Last modified: 2024/05/30
Revision: 1.3
Prepared by:
Alea German, Claudia Pingatore, Ada Shen, & Keith Saechao, Frontier Energy, Inc Misti Bruceri, Misti Bruceri & Associates, LLC
Prepared for:
Kelly Cunningham, Codes and Standards Program, Pacific Gas and Electric
-
Cost Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction Legal Notice
This report was prepared by Pacific Gas and Electric Company and funded by the California utility customers under the auspices of the California Public Utilities Commission.
Copyright 202 2, Pacific Gas and Electric Company. 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
2023 PV$ – Present value costs in 2023
ACH50 – Air Changes per Hour at 50 pascals pressure
differential
ACM – Alternative Calculation Method
ADU – Accessory Dwelling Unit
AFUE – Annual Fuel Utilization Efficiency
B/C – Lifecycle Benefit-to-Cost Ratio
BEopt – Building Energy Optimization Tool
BSC – Building Standards Commission
CA IOUs – California Investor-Owned Utilities
CASE – Codes and Standards Enhancement
CBECC-Res – Computer program developed by the California Energy Commission for use in demonstrating
compliance with the California Residential Building
Energy Efficiency Standards
CFI – California Flexible Installation
CFM – Cubic Feet per Minute
CO
2 – Carbon Dioxide
CPAU – City of Palo Alto Utilities
CPUC – California Public Utilities Commission
CZ – California Climate Zone
DHW – Domestic Hot Water
DOE – Department of Energy
DWHR – Drain Water Heat Recovery
EDR – Energy Design Rating
EER – Energy Efficiency Ratio
EF – Energy Factor
Cost Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction GHG – Greenhouse Gas
HERS Rater – Home Energy Rating System Rater
HPA – High Performance Attic
HPWH – Heat Pump Water Heater
HSPF – Heating Seasonal Performance Factor
IECC – International Energy Conservation Code
IOU – Investor Owned Utility
kBtu – kilo-British thermal unit
kWh – Kilowatt Hour
LBNL – Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
LCC – Lifecycle Cost
LLAHU – Low Leakage Air Handler Unit
LSC – Long-term System Cost (2025 Title 24, Part 6 compliance metric) MF – Multifamily
NEEA – Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance
NEM – Net Energy Metering
NPV – Net Present Value
NREL – National Renewable Energy Laboratory
PG&E – Pacific Gas and Electric Company
POU – Publicly-Owned-Utilities
PV – Photovoltaic
SCE – Southern California Edison
SDG&E – San Diego Gas and Electric
SEER – Seasonal Energy Efficiency Ratio
SF – Single Family
SMUD – Sacramento Municipal Utility District
SoCalGas – Southern California Gas Company
TDV – Time Dependent Valuation (2022 Title 24, Part 6 compliance metric) Therm – Unit for quantity of heat that equals 100,000 British thermal units Title 24 – Title 24, Part 6
TOU – Time-Of-Use
UEF – Uniform Energy Factor
VLLDCS – Verified Low Leakage Ducts in Conditioned Space ZNE – Zero-net Energy
-
Cost Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction Summary of Revisions
Date Description Reference (page or section)
9/12/2022 Original Release (1.0) N/A
3/25/2024 Updated analysis (1.1) • New simulation results with latest CBECC-Res version (Section 2.1.1)
• Updated utility cost estimates using
recent utility tariff and net billing
tariff (Section 2.1.3)
• New measure costs for heat pumps,
batteries, and PV (Section 3.3)
• Revised packages (Section 3.4)
• Revised Results, Summary,
References, and Appendices
(Sections 4-7)
4/26/2024 Corrected errors (1.2)
• Corrected incorrect results in Tables
16-19, 23, 26
5/30/2024 Corrected errors (1.3) • Corrected incorrect results in Tables 15-18, 22-28
-
Cost Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Executive Summary..........................................................................................................................................................1 1 Introduction................................................................................................................................................................4 2 Methodology and Assumptions ...............................................................................................................................5
2.1 Analysis for Reach Codes..................................................................................................................................................... 5
2.1.1 Modeling ....................................................................................................................................................................... 5
2.1.2 Cost-effectiveness ........................................................................................................................................................ 5
2.1.3 Utility Rates................................................................................................................................................................... 7
2.2 Greenhouse Gas Emissions ................................................................................................................................................. 8
2.3 Energy Design Rating ........................................................................................................................................................... 8 3 Prototypes, Measure Packages, and Costs ..........................................................................................................10
3.1 Prior Reach Code Research ............................................................................................................................................... 10
3.2 Prototype Characteristics.................................................................................................................................................... 10
3.3 Measure Definitions and Costs ........................................................................................................................................... 13
3.3.1 Efficiency, Solar PV, and Batteries ............................................................................................................................. 13
3.3.2 Electrification............................................................................................................................................................... 18
3.4 Measure Packages ............................................................................................................................................................. 23 4 Results......................................................................................................................................................................25
4.1 Compliance Results: All-Electric vs. Mixed Fuel Code Minimum ........................................................................................ 25
4.2 All-Electric Code Minimum Results..................................................................................................................................... 27
4.3 All-Electric Efficiency, PV, and Battery Results................................................................................................................... 30
4.4 Mixed Fuel Results ............................................................................................................................................................. 32
4.5 Greenhouse Gas Reductions.............................................................................................................................................. 34
4.6 Sensitivity Analysis ............................................................................................................................................................. 36
4.6.1 CARE Rate Comparison ............................................................................................................................................. 37
4.6.2 Utility Infrastructure Cost Sensitivity............................................................................................................................ 39
4.6.3 Utility Rate Escalation ................................................................................................................................................. 40 5 Summary ..................................................................................................................................................................43 6 References ...............................................................................................................................................................47 7 Appendices ..............................................................................................................................................................49
7.1 Map of California Climate Zones......................................................................................................................................... 49
7.2 Utility Rate Schedules......................................................................................................................................................... 50
7.2.1 Pacific Gas & Electric.................................................................................................................................................. 51
7.2.2 Southern California Edison ......................................................................................................................................... 58
7.2.3 Southern California Gas.............................................................................................................................................. 62
7.2.4 San Diego Gas & Electric............................................................................................................................................ 63
7.2.5 City of Palo Alto Utilities.............................................................................................................................................. 69
7.2.6 Sacramento Municipal Utilities District (Electric Only)................................................................................................. 71
7.2.7 Fuel Escalation Assumptions...................................................................................................................................... 73
7.3 Summary of Efficiency Measures........................................................................................................................................ 75
7.4 Summary of Applicable Prescriptive Base case Measures ................................................................................................. 77
-
Cost Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Utility Tariffs Used Based on Climate Zone ............................................................................................................................ 7 Table 2: Prototype Characteristics...................................................................................................................................................... 10 Table 3: Base case Characteristics of the Prototypes ........................................................................................................................ 12 Table 4: Base Package PV Capacities (kW-DC) ................................................................................................................................ 13 Table 5: Incremental Cost Assumptions: Efficiency, PV, and Battery Measures ................................................................................ 15 Table 6: Single Family IOU Total Natural Gas Infrastructure Costs.................................................................................................... 18 Table 7: Single Family CPAU Total Natural Gas Infrastructure Costs ................................................................................................ 19 Table 8: ADU Utility Infrastructure Total and Incremental Costs......................................................................................................... 19 Table 9: Effective Useful Lifetime (EUL) of Water Heating & Space Conditioning Equipment............................................................ 20 Table 10: Space Conditioning System Nominal Capacities ................................................................................................................ 21 Table 11: Space Conditioning System Incremental Costs (2023 PV$) ............................................................................................... 21 Table 12: Heat Pump Water Heating System Incremental Costs (2023 PV$) .................................................................................... 22 Table 13: Single Family All-Electric Appliance Incremental Costs...................................................................................................... 23 Table 14: Single Family Cost-Effectiveness: All-Electric Code Minimum............................................................................................ 28 Table 15: ADU Cost-Effectiveness: All-Electric Code Minimum.......................................................................................................... 29 Table 16: Single Family Cost-Effectiveness: Comparison of All-Electric Efficiency Only, PV, and Battery Packages ........................ 30 Table 17: ADU Cost-Effectiveness: All-Electric Energy Efficiency + Additional PV + Battery ............................................................. 31 Table 18: Single Family Cost-Effectiveness: Mixed Fuel Efficiency + PV + Battery............................................................................ 32 Table 19: ADU Cost-Effectiveness: Mixed Fuel Efficiency + PV + Battery ......................................................................................... 33 Table 20: Single Family Greenhouse Gas Reductions (metric tons) .................................................................................................. 34 Table 21: ADU Greenhouse Gas Reductions (metric tons) ................................................................................................................ 35 Table 22: On-Bill Cost-Effectiveness with CARE Tariffs: All-Electric Code Minimum ......................................................................... 37 Table 23: On-Bill Cost-Effectiveness with CARE Tariffs: Mixed Fuel Efficiency + PV+ Battery Package ........................................... 38 Table 24: Single Family Cost-Effectiveness Comparison with Range of Natural Gas Utility Infrastructure Costs: All-Electric Code Minimum........................................................................................................................................................................................ 39 Table 25: Cost-Effectiveness, 2025 LSC Basis: All-Electric Code Minimum ...................................................................................... 41 Table 26: Cost-Effectiveness, 2025 LSC Basis: Mixed Fuel Efficiency + PV + Battery ...................................................................... 42 Table 27: Summary of Single Family EDR1 Margins and Cost-Effectiveness .................................................................................... 45 Table 28: Summary of ADU EDR1 Margins and Cost-Effectiveness.................................................................................................. 46 Table 29: PG&E Baseline Territory by Climate Zone.......................................................................................................................... 51 Table 30: PG&E Monthly Gas Rate ($/therm)..................................................................................................................................... 51 Table 31: SCE Baseline Territory by Climate Zone ............................................................................................................................ 58 Table 32: SoCalGas Baseline Territory by Climate Zone ................................................................................................................... 62 Table 33: SoCalGas Monthly Gas Rate ($/therm) .............................................................................................................................. 62 Table 34: SDG&E Baseline Territory by Climate Zone ....................................................................................................................... 63
-
Cost Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction Table 35: SDG&E Monthly Gas Rate ($/therm) .................................................................................................................................. 63 Table 36: CPAU Monthly Gas Rate ($/therm)..................................................................................................................................... 69 Table 37: Real Utility Rate Escalation Rate Assumptions, CPUC En Banc and 2022 TDV Basis ...................................................... 73 Table 38: Real Utility Rate Escalation Rate Assumptions, 2025 LSC Basis ....................................................................................... 74 Table 39: All-Electric Single Family Efficiency Measures, Various Packages..................................................................................... 75 Table 40: Mixed Fuel Single Family Measures, Efficiency + PV + Battery Package........................................................................... 76 Table 41: Efficiency Measures for All ADU Packages ........................................................................................................................ 76 Table 42 Prescriptive Envelope, PV, and Battery Measures by Climate Zone.................................................................................... 77 Table 43 Prescriptive HVAC Measures by Climate Zone ................................................................................................................... 78 Table 44 Prescriptive Water Heating Measures by Climate Zone....................................................................................................... 78
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Single family all-electric home compliance impacts............................................................................................................. 25 Figure 2: ADU all-electric home compliance impacts.......................................................................................................................... 26 Figure 3: Single family four gas appliance home compliance impacts................................................................................................ 26 Figure 4: Map of California climate zones........................................................................................................................................... 49
-
Cost Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction Executive Summary
1 Executive Summary
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 (GHG) 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.
This report documents cost-effectiveness analysis results for traditional new detached single family and detached accessory dwelling unit (ADUs) building types. It evaluates mixed fuel and all-electric package options in all sixteen California climate zones (CZs). Packages include combinations of efficiency measures, on-site renewable energy, and battery energy storage.
