pathway is established for a central heat pump boiler in the Energy Code and results can be updated accordingly. Heat pump systems are more efficient but may also be more costly than the electric resistance reheat systems currently analyzed. However, with further added load flexibility, the package is both code compliant and cost-effective.
• The Reach Codes Team found All-Electric Medium Retail with added efficiency to be code complaint and cost effective.
Both Compliant & c/e on both metrics
On-bill/TDV Compliant & c/e on one metric
Comp Compliant not c/e
- Not compliant
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: City of Glendale 13
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-05-13
• For Quick-Service Restaurant, the Team couldn’t identify On-Bill cost-effective options for all-electric packages. However, the all-electric packages are “code-compliant” with or without cooking appliance electrification, and added energy efficiency or load flexibility or PV measures. • For Small Hotel, the all-electric package is On-Bill cost-effective with PTHP system type only, but not with SZHP system type. None of the all-electric packages with SZHP system type are cost-effective but are code compliant.
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: City of Glendale 14
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-05-13
5 References
California Public Utilities Commission. (2021a). Utility Costs and Affordability of the Grid of the Future: An Evaluation of Electric Costs, Rates, and Equity Issues Pursuant to P.U. Code Section 913.1. Retrieved from https://www.cpuc.ca.gov/-/media/cpuc-website/divisions/office-of-governmental-affairs- division/reports/2021/senate-bill-695-report-2021-and-en-banc-whitepaper_final_04302021.pdf E3. (2021). Retrieved from https://efiling.energy.ca.gov/GetDocument.aspx?tn=233260&DocumentContentId=65748 NORESCO. (2020). Time Dependent Valuation of Energy for Developing Building Efficiency Standards. Retrieved from https://efiling.energy.ca.gov/GetDocument.aspx?tn=233257&DocumentContentId=65743
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: City of Glendale 15
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-05-13
6 Appendices
6.1 Map of California Climate Zones
Climate zone geographical boundaries are depicted in Figure 1. The map in Figure 1 along with a zip-code search directory is available at: https://ww2.energy.ca.gov/maps/renewable/building_climate_zones.html Figure 1. Map of California climate zones.
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: City of Glendale 16
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-05-13
6.2 Utility Rate Schedules
The Reach Codes Team used the City of Glendale tariffs detailed below to determine the On-Bill savings for each package.
6.2.1 Glendale Water & Power (GWP)
6.2.1.1 Nonresidential
Following are the GWP electricity tariffs applied in this study. LD-2-B is applied based on the demands. The analysis is updated with GWP electricity rate forecasted for Phase 1 July 2024.
6.2.2 Southern California Gas (SCG)
Following is the SCG gas rates applied in this study. This analysis is updated with the current SCG natural gas rates as of April 2024.
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: City of Glendale 17
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-05-13
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: City of Glendale 18
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-05-13
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: City of Glendale 19
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-05-13
6.2.3 Fuel Escalation Rates
6.2.3.1 Nonresidential Occupancies
Table 11 below documents the escalation rates used for nonresidential buildings.
Table 11: Real Utility Rate Escalation Rate Assumptions
Source
Statewide Electric
Nonresidential Average
Rate (%/year, real)
Statewide Natural Gas
Nonresidential Core Rate
(%/year, real)
2023 E3 2019 2.0% 4.0%
2024 2022 TDV 0.7% 7.7%
2025 2022 TDV 0.5% 5.5%
2026 2022 TDV 0.7% 5.6%
2027 2022 TDV 0.2% 5.6%
2028 2022 TDV 0.6% 5.7%
2029 2022 TDV 0.7% 5.7%
2030 2022 TDV 0.6% 5.8%
2031 2022 TDV 0.6% 3.3%
2032 2022 TDV 0.6% 3.6%
2033 2022 TDV 0.6% 3.4%
2034 2022 TDV 0.6% 3.4%
2035 2022 TDV 0.6% 3.2%
2036 2022 TDV 0.6% 3.2%
2037 2022 TDV 0.6% 3.1%
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: City of Glendale 20
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-05-13
Get In Touch
The adoption of reach codes can differentiate jurisdictions as efficiency leaders and help accelerate the adoption of new equipment, technologies, code compliance, and energy savings strategies.
As part of the Statewide Codes & Standards Program, the Reach Codes Subprogram is a resource available to any local jurisdiction located throughout the state of California.
Our experts develop robust toolkits as well as provide specific technical assistance to local jurisdictions (cities and counties) considering adopting energy reach codes. These include cost-effectiveness research and analysis, model ordinance language and other code development and implementation tools, and specific technical assistance throughout the code adoption process.
If you are interested in finding out more about local energy reach codes, the Reach Codes Team stands ready to assist jurisdictions at any stage of a reach code project.
Visit LocalEnergyCodes.com
to access our resources and
sign up for newsletters.
Contact
[email protected]
for
no-charge assistance from expert
Reach Code advisors.
Follow us on LinkedIn