This analysis used two different metrics to assess the cost-effectiveness of the proposed upgrades. Both methodologies require estimating and quantifying the incremental costs and energy savings associated with each energy efficiency measure over a 30-year analysis period. On-Bill cost-effectiveness is a customer-based lifecycle cost (LCC) approach that values energy based upon estimated site energy usage and customer utility bill savings using today’s electricity and natural gas utility tariffs. Time Dependent Valuation (TDV) is the California Energy Commission’s LCC methodology, which is intended to capture the long-term projected cost of energy, including costs for providing energy during peak periods of demand, carbon emissions, grid transmission and distribution impacts. This is the methodology used by the Energy Commission in evaluating cost-effectiveness for efficiency measures in Title 24, Part 6.
The following are key takeaways and recommendations from the analysis.
Conclusions and Discussion:
• All-electric buildings have lower GHG emissions than mixed fuel buildings, due to the clean power sources currently available from California’s power providers as well as accounting for increased penetration of renewables in the future. Almost all the all-electric packages evaluated resulted in greater GHG emission savings than the mixed fuel packages, with the exception of the mixed fuel package with battery storage in climate zones with low heating loads.
• The Reach Codes Team found code-compliant all-electric new construction to be feasible and cost-effective based on TDV for single family homes in all cases except Climate Zone 16. • All-electric single family new construction was On-Bill cost-effective in all cases except Climate Zones 1, 3, 14, and 16.
• The all-electric ADU home was cost-effective based on TDV in all cases except in Climate Zones 3, 4, 13, and 14 where the higher cost of installing a ducted heat pump water heater (HPWH) instead of the prescriptively required gas tankless water heater exceed the resulting energy cost savings. In the other climate zones there were first cost savings for installing a heat pump space heater instead of a gas furnace, contributing to an overall TDV cost-effective result.
• Few cases were cost-effective On-Bill for the ADU.
• All-electric code minimum construction results in an increase in first lifetime costs relative to a mixed fuel home, except for CPAU and SMUD where electricity rates are much lower than for the investor-owned utilities (IOUs). The addition of efficiency measures, market dominant HPWHs that meet the Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance’s (NEEA’s) Advanced Water Heating Specification 1, high efficiency heat pumps, increased
solar photovoltaics (PV), and batteries all reduce utility costs, and the combination of these options was found to reduce annual utility costs relative to a mixed fuel home in all cases. 1 Refer to Section 0 for an explanation of HPWHs certified through NEEA’s Advanced Water Heating Specification, their market status, and how they compare to federal minimum efficiency standards.
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
-
Cost Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction Executive Summary
2 • Under the Net Billing Tariff (NBT)2, utility cost savings for increasing PV system size beyond code minimum are substantially l
ess than what they were under prior net energy metering rules (NEM 2.0); however, savings are sufficient to be On-Bill cost-effective in all climate zones for the all-electric single family home except climate zones
1, 3, and 16. Coupling PV with battery systems increases utility cost savings as a result of improved on- site
utilization of PV generation and fewer exports to the grid. • Applying
California Alternate Rates for Energy (CARE) rates in the IOU territories improves On-Bill cost- effectiveness for all-electric buildings, as compared to the same case under standard rates, due to higher utility cost savings compared to a code compliant mixed fuel building also on a CARE rate. This is due to the CARE discount
on electricity being higher than that on gas.
• If gas tariffs are assumed to increase substantially over time, in line with the escalation assumption from the 2025 LSC development, all-electric n ew construction was found to be On-Bill cost-effective in almost all single family and most ADU scenarios over the 30-year a nalysis period. There is much uncertainty surrounding future tariff s
tructures as well as escalation values. While it’s clear that gas rates are anticipated to increase, how much and how
quickly is not known. Electricity tariff structures are expected to evolve over time, and the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) has an active proceeding to adopt an income-graduated fixed charge that b
enefits low-income customers and supports electrification measures3. The CPUC will make a decision in mid-2024 and the new rates are expected to be in place later that year or in 2025. While the anticipated impact of this rate change is lower volumetric electricity rates, the rate design is not finalized. While lower
volumetric electricity rates provide many benefits like incentivizing electrification, it also will make building efficiency
measures harder to justify as cost-effective due to lower utility bill cost savings.
Recomm
endations:
• A reach code with a single performance target based on source energy (EDR1) can be structured to strongly encourage electrification. This approach requires equivalent performance for all buildings and allow s mixed fuel buildings which minimizes the risk of violating federal preemption. Below are examples of how a reach code for single family homes could be set up based on the results summarized in Table 27. o A jurisdiction in Climate Zone 12 could set a performance target at an EDR1 margin of 11.5 (the EDR1 margin for the all-electric Code Minimum package). Any all-electric home meeting or exceeding the prescriptive requirements would comply, and a mixed fuel home would likely need to incorporate a combination of efficiency measures and a battery system to comply. o Similarly, a jurisdiction in Climate Zone 7 may consider setting a performance target of 2.8 EDR1 margin (also the EDR1 margin for the all-electric Code Minimum package). Any all-electric home meeting or exceeding the prescriptive requirements would comply, but a mixed fuel home would likely be able to comply with only a suite of above-code efficiency measures (no battery). Alternatively, a higher EDR1 margin target of 5 would incentivize more energy efficiency or additional PV for all - electric construction, and mixed fuel construction would likely need to incorporate a battery system to comply.
o A jurisdiction in Climate Zone 16 may want to set a performance target at an EDR1 margin of 20. 4 (the EDR1 margin for the mixed fuel efficiency + PV + battery package). This would establish a target that a mixed fuel home could On-Bill cost-effectively meet, likely only after incorporating a combination of efficiency measures and a battery system, and that an all-electric home could easily meet. • The 2022 Title 24 code’s new source energy metric combined with the heat pump baseline encourage all - electric construction, providing an incentive that allows for some amount of prescriptively required building efficiency to be traded off, still meeting minimum code compliance. This compliance benefit for all -electric homes highlights a unique opportunity for jurisdictions to incorporate efficiency into all-electric reach codes.
Efficiency and electrification have symbiotic benefits and are both critical for decarbonization of buildings. As demand on the electric grid is increased through electrification, efficiency can reduce the negative impacts of 2 Refer to Section 2.1.3 for discussion on NBT and NEM
3 https://www.cpuc.ca.gov/industries-and-topics/electrical-energy/electric-costs/demand-response-dr/demand-flexibility-rulemaking California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
-
Cost Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction Executive Summary
3 additional electricity demand on the grid, reducing the need for increased generation and storage capacity , as well as the need to upgrade upstream transmission and distribution equipment. The Reach Codes Team recommends that jurisdictions adopting a reach code for single family buildings also include an efficiency requirement with EDR1 margins at minimum consistent with the all-electric code minimum package results in Table 27.
• The code compliance margins for the ADU all-electric code minimum package are lower than for the single family prototype; code compliance and cost-effectiveness can be more challenging for smaller dwelling units.
As a result, the Reach Codes Team does not recommend EDR1 targets above those reported for the all - electric Code Minimum package in Table 28.
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. For example, jurisdictions may amend Part 11 instead of Part 6 of the CA Building Code requiring review and approval by the Building Standards Commission (BSC) but not the California Energy Commission (Energy Commission). Reach codes that amend Part 6 of the CA Building Code and require energy performance beyond state code minimums must demonstrate the proposed changes are cost-effective and obtain approval from the Energy Commission. Although a cost-effectiveness study is only required to amend Part 6 of the CA Building Code, this study provides valuable context for jurisdictions pursuing other ordinance paths to understand the economic impacts of 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]. In addition, jurisdictions in a CCA territory with rates or rate structures that are significantly different than IOU rates may email the program at [email protected] to request a custom analysis.
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
-
Cost Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction Introduction
4 1 Introduction
This report documents cost-effective combinations of measures that exceed the minimum state requirements, the 2022 Building Energy Efficiency Standards, effective January 1, 2023, for newly constructed single family buildings. This report was developed in coordination with the California Statewide Investor-Owned Utilities (CA IOUs) Codes and Standards Program, key consultants, and engaged cities—collectively known as the Reach Codes Team.
The analysis considers traditional detached single family and detached accessory dwelling unit (ADUs) building types and evaluates mixed fuel and all-electric package options in all sixteen California climate zones (CZs).4 Packages include combinations of efficiency measures, on-site renewable energy, and battery energy storage.
This report documents the key results and conclusions from the Reach Codes Team analysis. A full dataset of all results can be downloaded from the Local Energy Codes Resources 5 webpage. Results alongside policy options and
the potential citywide impacts for specific jurisdictions can also be explored using the Cost-effectiveness Explorer at https://explorer.localenergycodes.com/.
The California Building Energy Efficiency Standards Title 24, Part 6 (Title 24) (California Energy Commission, 2021a) is maintained and updated every three years by two state agencies: the California Energy Commission (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.
The Department of Energy (DOE) sets minimum efficiency standards for equipment and appliances that are federally regulated under the National Appliance Energy Conservation Act, including heating, cooling, and water heating equipment (E-CFR, 2020). Since state and local governments are prohibited from adopting higher minimum efficiencies than the federal standards require — herein referred to as federal preemption — the focus of this study is to identify and evaluate cost-effective packages that do not include high efficiency heating, cooling, and water heating equipment.
High efficiency appliances are often the easiest and most affordable measures to increase energy performance. While federal preemption limits reach code mandatory requirements for covered appliances, in practice, builders may install any package of compliant measures to achieve the performance requirements. 4 See Appendix 7.1 Map of California Climate Zones for a graphical depiction of climate zone locations. 5 https://localenergycodes.com/content/resources/?q=newly%20constructed%20buildings:%20efficiency%20and%20electrification California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
-
Cost Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction Methodology and Assumptions
5 2 Methodology and Assumptions
2.1 Analysis for Reach Codes
This section describes the approach to calculating cost-effectiveness including benefits, costs, metrics, and utility rate selection.
2.1.1 Modeling
The Reach Codes Team performed energy simulations using software approved for 2022 Title 24 Code compliance analysis, CBECC-Res 2022.3.0.
The general approach applied in this analysis is to evaluate performance and determine cost-effectiveness of various energy efficiency upgrade measures, individually and as packages, in single family buildings. Using the 2022 baseline as the starting point, prospective measures and packages were identified and modeled in each of the prototypes to determine the projected energy use (therm and kWh) and compliance impacts. A large set of parametric runs were conducted to evaluate various options and develop packages of measures that met or exceeded minimum code performance. The analysis utilized a Python based parametric tool to automate and manage the generation of CBECC- Res input files. This allowed for quick evaluation of various efficiency measures across multiple climate zones and prototypes and improved quality control. The batch process functionality of CBECC-Res was utilized to simulate large groups of input files at once.
2.1.2 Cost-effectiveness
2.1.2.1 Benefits
This analysis used two different metrics to assess cost-effectiveness of the proposed upgrades. Both methodologies require estimating and quantifying the incremental costs and energy savings associated with each energy efficiency measure. The main difference between the methodologies is the manner in which they value energy and thus the cost savings of reduced or avoided energy use:
Utility Bill Impacts (On-Bill): Customer-based lifecycle cost (LCC) approach that values energy based upon estimated site energy usage and customer utility bill savings using today’s electricity and natural gas utility tariffs. Total savings are estimated over a 30-year duration and include discounting of future costs and energy cost inflation.
Time Dependent Valuation (TDV): Energy Commission LCC methodology, which is intended to capture the total value or cost of energy use over 30 years. This method accounts for long-term projected costs, such as the cost of providing energy during peak periods of demand, and other societal costs, such as projected costs for carbon emissions as well as grid transmission and distribution impacts. This metric values energy use differently depending on the fuel source (natural gas, electricity, and propane), time of day, and season. For example, electricity used (or saved) during peak periods has a much higher value than electricity used (or saved) during off -peak periods due to the less inefficient energy generation sources providing peak electricity (Horii, Cutter, Kapur, Arent, & Conotyannis, 2014) . This is the methodology used by the Energy Commission in evaluating cost-effectiveness for efficiency measures in Title 24, Part 6.
2.1.2.2 Costs
The Reach Codes Team assessed the incremental costs of the measures and packages over a 30-year lifecycle.
Incremental costs represent the equipment, installation, replacement, and maintenance costs of the proposed measure relative to the 2022 Title 24 Standards minimum requirements or standard industry practices. Present value of replacement cost is included only for measures with lifetimes less than the 30-year evaluation period.
In calculating On-Bill cost-effectiveness, incremental first costs were assumed to be financed into a mortgage or loan with a 30-year loan term and four percent interest rate. Financing was not applied to future replacement or maintenance costs. In calculating TDV cost-effectiveness, incremental first costs were not assumed to be financed into a mortgage or loan.
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
-
Cost Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction Methodology and Assumptions
6 2.1.2.3 Metrics
Cost-effectiveness is presented using net present value (NPV) and benefit-to-cost (B/C) ratio metrics.
NPV Savings: The lifetime NPV savings is reported as a cost-effectiveness metric; Equation 1 demonstrates how this is calculated. If the net savings of a measure or package is positive, it is considered cost-effective. Negative savings represent net costs.
B/C Ratio: Ratio of the present value of all benefits to the present value of all costs over 30 years (present value of benefits divided by present value of costs). The criteria benchmark for cost-effectiveness is a B/C ratio greater than one. A value of one indicates the present value of the savings over the analysis period is equivalent to the present value of the lifetime incremental cost of that measure. A value greater than one represents a positive return on investment. The B/C ratio is calculated according to Equation 2.
Equation 1
𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁 𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆 = 𝑁𝑁𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑆𝑆𝑃𝑃𝑆𝑆𝑃𝑃 𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑃𝑃 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜 𝑣𝑣𝑆𝑆𝑜𝑜𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑆𝑆𝑙𝑙𝑃𝑃 𝑏𝑏𝑃𝑃𝑆𝑆𝑃𝑃𝑜𝑜𝑆𝑆𝑃𝑃 − 𝑁𝑁𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑆𝑆𝑃𝑃𝑆𝑆𝑃𝑃 𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑃𝑃 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜 𝑣𝑣𝑆𝑆𝑜𝑜𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑆𝑆𝑙𝑙𝑃𝑃 𝑐𝑐𝑜𝑜𝑆𝑆𝑃𝑃 Equation 2
𝑁𝑁𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑆𝑆𝑃𝑃𝑆𝑆𝑃𝑃 𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑃𝑃 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜 𝑣𝑣𝑆𝑆𝑜𝑜𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑆𝑆𝑙𝑙𝑃𝑃 𝑏𝑏𝑃𝑃𝑆𝑆𝑃𝑃𝑜𝑜𝑆𝑆𝑃𝑃 𝐵𝐵𝑃𝑃𝑆𝑆𝑃𝑃𝑜𝑜𝑆𝑆𝑃𝑃 − 𝑃𝑃𝑜𝑜 − 𝐶𝐶𝑜𝑜𝑆𝑆𝑃𝑃 𝑅𝑅𝑆𝑆𝑃𝑃𝑆𝑆𝑜𝑜 = 𝑁𝑁𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑆𝑆𝑃𝑃𝑆𝑆𝑃𝑃 𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑃𝑃 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜 𝑣𝑣𝑆𝑆𝑜𝑜𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑆𝑆𝑙𝑙𝑃𝑃 𝑐𝑐𝑜𝑜𝑆𝑆𝑃𝑃 Improving the efficiency of a project often requires an initial incremental investment. In most cases the benefit is represented by annual On-Bill utility or TDV savings, and the cost is represented 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”.
The lifetime costs or benefits are calculated according to Equation 3.
Equation 3
𝐴𝐴 (𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴 𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐𝑜𝑜 𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏𝐴𝐴𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑐𝑐)𝑡𝑡 𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜 𝑣𝑣𝑆𝑆𝑜𝑜𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑆𝑆𝑙𝑙𝑃𝑃 𝑐𝑐𝑜𝑜𝑆𝑆𝑃𝑃 𝑜𝑜𝑃𝑃 𝑏𝑏𝑃𝑃𝑆𝑆𝑃𝑃𝑜𝑜𝑆𝑆𝑃𝑃 = ∑𝑐𝑐=0 (1+𝑜𝑜)𝑡𝑡 Where: n = analysis term in years
r = discount rate
The following summarizes the assumptions applied in this analysis to both methodologies.
Analysis term of 30 years
Real discount rate of three percent
TDV is a normalized monetary format and there is a unique procedure for calculating the present value benefit of TDV energy savings. The present value of the energy cost savings in dollars is calculated by multiplying the TDV savings (reported by the CBECC-Res simulation software) by a NPV factor developed by the Energy Commission (see (Energy + Environmental Economics, 2020)). The 30-year residential NPV factor is $0.173/kTDV kBtu for the 2022 code cycle.
Equation 4
𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑁𝑁 𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜 𝑣𝑣𝑆𝑆𝑜𝑜𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑆𝑆𝑙𝑙𝑃𝑃 𝑏𝑏𝑃𝑃𝑆𝑆𝑃𝑃𝑜𝑜𝑆𝑆𝑃𝑃 = 𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑁𝑁 𝑃𝑃𝑆𝑆𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑆𝑆𝑒𝑒 𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆 ∗ 𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁 𝑜𝑜𝑆𝑆𝑐𝑐𝑃𝑃𝑜𝑜𝑃𝑃 California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
-
Cost Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction Methodology and Assumptions
7 2.1.3 Utility Rates
In coordination with the CA IOU rate team (comprised of representatives from Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E), Southern California Edison (SCE) and San Diego Gas and Electric (SDG&E)) and two Publicly-Owned-Utilities (POUs) (Sacramento Municipal Utility District (SMUD) and City of Palo Alto Utilities (CPAU)), the Reach Codes Team determined appropriate utility rates for each climate zone in order to calculate utility costs and determine On- Bill cost- effectiveness for the proposed measures and packages. The utility tariffs, summarized in Table 1, were determined based on the most prevalent active rate in each territory. Utility rates were applied to each climate zone based on the predominant IOU serving the population of each zone, with a few climate zones evaluated multiple times under different utility scenarios. Climate Zones 10 and 14 were evaluated with both SCE/SoCalGas and SDG&E tariffs since each utility has customers within these climate zones. Climate Zone 5 is evaluated under both PG&E and SoCalGas natural gas rates. Two POU or municipal utility rates were also evaluated: SMUD in Climate Zone 12 and CPAU in Climate Zone 4.
Some community choice aggregations (CCAs) have utility rates that are very similar to IOU rates, often within $0.02 per kWh. For these CCA customers, total utility costs will be very similar to those calculated in this study and the results from this study will generally apply. The study results cannot be easily applied to CCAs with rates that do not closely track the IOU rates or municipal utilities outside of SMUD and CPAU.
First-year utility costs were calculated using hourly electricity and natural gas output from CBECC-Res and applying the utility tariffs summarized in Table 1. Annual costs were also estimated for IOU customers eligible for the CARE tariff discounts on both electricity and natural gas bills. Appendix 7.2 Utility Rate Schedules includes details of each utility tariff. For cases with onsite generation (i.e. solar photovoltaics (PV)), the approved Net Billing Tariff (NBT) was applied along with monthly service fees and hourly export compensation rates for 2024
6. In December 2022, the California
Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) issued a decision adopting NBT as a successor to prior net energy metering rules (NEM 2.0) that went into effect April of 2023.7 The ADU was assumed to have separate electric and gas meters from the main house.
Table 1: Utility Tariffs Used Based on Climate Zone
IOUs
Climate Zones Electric / Gas Utility Electricity Tariff Natural Gas Tariff 1-5,11-13,16 PG&E / PG&E E-ELEC G1
5 PG&E / SoCalGas E-ELEC GR
6, 8-10, 14, 15 SCE / SoCalGas TOU-D-PRIME GR
7, 10, 14 SDG&E / SDG&E
EV-TOU-5 (TOU-ELEC
for ADU cases without
PV systems8)
GR
POUs
Climate Zones Electric / Gas Utility Electricity Tariff Natural Gas Tariff 4 CPAU / CPAU E-1 G1
12 SMUD / PG&E R-TOD G1
Utility rates are assumed to escalate over time according to the CPUC 2021 En Banc hearings on utility costs through 2030 (California Public Utilities Commission, 2021a). Escalation rates through the remainder of the 30- year evaluation period are based on the escalation rate assumptions within the 2022 TDV factors. A second set of escalation rates were also evaluated to demonstrate the impact that utility cost changes over time have on cost-effectiveness. This 6 https://www.cpuc.ca.gov/-/media/cpuc-website/divisions/energy-division/documents/net-energy-metering-nem/nemrevisit/nbt- model--12142022.xlsb
7 https://www.cpuc.ca.gov/nemrevisit
8 See Section 3.2 Prototype Characteristics for a description of ADU cases that don’t require solar PV prescriptively.
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
-
Cost Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction Methodology and Assumptions
8 utility rate escalation sensitivity analysis, presented in Section 4.6.3, was based on those used within the 2025 Long- term System Cost (LSC) factors (LSC replaces TDV in the 2025 code cycle) which assumed steep increases in gas rates in the latter half of the analysis period. See Appendix 7.2.7 Fuel Escalation Assumptions for details.
2.2 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
The analysis reports the greenhouse gas (GHG) emission estimates based on assumptions within CBECC-Res. There are 8,760 hourly multipliers accounting for time-dependent energy use and carbon based on source emissions, including renewable portfolio standard projections. There are two strings of multipliers —one for Northern California climate zones, and another for Southern California climate zones. 9 GHG emissions are reported as average annual metric tons of CO2 equivalent over the 30-year measure analysis period.
2.3 Energy Design Rating
The 2019 Title 24 Code introduced California’s Energy Design Rating (EDR) as the primary metric to demonstrate compliance with the energy code for single family buildings. This EDR was based on the hourly TDV energy use from a building that is compliant with the 2006 International Energy Conservation Code (IECC) as the Reference Building. The Reference Building has an EDR score of 100 while a zero-net energy (ZNE) home has an EDR score of zero. While the Reference Building is used to set the scale for the rating, the Proposed Design is still compared to the Standard Design based on the Title 24 prescriptive baseline assumptions to determine compliance. In the 2022 Title 24 Code a second new EDR metric was introduced based on hourly source energy. The two EDR metrics are described below:
EDR1 is calculated based on source energy.
EDR2 is calculated based on TDV energy.
EDR1 has only one component, “Total EDR1” which represents source energy use for t he entire building. EDR2 is composed of two components for compliance purposes: the “Efficiency EDR2”, which represents the energy efficiency features of a home, and the PV/Flexibility EDR2, which includes the effects of PV and battery storage systems. “Total EDR2” combines all energy use of the building including both the Efficiency and PV/Flexibility impacts. While the Efficiency EDR2 does not include the full impact of a battery system, it can include a self -utilization credit for batteries if certain conditions are met.
For a new, single family building to comply with the 2022 Title 24 Code, three criteria must be met:
1. The Proposed Total EDR1 must be equal to or less than the Total EDR1 of the Standard Design, and
2. The Proposed Efficiency EDR2 must be equal to or less than the Efficiency EDR2 of the Standard Design, and
3. The Proposed Total EDR2 must be equal to or less than the Total EDR2 of the Standard Design.
This concept, consistent with California’s “loading order” which prioritizes energy efficiency ahead of renewable generation, requires projects to meet a minimum Efficiency EDR2 before PV is credited but allows for PV to be traded off with additional efficiency when meeting the Total EDR2. A project may improve building efficiency beyond the minimum required and subsequently reduce the PV generation capacity necessary to achieve the required Total EDR2.
However, it may not increase the size of the PV system and trade this off with a reduction of efficiency measures.
Results from this analysis are presented as EDR Margin, a reduction in the EDR score relative to the Standard Design.
EDR Margin is a better metric to use than absolute EDR in the context of a reach code because absolute values vary based on the home design and characteristics such as size and orientation. This approach aligns with how compliance is reported for the 2019 and 2022 Title 24 Code. The EDR Margin is calculated according to Equation 5.
Equation 5
9 CBECC-Res multipliers are the same for CZs 1-5 and 11-13 (Northern California), while there is another set of multipliers for CZs 6-10 and 14-16 (Southern California).
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
-
Cost Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction Methodology and Assumptions
9 𝐸𝐸𝑇𝑇𝑅𝑅 𝑀𝑀𝑆𝑆𝑃𝑃𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆 = 𝑆𝑆𝑃𝑃𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑃𝑃𝑆𝑆 𝑇𝑇𝑃𝑃𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆 𝐸𝐸𝑇𝑇𝑅𝑅 − 𝑁𝑁𝑃𝑃𝑜𝑜𝑃𝑃𝑜𝑜𝑆𝑆𝑃𝑃𝑆𝑆 𝑇𝑇𝑃𝑃𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆 𝐸𝐸𝑇𝑇𝑅𝑅 California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
-
Cost Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction Prototypes, Measure Packages, and Costs
10 3 Prototypes, Measure Packages, and Costs
This section describes the prototypes and the scope of analysis drawing from previous research where necessary, including the 2019 low-rise residential single family reach code study (Statewide Reach Codes Team, 2019).
3.1 Prior Reach Code Research
In 2019, the Reach Codes Team analyzed the cost-effectiveness of residential single family new construction projects for mixed fuel and all-electric packages (Statewide Reach Codes Team, 2019). Using this analysis, several cities and counties in California adopted local energy code amendments encouraging or requiring that low -rise residential new construction be all-electric. As there were few changes to the single family requirements, this analysis for the 2022 code cycle leveraged the work completed for the 2019 reports. Initial efficiency packages were based on the final packages from the 2019 research and were revised to reflect measure specifications and costs based on new data.
3.2 Prototype Characteristics
The Energy Commission defines building prototypes which it uses to evaluate the cost -effectiveness of proposed changes to Title 24 requirements. For the 2022 code cycle the Energy Commission used two single family prototypes , both of which were used in this analysis. Additional details on the prototypes can be found in the Alternative Calculation Method (ACM) Approval Manual (California Energy Commission, 2018).
Additionally, a detached new construction ADU prototype was developed to reflect recent trends in California construction related to the high cost of housing (TRC, 2021). ADUs are additional dwelling units typically built on the property of an existing single-family parcel. ADUs are defined as new construction in the energy code when they are ground-up developments, do not convert an existing space to livable space, and are not attached to the primary dwelling. The evaluated prototype is not representative of an attached ADU constructed as an addition to an existing home.
The Reach Codes Team leveraged prior research to define the detached ADU baseline and measure packages . The house size and number of bedrooms were based on data from a survey conducted by UC Berkeley’s Center for Community Innovation (UC Berkeley Center for Community Innovation, 2021). The survey found that the average square footage for new ADUs statewide is 615 square feet and that the majority (61 percent) of new ADUs have one bedroom.
Table 2 describes the basic characteristics of each prototype. The prototypes have equal geometry on all walls, windows and roof to be orientation neutral.
Table 2: Prototype Characteristics
Characteristic Single Family
One-Story
Single Family
Two-Story ADU
Conditioned Floor Area 2,100 ft2 2,700 ft2 625 ft2
Num. of Stories 1 2 1
Num. of Bedrooms 3 4 1
Window-to-Floor Area Ratio 20% 20% 19.2%
The Energy Commission’s protocol for the two single family prototypes is to weigh the simulated energy impacts by a factor that represents the distribution of single-story and two-story homes being built statewide. Consistent with this protocol, this study assumed 50 percent single-story and 50 percent two-story. Simulation results in this study are California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
-
Cost Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction Prototypes, Measure Packages, and Costs
11 characterized and presented according to this ratio, which is approximately equivalent to a 2,400- square foot (ft2) house.10 ADU results are presented separately.
The methodology used in the analyses for each of the prototypical building types begins with a design that precisely meets the minimum 2022 prescriptive requirements (zero compliance margin). Table 150.1-A in the 2022 Standards (California Energy Commission, 2021a) lists the prescriptive measures that determine the baseline design in each climate zone. Other features are consistent with the Standard Design in the ACM Reference Manual (California Energy Commission, 2022), and are designed to meet, but not exceed, the minimum requirements. See Appendix 7.4 for a list of prescriptive values relevant to the measures explored in this analysis.
Table 3 describes additional characteristics as they were applied to the base case, or baseline, energy model in this analysis. In a shift from the 2019 Standards, the 2022 Standards apply a prescriptive fuel source for space heating and water, where one is gas-fueled and one is a heat pump depending on climate zone. This establishes a prescriptive heat pump baseline. In most climate zones the prescriptive base case includes a heat pump water heater and a natural gas furnace for space heating. In Climate Zones 3, 4, 13, and 14 this is reversed, where the base case has a heat pump space heater and natural gas tankless water heater.
Table 4 summarizes the PV capacities for the base case packages. 10 2,400 ft2 = (50% x 2,100 ft2) + (50% x 2,700 ft2)
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
-
Cost Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction Prototypes, Measure Packages, and Costs
12 Table 3: Base case Characteristics of the Prototypes Characteristic Single Family ADU
Space
Heating/Cooling1,2
CZs 1-2,5-12,15-16: Natural gas furnace, split
AC 80 AFUE, 14.3 SEER2, 11.7 EER2
CZs 3-4,13-14: Split heat pump – 7.5 HSPF2,
14.3 SEER2, 11.7 EER2
Same as single family
Air Distribution Ductwork located in vented attic Same as single family Water Heater1,2
CZs 1-2,5-12,15-16: Heat pump water heater
(HPWH) UEF = 2.0 located in the garage
CZs 3-4,13-14: Natural gas tankless –
UEF = 0.81
Same equipment type as SF
except HPWH is located inside
the conditioned space with the
supply air ducted from outside
and exhaust air ducted to
outside.3
Hot Water
Distribution
Code minimum
CZs 1,16: Basic compact distribution credit Same as single family Cooking Natural Gas Same as single family
Clothes Drying Natural Gas Same as single family
PV System
Sized to offset 100% of electricity use for space
cooling, ventilation, lighting, appliance, & other
miscellaneous electric loads. Size differs by
climate zone ranging from 2.64 kW to 5.21 kW,
see Table 4.
PV is not required when the PV
system size required based on the
prescriptive calculations is less
than 1.8 kW, as is the case in
Climate Zones 1-9, 12, 14, and
16. In the other climate zones the
PV size ranges from 1.73 kW to
42.51 kW, see Table 4.
Foundation Slab-on-grade Same as single family
1 Equipment efficiencies are equal to minimum federal appliance efficiency standards. 2 AFUE = annual fuel utilization efficiency. SEER = seasonal energy efficiency ratio. EER = energy efficiency ratio.
HSPF = heating seasonal performance factor. UEF = uniform energy factor. 3 This version of CBECC-Res used in this analysis did not have the capability to directly model ducted HPWHs even though this configuration is called out as the Standard Design in the 2022 ACM (California Energy Commission, 2022). This was modeled by indicating that the tank is located within the conditioned space with the compressor unit located outside. 4 Exception 2 to Section 150.1(I)14 states that “no PV system is required when the minimum PV system size specified by section 150.1(c)14 is less than 1.8 kWdc.” In this analysis this exception is applied based on the sizes calculated per Equation150.1-C of Section 150.1(c)14. The performance software sizes the PV system based on the estimated energy use, which differs slightly from the prescriptive sizing. As a result, the baseline PV capacity from the performance software for Climate Zone 10 is less than 1.8 kWdc.
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
-
Cost Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction Prototypes, Measure Packages, and Costs
13 Table 4: Base Package PV Capacities (kW-DC)
Climate
Zone
Base Package
Single
Family ADU
CZ01 3.57 0
CZ02 3.03 0
CZ03 2.83 0
CZ04 2.91 0
CZ05 2.64 0
CZ06 2.65 0
CZ07 2.83 0
CZ08 3.11 0
CZ09 2.96 0
CZ10 3.17 1.73
CZ11 3.90 2.06
CZ12 3.14 0
CZ13 4.05 2.09
CZ14 3.15 0
CZ15 5.21 2.51
CZ16 2.93 0
3.3 Measure Definitions and Costs
Measures evaluated in this study fall into two categories: those associated with general efficiency — onsite generation (solar PV), and demand flexibility (batteries) — and those associated with building electrification. Furthermore, general efficiency measures are broken into those that are federally preempted and those that are not ; see Section 1 for background information on preemption and Section 3.4 for details of measure packages evaluated in this study. The Reach Codes Team selected measures based on cost-effectiveness as well as decades of experience with residential architects, builders, and engineers along with general knowledge of the relative consumer acceptance of many measures.
The following sections describe the details and incremental cost assumptions for each of the measures. Incremental costs represent the equipment, installation, replacement, and maintenance costs of the proposed measures relative to the base case.11 Replacement costs are applied for roofs, mechanical equipment, PV inverters and battery systems over the 30-year evaluation period. Maintenance costs are estimated for PV systems, but not any other measures.
Costs were estimated to reflect costs to the building owner. All costs are provided as present value in 2023 (2023 PV$).
The Reach Codes Team obtained measure costs from distributors, contractors, literature review, and online sources such as Home Depot and RS Means. Contractor markups are incorporated. These are the Reach Codes Team’s best estimates of average costs statewide. However, it's recognized that local costs may differ, and that inflation and supply chain issues may also impact costs.
3.3.1 Efficiency, Solar PV, and Batteries
The following are descriptions of each of the efficiency, PV, and battery measures evaluated under this analysis and applied in at least one of the packages presented in this report, including how they compare to the current prescriptive requirements. Throughout this report, “Efficiency” measures refer specifically to the following non-preempted 11 All first costs are assumed to be financed in a mortgage and interest costs due to financing are included in the incremental costs.
See Section 2.1.2 for details.
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
-
Cost Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction Prototypes, Measure Packages, and Costs
14 measures. These measures are in addition to or in place of the relevant 2022 base case prototype characteristics outlined in Table 3, and their applicability to measure packages are summarized in Table 39 through Table 41. Table 5 summarizes the incremental cost assumptions for each of these measures.
Reduced Infiltration (ACH50): Reduce infiltration in single family homes from the default infiltration assumption of five (5) air changes per hour at 50 Pascals (ACH50) 12 by 40 percent to 3 ACH50. HERS rater field verification and diagnostic testing of building air leakage according to the procedures outlined in the 2022 Reference Appendices RA3.8 (California Energy Commission, 2021b).
Lower U-Factor Fenestration: Reduce window U-factor to 0.24. The prescriptive U-factor is 0.30 in all climate zones.
Higher SHGC Fenestration: Increase solar heat gain coefficient (SHGC) to 0.50 in climate zones where heating loads dominate (1, 3, 5 and 16). The baseline SHGC applied in the Standard Design is 0.35 in these climate zones.
Cool Roof: Install a roofing product that’s rated by the Cool Roof Rating Council to have an aged solar reflectance (ASR) equal to or greater than 0.25. Steep-sloped roofs were assumed in all cases. The prescriptive ASR is 0.20 for Climate Zones 10 through 15.
Increased Ceiling Insulation: Increase ceiling level insulation in a vented attic to R-38, R-49, or R-60 insulation.
Slab Insulation: Install R-10 perimeter slab insulation at a depth of 16-inches. This measure doesn’t apply to Climate Zone 16 where slab insulation is required prescriptively.
Low Pressure Drop Ducts: Upgrade the duct distribution system to reduce external static pressure and meet a maximum fan efficacy of 0.35 Watts per cfm (compared to the prescriptively required 0.45 W/cfm). This may involve upsizing ductwork, reducing the total effective length of ducts, and/or selecting low pressure drop components such as filters. Fan watt draw must be verified by a HERS rater according to the procedures outlined in the 2022 Reference Appendices RA3.3 (California Energy Commission, 2021b). This applies to the single family prototype only.
Buried Radial Duct Design: Bury all ductwork in ceiling insulation by laying the ducts across the ceiling joists or in- between ceiling joists directly on the ceiling drywall. Duct design is based on a radial design where individual ducts are run to each supply register. This allows for smaller diameter ducts, reducing duct losses and more easily meeting fully or deeply buried conditions.
13 Duct burial and duct system design must be verified by a HERS rater according to the procedures outlined in the 2022 Reference Appendices RA3.1.4.1.5 and RA3.1.4.1.6 (California Energy Commission, 2021b). This applies to the single family prototype only.
Ductless Mini-Split Heat Pump: In the ADU prototype install a ductless mini-split heat pump with three indoor heads.
The system is evaluated as meeting the criteria for the variable capacity heat pump (VCHP) credit , introduced in the 2019 code cycle, which must be verified by a HERS rater according to the procedures outlined in the 2022 Reference Appendices RA3.4.4.3 (California Energy Commission, 2021b). This credit requires verification of refrigerant charge, that all equipment is entirely within conditioned space, that airflow is directly supplied to all habitable space, and that wall mounted thermostats serve any zones greater than 150 square feet. This measure is non-preempted because it does not require the installation of equipment with efficiencies above federal minimum requirements.
Compact Hot Water Distribution: Design the hot water distribution system to meet minimum requirements for the basic compact hot water distribution credit according to the procedures outlined in the 2022 Reference Appendices RA4.4.6 (California Energy Commission, 2021b). In many single family homes this may require moving the water heater from an exterior to an interior garage wall. CBECC-Res software assumes a 30% reduction in distribution losses for the basic credit. This is prescriptively required in Climate Zones 1 and 16 only.
Solar PV: Installation of on-site PV is required in the 2022 residential code unless an exception is met. The PV sizing methodology in each package was developed to offset annual building electricity use and avoid oversizing. In all cases, 12 Whole house leakage tested at a pressure difference of 50 Pascals between indoors and outdoors. 13 The duct systems in the Central Valley Research Homes Project Final Project Report are illustrative of this approach (Proctor, Wilcox, & Chitwood, 2018).
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
-
Cost Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction Prototypes, Measure Packages, and Costs
15 PV is evaluated in CBECC-Res according to the California Flexible Installation (CFI) 1 assumptions. To meet CFI eligibility, the requirements of 2022 Reference Appendices JA11.2.2 (California Energy Commission, 2021b) must be met.
The Reach Codes Team used two options within the CBECC-Res software for sizing the PV system. The first option, “Standard Design PV”, was applied in the base case simulations and packages where the PV system size was not changed from the minimum system size required 14. For the PV packages, the second option, “Specify PV System Scaling”, was used. In these cases, a scaling of 100 was applied, indicating that the PV system be sized to offset 100% of the estimated electricity use of the Proposed Design case.
One exception to the PV requirement is when the minimum PV system size required is less than 1.8 kW. This exception applies to the ADU models in Climate Zones 1-9, 12, 14, and 16. For these cases no PV system is required by code and no PV system was modeled in the base case simulations.
Battery Energy Storage: A 10 kWh battery system was evaluated in CBECC-Res with control type set to “Basic” and with default efficiencies of 95% for both charging and discharging. 10kWh battery capacity is representative of systems installed in single family homes based on the Self-Generation Incentive Program (SGIP) participant data. The “Basic” control option charges the battery system anytime PV generation is greater than the house load and discharges the battery whenever the house load exceeds PV generation. The battery does not discharge to the grid, maximizing on- site utilization of the PV system and in turn utility bill benefits under NBT. To qualify for the battery storage compliance credit the battery system must meet the requirements outlined in the 2022 Reference Appendices JA12 (California Energy Commission, 2021b). Batteries are not prescriptively required in any climate zone.
Table 5: Incremental Cost Assumptions: Efficiency, PV, and Battery Measures Measure
Performance
Level
Incremental
Cost
(2023 PV$)1
Source & Notes
Single
Family ADU
Reduced
Infiltration
3.0 vs 5.0
ACH50 $591 $362 $0.115/ft2 based on NREL’s BEopt cost database plus $250 HERS rater verification.
Window U-
factor 0.24 vs 0.30 $2,280 $285 $4.23/ft2 window area based on analysis conducted for the 2019 and 2022 Title 24 cycles (Statewide CASE Team, 2018).
Window
SHGC 0.50 vs 0.35 $0 $0
Based on feedback from Statewide CASE Team that higher SHGC does not necessarily have any incremental cost (Statewide CASE Team, 2017).
Cool Roof
0.25 vs 0.20
aged solar
reflectance
$219 $53
$0.07per ft2 of roof area first incremental cost for asphalt shingle product based on the 2022 Nonresidential High Performance Envelope CASE Report (Statewide CASE Team, 2020a). Total costs assume present value of replacement at year 20 and residual cost for remaining product life at end of 30-year analysis period. Higher reflectance values for lower cost are achievable for tile roof products
Attic
Insulation
R-49 vs R-30 $872 n/a
Based on costs from the 2022 Residential Additions & Alterations CASE Report (Statewide CASE Team, 2020b).
R-60 vs R-30 $1,420 n/a
R-60 vs R-38 $1,096 n/a
Slab Edge
Insulation R-10 vs R-0 $651 $449 $4 per linear foot of slab perimeter based on internet research.
Assumes 16in depth.
14 The Standard Design PV system is sized to offset the electricity use of the building loads which are typically electric in a mixed fuel home, which includes all loads except space heating, water heating, clothes drying, and cooking.
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
-
Cost Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction Prototypes, Measure Packages, and Costs
16 Measure
Performance
Level
Incremental
Cost
(2023 PV$)1
Source & Notes
Single
Family ADU
Low
Pressure
Drop Ducts
0.35 vs 0.45
W/cfm $99 n/a
Costs assume one-hour labor for single family and half-hour for the ADU. Labor rate of $88 per hour is from 2022 RS Means for sheet metal workers and includes a weighted average City Cost Index for labor for California.
Buried
Ducts
Buried, radial
design $281 n/a
No cost for laying ducts on attic floor versus suspending, in some cases there will be cost savings. Neutral cost for radiant design versus trunk and branch design. A $250 HERS Rater verification fee is included.
Duct
Insulation R-8 vs R-6 $201 n/a Based on costs from the 2022 Residential Additions & Alterations CASE Report (Statewide CASE Team, 2020b).
Ductless
Mini-Split
Heat Pump
Ductless
system
meeting the
VCHP credit
vs. ducted
split heat
pump
n/a $1,571
Costs were developed based on data from E3’s 2019 report Residential Building Electrification in California (Energy & Environmental Economics, 2019) and the 2022 All-Electric Multifamily CASE Report (Statewide CASE Team, 2020c).
Equipment costs are from the CASE Report for the 10-story multifamily prototype assuming similar sized equipment between the multifamily dwelling unit and the ADU. Thermostat, wiring, electrical, and ducting costs are from the E3 study. A $250 HERS Rater verification fee is also included. Where this measure is applied to the mixed fuel home with a gas furnace, this cost is in addition to the cost difference for a heat pump versus a gas furnace/split AC reported in Section 3.3.2.
Compact
Hot Water
Distribution
Basic credit –
homes with
gas tankless
$196 $0
For single family homes with a gas tankless water heater (mixed fuel homes in Climate Zones 3, 4, 13, 14) assumes adding 20-feet venting at $14.69 per linear foot to locate water heater on interior garage wall, less 20-feet savings for PEX and pipe insulation at $5.98 per linear foot. Costs obtained from online retailers. For single family homes with a HPWH there is an incremental cost savings from less pipe being required. For the ADU it is assumed the credit can be met without any changes to design and there is no cost impact.
Basic credit –
homes with
HPWH
-$134 $0
PV System
First Cost $3.11/
W
$3.11/
W
First costs are from LBNL’s Tracking the Sun 2022 (Barbose, Galen; Darghouth, Naim; O'Shaughnessy, Eric; Forrester, Sydney, 2022) and represent median costs in California in 2022 of $3.78/WDC for residential systems. The first cost was reduced by the solar energy Investment Tax Credit of 30%.
2 Inverter replacement cost of $0.14/WDC present value includes replacements at year 11 at $0.15/WDC (nominal) and at year 21 at $0.12/WDC (nominal) per the 2019 PV CASE Report (California Energy Commission, 2017).
System maintenance costs of $0.31/WDC present value assume $0.02/WDC (nominal) annually per the 2019 PV CASE Report (California Energy Commission, 2017).
Inverter
replacement
$0.14/
W
$0.14/
W
Maintenance $0.31/
W
$0.31/
W
Replacement
cost
$648/
kWh
$648/
kWh
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
-
Cost Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction Prototypes, Measure Packages, and Costs
17 Measure
Performance
Level
Incremental
Cost
(2023 PV$)1
Source & Notes
Single
Family ADU
Battery (10
kWh) First cost $782/
kWh
$782/
kWh
First costs of $1,101/kWh are from SGIP residential participant cost data for single family projects between 2020 and 2023. The first cost is reduced by 30% due to the Investment Tax Credit2 and also by $0.15/Wh due to the base SGIP incentive3. The SGIP incentive is only accounted for in IOU territories and not for SMUD and CPAU analyses.
Replacement cost at years 10 and 20 was calculated based on the first cost reduced by 7% annually over the next 10 years for a future value cost of $533/kWh. The 7% reduction is based on SDG&E’s Behind-the-Meter Battery Market Study (E-Source companies, 2020). For projects constructed in 2024 or 2025, the first replacement at year 10 would occur in 2034 or 2035. This replacement cost includes an average Investment Tax Credit of 22% in 2034 and 0% in 2035
2. 1All first costs are assumed to be financed in a mortgage and interest costs due to financing are included in the incremental costs. See Section 2.1.2 for details. Interest costs were not included for calculating TDV cost- effectiveness.
2As part of the Inflation Reduction Act in August 2022 the Section 25D Investment Tax Credit was extended and raised to 30% through 2032 with a step-down beginning in 2033. https://www.seia.org/sites/default/files/2022- 08/Inflation%20Reduction%20Act%20Summary%20PDF%20FINAL.pdf 3SGIP incentives vary by ‘steps’ which reflect utility-specific funding across program implementation years. See:
https://www.selfgenca.com/home/program_metrics/
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
-
Cost Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction Prototypes, Measure Packages, and Costs
18 3.3.2 Electrification
This analysis compared a code compliant mixed fuel prototype, which uses natural gas for three appliances (cooking, clothes drying and either space heating or water heating), with a code compliant all-electric prototype. The associated costs included the relative costs between natural gas and electric appliances, differences between in- house electricity and natural gas infrastructure, and the associated infrastructure costs for providing natural gas to the building. To estimate costs the Reach Codes Team leveraged costs from the 2019 reach code cost -effectiveness studies for residential new construction (Statewide Reach Codes Team, 2019) and detached accessory dwelling units (Statewide Reach Codes Team, 2021b), 2022 RS Means, PG&E data, published utility schedules and rules, and online research.
3.3.2.1 Utility Infrastructure
This section addresses utility infrastructure costs during construction; appliance-specific infrastructure costs are addressed in Section 0. Table 6 presents total costs for natural gas infrastructure for a single family building within CA gas IOU territory, including distribution and service line extensions, meter installation, and plan review . These costs are applied as cost savings for an all-electric home when compared to a mixed fuel home. This is the component with the highest degree of variability for all-electric homes, as they are project-dependent and may be significantly impacted by such factors as utility territory, site characteristics, distance to the nearest natural gas main and main location, joint trenching, whether work is conducted by the utility or a private contractor, and number of dwelling units per development. All gas utilities participating in this study were solicited for cost information. The CA IOU costs for single family homes presented are based on cost data provided by PG&E.
Extension of service lines from a main distribution line to the home were provided separately for a new subdivision in an undeveloped area ($1,300) as well as an infill development ($6,750). The service extension is typically more costly in an infill scenario due to the disruption of existing roads, sidewalks, and other structures . For this analysis an average of the new subdivision and infill development costs was used, representing 80 percent of the new subdivision and 20 percent infill. In the case of distribution line extensions, the estimated cost is for new greenfield development .
For the single family analysis, based on the Reach Codes Team's conversations with the industry it is assumed that no upgrades to the electrical panel are required and that a 200 Amp panel is typically installed for both mixed fuel and all- electric homes.
Table 6: Single Family IOU Total Natural Gas Infrastructure Costs Item Cost
Distribution Line Extension $1,020
Service Line Extension $2,390
Meter $300
Plan Review Costs $850
Total $4,560
CPAU provides gas service to its customers and therefore separate costs were evaluated based on CPAU gas service connection fees.15 Table 7 presents the breakdown of gas infrastructure costs used in this analysis for CPAU. There is no main distribution line component since Palo Alto has little greenfield space remaining and most of the development is infill.
15 CPAU Schedule G-5 effective 09-01-2019: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/utilities/utilities-engineering/general- specifications/gas-service-connection-fees.pdf
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
-
Cost Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction Prototypes, Measure Packages, and Costs
19 Table 7: Single Family CPAU Total Natural Gas Infrastructure Costs Item Cost
Service Extension $5,892
Meter $1,012
Plan Review Costs $924
Total $7,828
Electricity infrastructure costs for single family homes were not estimated as part of this work as they are expected to be the same for both all-electric and mixed fuel construction. This will change in July 2024 based on the CPUC ’s recent decision to eliminate electric line extension subsidies for new construction projects that use natural gas and/or propane.
16 This will increase the utility infrastructure costs for mixed fuel homes, relative to all-electric homes, improving the cost-effectiveness of all-electric construction. The Reach Codes Team intends to quantify this impact in future studies.
Table 8 presents utility infrastructure costs for the detached ADU, both mixed fuel and all-electric designs. These costs are directly from the 2019 detached ADU reach code report (Statewide Reach Codes Team, 2021b) and were obtained from stakeholder interviews and RS Means. For the ADU scenario it’s assumed that natural gas infrastructure already exists on the lot and is being extended to the location of the ADU typically at the back of the lot. There are incremental cost savings for an all-electric ADU from not extending the natural gas service; however, there is also a small incremental cost for upgrading the electric service to accommodate the additional electrical load. The Reach Codes Team found that a new detached ADU would require that the building owner upgrade the service connection to the lot in both the mixed fuel ADU design and the all-electric design. The most common size for this upgrade is to upsize the existing panel to 225A, which would not represent an incremental cost from the mixed fuel project to the all -electric project. Feeder wiring to the ADU and the ADU subpanel, on the other hand, will need to be slightly upgraded for the all-electric design.
Table 8: ADU Utility Infrastructure Total and Incremental Costs Mixed Fuel Measure Mixed Fuel
Total Cost All-Electric Measure All-Electric
Total Cost
All-Electric
Incremental Cost
Site natural gas service
extension $1,998 No site natural gas service $0 ($1,998) Site electrical service
connection upgrade 225A $3,500
Site electrical service
connection upgrade 225A $3,500 $0
100A feeder to ADU with
breaker $933
125A feeder to ADU with
breaker $1,206 $273
100A ADU subpanel $733 125A ADU subpanel $946 $213
Totals $7,164 $5,652 ($1,512)
3.3.2.2 Equipment
This section provides descriptions and costs of the equipment applied to electrify mixed fuel homes in the all-electric packages. The equipment meets but does not exceed federal efficiency requirements to avoid federal preemption concerns.
16 https://www.cpuc.ca.gov/news-and-updates/all-news/cpuc-eliminates-last-remaining-utility-subsidies-for-new-construction-of- buildings-using-gas-2023
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
-
Cost Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction Prototypes, Measure Packages, and Costs
20 For the water heating and space conditioning equipment analyzed, cost analyses incorporated the equipment’s effective useful lifetime (EUL), which are summarized in Table 9. The EUL for the heat pump, furnace, and air conditioner are based on the Database for Energy Efficient Resources (DEER) (California Public Utilities Commission, 2021b). Water heating equipment lifetimes are based on DOE’s recent water heater rulemaking (Department of Energy, 2022). Replacement costs are applied when equipment reaches its EUL within the 30-year evaluation period, and in such cases are included in the total lifetime costs. Residual value of the gas furnace and gas tankless at the end of the 30-year analysis period was accounted for to represent the remaining life of the equipment.
In this analysis, replacement costs assume a like-for-like replacement of equipment type and fuel (as listed in Table 9).
However, this may be precluded in the future due to efforts to prohibit the sale of gas equipment currently being considered or undertaken by air districts (ex. BAAQMD, SCAQMD) and the California Air Resources Board (ex. zero NOx appliance rules).
Table 9: Effective Useful Lifetime (EUL) of Water Heating & Space Conditioning Equipment Measure EUL (Years)
Gas Furnace 20
Air Conditioner 15
Heat Pump 15
Gas Tankless Water Heater 20
Heat Pump Water Heater 15
Space Conditioning: This measure covers replacing a prescriptive air conditioner and gas furnace with a minimum efficiency heat pump in applicable climate zones (1, 2, 5 to 12, 15 and 16; see Table 3). Typical incremental costs for this equipment were based on contractor feedback and price variation by system capacity from the AC Wholesalers website and the RS Means cost database (RSMeans, 2022). Costs were applied based on the system capacity from heating and cooling load calculations in CBECC-Res as presented in Table 10. Air conditioner nominal capacity was calculated as the CBECC-Res cooling load, rounded up to the nearest half ton. Heat pump nominal capacity was calculated as the maximum of either the CBECC-Res heating or cooling load, rounded up to the nearest half ton. In both cases a minimum capacity of 1.5-ton was applied as this represents the typical smallest available split system heat pump equipment. Load calculations demonstrated that Climate Zones 2, 5 to 12, and 15 were cooling-dominated while Climate Zones 1 and 16 were heating-dominated. In the heating dominated climate zones the heat pump for the single family home needs to be upsized relative to an air conditioner that only provides cooling.
Replacement costs were estimated based on a contractor survey conducted by the Statewide Reach Codes Team in 2023 (Statewide Reach Codes Team, tbd), less any gas and electric infrastructure costs, and the equipment lifetimes listed in Table 9. Resultant incremental costs are presented in Table 11.
This measure, and thus the incremental cost, does not apply to climate zones where heat pump space conditioning is already prescriptively required (Climate Zones 3, 4, 13, and 14).
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
-
Cost Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction Prototypes, Measure Packages, and Costs
21 Table 10: Space Conditioning System Nominal Capacities Climate
Zone
Single Family ADU
Air Conditioner
Capacity (tons)
Heat Pump
Capacity (tons)
Air Conditioner
Capacity (tons)
Heat Pump
Capacity (tons)
1 1.5 2.5 1.5 1.5
2 3 3 1.5 1.5
3 - - - -
4 - - - -
5 3 3 1.5 1.5
6 3 3 1.5 1.5
7 3 3 1.5 1.5
8 2.5 2.5 1.5 1.5
9 2.5 2.5 1.5 1.5
10 2.5 2.5 1.5 1.5
11 3 3 1.5 1.5
12 2.5 2.5 1.5 1.5
13 - - - -
14 - - - -
15 4 4 1.5 1.5
16 2 3.5 1.5 1.5
Table 11: Space Conditioning System Incremental Costs (2023 PV$) Climate
Zone
Single Family ADU
First
Cost
Total Lifetime
Cost (Financed)
First
Cost
Total Lifetime
Cost (Financed)
1 $803 $2,705 ($2,120) ($1,717)
2 ($1,044) ($44) ($2,120) ($1,717)
3 - - - -
4 - - - -
5 ($1,044) ($44) ($2,120) ($1,717)
6 ($1,044) ($44) ($2,120) ($1,717)
7 ($1,044) ($44) ($2,120) ($1,717)
8 ($1,445) ($673) ($2,120) ($1,717)
9 ($1,445) ($673) ($2,120) ($1,717)
10 ($1,445) ($673) ($2,120) ($1,717)
11 ($1,044) ($44) ($2,120) ($1,717)
12 ($1,445) ($673) ($2,120) ($1,717)
13 - - - -
14 - - - -
15 ($1,032) $368 ($2,120) ($1,717)
16 $2,331 $5,123 ($2,120) ($1,717)
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
-
Cost Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction Prototypes, Measure Packages, and Costs
22 Water Heater: This measure covers replacing a prescriptive gas tankless water heater with a minimum efficiency HPWH in applicable climate zones (3, 4, 13, and 14; see Table 3). Typical incremental costs were based on costs from prior reach code work and recent contractor feedback. Incremental first costs assume a 65-gal HPWH and incremental replacement costs account for equipment lifetimes listed in Table 9. Replacement costs assume no change in cost from the first cost estimates before accounting for inflation, less any gas and electric infrastructure costs. For the ADU analysis the water heater is evaluated within the conditioned space with the supply air ducted from the outside and exhaust air ducted to the outside. A mechanical contractor provided a cost estimate of $943 for ducting through the attic in an ADU where the water heater is in an interior room. This cost is included in the equipment and installation total for the ADU. Resultant incremental costs are presented in Table 12.
Table 12: Heat Pump Water Heating System Incremental Costs (2023 PV$) Item
ADU Single Family
First
Cost
Total Lifetime
Cost
(Financed)
First
Cost
Total Lifetime
Cost
(Financed)
Equipment & Installation $2,243 $3,930 $1,300 $2,267
Electric Service Upgrade $43 $48 $45 $51
In-House Gas Piping ($580) ($651) ($580) ($651)
Total $1,706 $3,327 $765 $1,666
For this electrification analysis, a HPWH that just meets the federal minimum efficiency standards 17 of close to 2.0 Uniform Energy Factor (UEF) was evaluated in order to satisfy preemption requirements. However, the Reach Codes Team is not aware of any 2.0 UEF products that are available on the market. The Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance (NEEA) established its own rating system for high efficiency HPWHs 18 and maintains a database of qualified products.
The lowest UEF currently reported in the database is 2.73. In fact, of the four rating tiers offered by NEEA, those meeting Tier 3 or Tier 4 are the dominant products on the market today. According to NEEA all major HPWH manufacturers are represented in NEEA’s qualified product list 19 and there are fewer than 10 integrated products
certified as Tier 1 or Tier 2, all of which have UEFs greater than 3.0. 20 NEEA Tier 3 water heaters were included in the high-efficiency measure packages (see Section 3.4).
Clothes Dryer and Range: After review of various sources, the Reach Codes Team concluded that the cost difference between gas and electric resistance equipment for clothes dryers and stoves is negligible and that the lifetimes of the two technologies are similar. Resultant incremental costs are presented in Table 13. Note that while induction stoves may be a more likely installation option in many homes, CBECC-Res does not currently differentiate between electric technologies for stoves and therefore they were not considered in this analysis. Relative to electric resistance, induction stoves use less energy and improve performance and user satisfaction, at an additional cost.
Electric Service Upgrade (appliance-specific): The 2022 Title 24 Code requires electric readiness for gas appliances; as a result, the incremental costs to provide electrical service for electric appliances are minimal. The incremental costs accounted for in this study — shown in Table 13 — are calculated as the cost to install 220V service for the electric appliances less the cost for the electric ready requirements and for installing 110V service for the 17 The Department of Energy establishes minimum energy conservation standards for consumer products, as directed in the Energy Policy and Conservation Act. See https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-10/chapter-II/subchapter-D/part-430/subpart-C/section- 430.32.
18 Based on operational challenges experienced in the past, NEEA established rating test criteria to ensure newly installed HPWHs perform adequately, especially in colder climates. The NEEA rating requires products comply with ENERGY STAR and includes requirements regarding noise and prioritizing heat pump use over supplemental electric resistance heating. 19 https://neea.org/success-stories/heat-pump-water-heaters 20 As of 3/8/2024: https://neea.org/img/documents/residential-unitary-HPWH-qualified-products-list.pdf California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
-
Cost Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction Prototypes, Measure Packages, and Costs
23 comparable gas appliance. Incremental costs are applied for the space condition er, water heater, and cooking range.
Based on builder surveys, it’s assumed that in a typical mixed fuel home both electric and gas service are provided to the dryer location and therefore no incremental costs for the dryer were applied. Costs assume 50A service for the range and 30A service for the space conditioner and water heater. Costs are assumed to be the same for the single family and ADU analyses.
In-House Natural Gas Infrastructure (from meter to appliances): Installation cost to run a natural gas line from the meter to the appliance location was estimated at $580 per appliance, as shown in Table 13. These costs were based on material costs from Home Depot and labor costs from 2022 RS Means. The material costs were about 1/3 higher in RS Means than Home Depot, so the Reach Codes Team used the lower costs from Home Depot. The Reach Codes Team conducted a pipe sizing analysis for the two single family and one ADU prototype homes to estimate the length and diameter of gas piping required assuming the home included a gas furnace, gas tankless water heater, gas range, and gas dryer. Total estimated costs were very similar for each of the three prototypes and an average cost per appliance of $580 was determined. Costs are assumed to be the same for the single family and ADU analyses.
Table 13: Single Family All-Electric Appliance Incremental Costs Item
ADU & Single Family
First
Cost
Total Lifetime Cost
(Financed)
Electric Resistance vs Gas Cooking
Equipment & Installation $0 $0
Electric Service Upgrade $100 $113
In-House Gas Piping ($580) ($651)
Total ($480) ($539)
Electric Resistance vs Gas Clothes Drying
Equipment & Installation $0 $0
Electric Service Upgrade $0 $0
In-House Gas Piping ($580) ($651)
Total ($580) ($651)
3.4 Measure Packages
The Reach Codes Team evaluated two packages for mixed fuel homes and five packages for all-electric homes for each prototype and climate zone, as described below.
1. All-Electric Code Minimum: This package applied the prescriptive requirements of the 2022 Title 24 Code and replaced gas equipment with minimum efficiency electric equipment.
2. Efficiency Only, all-electric: This package used only efficiency measures that don’t trigger federal preemption issues including envelope, water heating distribution, and duct distribution efficiency measures. For ADUs, this also included ductless variable capacity heat pumps (VCHPs). This package was evaluated for the all- electric homes only.
3. Efficiency + High Efficiency (Preempted) Equipment, all-electric and mixed fuel: This package builds off the Efficiency Only package, adding water heating and space conditioning equipment that is more efficient than federal standards. The Reach Codes Team considers this more reflective of how builders meet above code requirements in practice. This package was evaluated to compare compliance results against the other non- preempted packages (see Table 27 and Table 28), however cost-effectiveness was not evaluated for this package since it cannot serve as the basis for adoption of a local ordinance. Specifically, it applied:
a. Water heating, all-electric: Heat pump water heaters with a NEEA Tier 3 rating (3.45 UEF). b. Water heating, mixed fuel: High efficiency (0.95 UEF) gas tankless.
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
-
Cost Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction Prototypes, Measure Packages, and Costs
24 c. Space conditioning, single family: High efficiency (16 SEER2/8 HSPF2) heat pumps. In mixed fuel packages, for climate zones with prescriptive gas heating, high efficiency (16 SEER2/95 AFUE) units were applied.
4. Efficiency + PV, all-electric: This package also builds on the Efficiency Only package, excluding preempted equipment. Instead, PV capacity was added to offset all of the estimated annual electricity use. This package was evaluated for the all-electric homes only.
5. Efficiency + PV + Battery, all-electric and mixed fuel: Using the Efficiency + PV package as a starting point for the all-electric analysis, a battery system was added. For mixed fuel homes the package of efficiency measures differed from the all-electric homes in some climate zones to arrive at a cost-effective solution.
To reiterate previous statements, the non-preempted measures used in all of the above packages (except for the All- Electric Code Minimum package) are referred to as “Efficiency measures”. As noted above, these measures may differ by prototype (single family vs. ADU) and by package. See Table 40 and Table 41 for the details of these measures.
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
-
Cost Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction Results
25 4 Results
Section 4.1 presents compliance results for all-electric versus mixed fuel code minimum packages to provide a broad overview of how these different approaches impact code compliance. Sections 4.2 to 4.5 present EDR results along with other savings data for packages of particular interest, as well as cost-effectiveness results for all packages.
Section 4.5 presents results for sensitivity analyses. All results reflect savings over a 30-year analysis period and are compared against the 2022 prescriptive baseline.
4.1 Compliance Results: All-Electric vs. Mixed Fuel Code Minimum The Reach Codes Team evaluated the compliance impacts of a prescriptive all-electric home as well as a traditional mixed fuel home with four gas appliances (space heating, water heating, cooking, clothes drying). Compliance is relative to the 2022 prescriptive base case home with three gas appliances which, by definition, has a compliance margin of zero in all climate zones. The impacts for the all-electric single family home and the ADU are presented in Figure 1 and Figure 2, respectively. The all-electric single family and ADU home prototypes are code compliant with both EDR1 (source energy) and efficiency EDR2 (TDV energy) in all climate zones, though the compliance margin is highly variable across climate zones. The four gas appliance single family home is presented in Figure 3. This case is not code compliant in any climate zone.
0 5
10 15
20 25
30 CZ01 CZ02 CZ03 CZ04 CZ05 CZ06 CZ07 CZ08 CZ09 CZ10 CZ11 CZ12 CZ13 CZ14 CZ15 CZ16 EDR Margin
All-Electric Prescriptive
Source (EDR1) TDV (EDR2 Efficiency)
Figure 1: Single family all-electric home compliance impacts.
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
-
Cost Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction Results
26 All-Electric Prescriptive
14 0
2 4
6 8
10 12 EDR Margin
CZ01 CZ02 CZ03 CZ04 CZ05 CZ06 CZ07 CZ08 CZ09 CZ10 CZ11 CZ12 CZ13 CZ14 CZ15 CZ16 Source (EDR1) TDV (EDR2 Efficiency)
Figure 2: ADU all-electric home compliance impacts.
Mixed Fuel Prescriptive, 4 Gas Appliances
CZ01 CZ02 CZ03 CZ04 CZ05 CZ06 CZ07 CZ08 CZ09 CZ10 CZ11 CZ12 CZ13 CZ14 CZ15 CZ16 2 -16
-14
-12
-10
-8
-6
-4
-2
0 EDR Margin
-18
Source (EDR1) TDV (EDR2 Efficiency)
Figure 3: Single family four gas appliance home compliance impacts.
This analysis illustrates a couple of interesting points:
1. The 2022 compliance metrics are important drivers encouraging electrification. The compliance penalties associated with the four gas appliance home scenarios are significant and will require deep efficiency measures to overcome.
2. The 2022 Title 24 Code’s new source energy metric combined with the heat pump baseline encourage all - electric construction, providing a compliance benefit that allows for some amount of prescriptively required building efficiency to be traded off and still comply when using the performance method.
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
-
Cost Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 27 Results
4.2 All-Electric Code Minimum Results
Table 14 shows results for the single family all-electric Code Minimum measure package. Utility cost savings are negative, indicating an increase in utility costs for the all-electric building, everywhere except in CPAU and SMUD territories. In all cases the incremental cost is negative, which reflects cost savings for the all -electric building due to elimination of gas infrastructure costs. The package is cost-effective based on TDV in all cases but one (Climate Zone 16); it’s not cost-effective On-Bill in Climate Zones 1, 3, 14, and 16.
Table 15 shows the all-electric Code Minimum package results for the ADU. Utility savings and incremental costs reflect the same general trend as single family homes; CPAU territory is the only case where utility costs decrease.
Cost-effectiveness is less favorable than the single family application, with TDV cost-effectiveness not met in Climate Zones 3, 4, 13, and 14, and On-Bill cost-effectiveness met only in Climate Zones 4 in CPAU territory, 10 in SCE/SCG territory, 12 in SMUD/PG&E territory, 11 and 15. Cost-effectiveness in Climate Zones 3, 4, 13, and 14 is worse than in the other climate zones due to the higher cost of converting from a gas tankless to a ducted HPWH (see Table 3) which isn’t offset enough by the energy savings. Cost savings due to elimination of gas infrastructure costs are also lower for the ADU relative to the single family home.
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
-
Cost Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 28 Results
Table 14: Single Family Cost-Effectiveness: All-Electric Code Minimum Climate
Zone
Electric
/Gas Utility
Total
EDR1
Margin
Efficiency
EDR2
Margin
Annual
Elec
Savings
(kWh)
Annual
Gas
Savings
(therms)
Utility Cost Savings Incremental Cost1 On-Bill TDV
First
Year
Lifecycle
(2022$) First Year Lifecycle
(2022$)
B/C
Ratio NPV B/C
Ratio NPV
CZ01 PGE 25.8 12.4 (4,308) 398 ($431) ($3,873) ($4,816) ($3,605) 0.9 ($268) >1 $5,702 CZ02 PGE 14.0 8.3 (2,888) 246 ($327) ($4,000) ($6,664) ($6,355) 1.6 $2,355 >1 $7,711 CZ03 PGE 9.1 7.7 (2,433) 171 ($303) ($4,734) ($4,854) ($4,644) 0.98 ($90) 25.3 $3,887 CZ04 PGE 8.8 5.0 (2,232) 163 ($251) ($3,665) ($4,854) ($4,644) 1.3 $979 >1 $4,494 CZ04 CPAU 8.8 5.0 (2,232) 163 ($36) $2,123 ($8,122) ($8,314) >1 $10,437 >1 $7,762 CZ05 PGE 6.5 4.0 (1,960) 133 ($292) ($4,981) ($6,664) ($6,355) 1.3 $1,373 6.1 $4,633 CZ05 PGE/SCG 6.5 4.0 (1,960) 133 ($277) ($4,532) ($6,664) ($6,355) 1.4 $1,823 6.1 $4,633 CZ06 SCE/SCG 4.2 3.5 (1,432) 84 ($231) ($4,015) ($6,664) ($6,355) 1.6 $2,339 4.7 $4,353 CZ07 SDGE 2.8 3.2 (1,293) 69 ($266) ($5,731) ($6,664) ($6,355) 1.1 $624 4.2 $4,211 CZ08 SCE/SCG 2.1 1.1 (1,293) 67 ($228) ($4,192) ($7,065) ($6,983) 1.7 $2,792 4.2 $4,674 CZ09 SCE 3.6 1.9 (1,453) 84 ($237) ($4,153) ($7,065) ($6,983) 1.7 $2,831 5.5 $5,013 CZ10 SCE/SCG 4.8 2.3 (1,683) 107 ($258) ($4,342) ($7,065) ($6,983) 1.6 $2,642 7.4 $5,287 CZ10 SDGE 4.8 2.3 (1,683) 107 ($265) ($5,158) ($7,065) ($6,983) 1.4 $1,825 7.4 $5,287 CZ11 PGE 11.4 4.9 (2,712) 226 ($306) ($3,803) ($6,664) ($6,355) 1.7 $2,552 >1 $7,153 CZ12 PGE 11.5 5.6 (2,554) 212 ($294) ($3,773) ($7,065) ($6,983) 1.9 $3,210 >1 $7,504 CZ12 SMUD/PGE 11.5 5.6 (2,554) 212 $79 $4,731 ($7,065) ($6,983) >1 $11,714 >1 $7,504 CZ13 PGE 8.3 3.2 (2,095) 154 ($224) ($3,164) ($4,854) ($4,644) 1.5 $1,480 >1 $4,490 CZ14 SCE/SCG 8.8 3.3 (2,291) 159 ($322) ($5,166) ($4,854) ($4,644) 0.9 ($522) >1 $4,105 CZ14 SDGE 8.8 3.3 (2,291) 159 ($344) ($6,361) ($4,854) ($4,644) 0.7 ($1,717) >1 $4,105 CZ15 SCE/SCG 0.9 1.0 (1,167) 53 ($217) ($4,152) ($6,652) ($5,942) 1.4 $1,791 3.0 $3,439 CZ16 PG&E 21.3 0.7 (4,729) 403 ($548) ($6,581) ($3,289) ($1,187) 0.2 ($5,394) 0.4 ($1,339) 1 Though uncommon, incremental costs can be negative, reflecting initial construction cost savings. When paired with increased energy costs (negative benefits), the construction cost savings are treated as the ‘benefit’ while the increased energy costs are the ‘cost,’ which may yield positive cost effectiveness. See Section 2.1.2.3 for more information.
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
-
Cost Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 29 Results
Table 15: ADU Cost-Effectiveness: All-Electric Code Minimum Climate
Zone
Electric
/Gas
Utility
Total
EDR1
Margin
Efficiency
EDR2
Margin
Annual
Elec
Savings
(kWh)
Annual
Gas
Savings
(therms)
Utility Cost Savings Incremental Cost1 On-Bill TDV
First
Year
Lifecycle
(2022$) First Year Lifecycle
(2022$)
B/C
Ratio NPV B/C
Ratio NPV
CZ01 PGE 11.9 6.1 (1,641) 114 ($353) ($6,682) ($4,692) ($4,605) 0.7 ($2,077) 3.9 $2,986 CZ02 PGE 5.7 3.4 (1,245) 75 ($312) ($6,347) ($4,692) ($4,605) 0.7 ($1,742) 2.7 $2,515 CZ03 PGE 2.9 2.3 (1,672) 123 ($377) ($7,138) ($863) $442 0.0 ($7,581) 0.0 ($1,489) CZ04 PGE 2.4 1.4 (1,612) 118 ($366) ($6,964) ($863) $442 0.0 ($7,406) 0.0 ($801) CZ04 CPAU 2.4 1.4 (1,612) 118 $25 $3,035 ($863) $442 6.9 $2,592 0.0 ($801) CZ05 PGE 1.8 0.8 (1,026) 49 ($302) ($6,517) ($4,692) ($4,605) 0.7 ($1,912) 2.0 $2,021 CZ05 PGE/SCG 1.8 0.8 (1,026) 49 ($257) ($5,178) ($4,692) ($4,605) 0.9 ($574) 2.0 $2,021 CZ06 SCE/SCG 0.5 0.2 (904) 38 ($243) ($4,923) ($4,692) ($4,605) 0.9 ($318) 2.1 $2,135 CZ07 SDGE 0.1 0.1 (884) 37 ($337) ($7,903) ($4,692) ($4,605) 0.6 ($3,298) 2.2 $2,205 CZ08 SCE/SCG 0.1 0.1 (878) 36 ($241) ($4,894) ($4,692) ($4,605) 0.9 ($289) 2.3 $2,274 CZ09 SCE 0.4 0.1 (903) 38 ($243) ($4,914) ($4,692) ($4,605) 0.9 ($310) 2.4 $2,321 CZ10 SCE/SCG 1.0 0.4 (952) 43 ($189) ($3,629) ($4,692) ($4,605) 1.3 $976 2.8 $2,577 CZ10 SDGE 1.0 0.4 (952) 43 ($249) ($5,689) ($4,692) ($4,605) 0.8 ($1,084) 2.8 $2,577 CZ11 PGE 4.6 2.1 (1,209) 71 ($224) ($4,405) ($4,692) ($4,605) 1.1 $200 3.5 $2,870 CZ12 PGE 4.6 2.3 (1,183) 69 ($306) ($6,315) ($4,692) ($4,605) 0.7 ($1,710) 3.0 $2,684 CZ12 SMUD/PGE 4.6 2.3 (1,183) 69 ($65) ($808) ($4,692) ($4,605) 5.7 $3,797 3.0 $2,684 CZ13 PGE 3.1 1.3 (1,611) 112 ($218) ($3,689) ($863) $442 0.0 ($4,131) 0.0 ($858) CZ14 SCE/SCG 3.5 1.2 (1,714) 115 ($375) ($6,933) ($863) $442 0.0 ($7,375) 0.0 ($1,089) CZ14 SDGE 3.5 1.2 (1,714) 115 ($483) ($10,348) ($863) $442 0.0 ($10,790) 0.0 ($1,089) CZ15 SCE/SCG 0.0 0.0 (864) 36 ($172) ($3,359) ($4,692) ($4,605) 1.4 $1,246 2.6 $2,477 CZ16 PG&E 11.2 0.1 (1,781) 122 ($379) ($7,167) ($4,692) ($4,605) 0.6 ($2,562) 2.1 $2,133 1 Though uncommon, incremental costs can be negative, reflecting initial construction cost savings. When paired with increased energy costs (negative benefits), the construction cost savings are treated as the ‘benefit’ while the increased energy costs are the ‘cost,’ which may yield positive cost effectiveness. See Section 2.1.2.3 for more information.
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
-
Cost Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 30 Results
4.3 All-Electric Efficiency, PV, and Battery Results
Table 16 and Table 17 compare cost-effectiveness results for the all-electric packages for the single family and ADU prototypes, respectively, with the exception of the all-electric Efficiency + High Efficiency (Preempted) Equipment package (cost-effectiveness was not evaluated for this package but see Table 27 and Table 28 for a comparison of compliance impacts). In almost all cases the single family packages are cost-effective based on TDV. For ADUs, all climate zones show an increase in TDV-cost effectiveness for the Efficiency + PV case but a decrease when a battery is added. On-Bill cost-effectiveness generally improves with the addition of efficiency measures for single family, but not for ADUs, which generally follows the same trend as TDV cost-effectiveness . A summary of measures included in each package is provided in Appendix 7.3 Summary of Measures by Package. The efficiency measures added to the all-electric package to meet minimum code requirements are described in Table 39 and Table 41.
Table 16: Single Family Cost-Effectiveness: Comparison of All-Electric Efficiency Only, PV, and Battery Packages Climate
Zone
Electric
/Gas Utility
All-Electric Code Minimum All-Electric Efficiency Only All-Electric-Efficiency + PV All-Electric Efficiency + PV + Battery
On-Bill TDV On-Bill TDV On-Bill TDV On-Bill TDV
B/C
Ratio NPV B/C
Ratio NPV B/C
Ratio NPV B/C
Ratio NPV B/C
Ratio NPV B/C
Ratio NPV B/C
Ratio NPV B/C
Ratio NPV
CZ01 PGE 0.9 ($268) >1 $5,702 >1 $2,945 >1 $8,168 0.9 ($1,313) 1.8 $9,817 1.0 $1,012 1.2 $4,391 CZ02 PGE 1.6 $2,355 >1 $7,711 8.9 $3,870 >1 $9,325 1.5 $2,242 4.2 $12,452 1.3 $4,962 1.5 $8,190 CZ03 PGE 0.98 ($90) 25.3 $3,887 1.1 $168 >1 $3,939 0.8 ($903) 2.8 $6,465 1.1 $2,114 1.1 $1,347 CZ04 PGE 1.3 $979 >1 $4,494 1.7 $1,054 >1 $4,849 1.1 $204 3.5 $7,893 1.2 $3,709 1.3 $4,506 CZ04 CPAU >1 $10,437 >1 $7,762 >1 $10,021 >1 $8,117 >1 $14,776 >1 $11,161 0.9 ($1,076) 1.5 $6,724 CZ05 PGE 1.3 $1,373 6.1 $4,633 1.6 $1,975 >1 $4,985 2.2 $1,457 8.5 $7,927 1.3 $5,551 1.2 $3,296 CZ05 PGE/SCG 1.4 $1,823 6.1 $4,633 1.9 $2,424 >1 $4,985 2.6 $1,907 8.5 $7,927 1.4 $6,001 1.2 $3,296 CZ06 SCE/SCG 1.6 $2,339 4.7 $4,353 1.6 $1,813 >1 $4,119 109.5 $2,638 152.4 $6,727 1.5 $7,153 1.2 $2,276 CZ07 SDGE 1.1 $624 4.2 $4,211 1.2 $839 8.3 $4,070 5.7 $469 >1 $6,079 2.0 $13,798 1.1 $1,186 CZ08 SCE/SCG 1.7 $2,792 4.2 $4,674 1.8 $2,574 17.7 $4,642 >1 $3,329 >1 $7,492 1.7 $8,899 1.2 $2,085 CZ09 SCE 1.7 $2,831 5.5 $5,013 1.9 $2,699 >1 $5,087 >1 $3,634 >1 $8,007 1.7 $9,151 1.3 $3,630 CZ10 SCE/SCG 1.6 $2,642 7.4 $5,287 2.0 $2,668 >1 $5,376 >1 $3,765 >1 $8,347 1.7 $10,088 1.3 $3,901 CZ10 SDGE 1.4 $1,825 7.4 $5,287 1.8 $2,438 >1 $5,376 >1 $2,539 >1 $8,347 2.4 $19,463 1.3 $3,901 CZ11 PGE 1.7 $2,552 >1 $7,153 >1 $4,159 >1 $8,524 1.8 $2,984 4.6 $11,310 1.4 $7,781 1.5 $8,757 CZ12 PGE 1.9 $3,210 >1 $7,504 4.6 $3,742 >1 $8,084 1.9 $2,561 5.5 $11,063 1.3 $6,021 1.5 $8,216 CZ12 SMUD/PGE >1 $11,714 >1 $7,504 >1 $10,665 >1 $8,084 5.8 $13,407 5.5 $11,063 0.9 ($1,237) 1.4 $7,166 CZ13 PGE 1.5 $1,480 >1 $4,490 >1 $2,876 >1 $5,773 1.7 $2,334 3.7 $8,341 1.4 $7,848 1.4 $7,005 CZ14 SCE/SCG 0.9 ($522) >1 $4,105 1.8 $811 >1 $5,461 1.6 $2,558 3.6 $9,965 1.6 $10,569 1.4 $6,204 CZ14 SDGE 0.7 ($1,717) >1 $4,105 1.5 $643 >1 $5,461 1.2 $922 3.6 $9,965 2.1 $20,099 1.4 $6,204 CZ15 SCE/SCG 1.4 $1,791 3.0 $3,439 8.0 $3,267 >1 $4,669 >1 $3,940 >1 $6,120 2.0 $13,576 0.99 ($80) CZ16 PG&E 0.2 ($5,394) 0.4 ($1,339) 0.2 ($1,946) 1.7 $1,894 0.8 ($3,199) 1.6 $6,711 1.0 $206 1.1 $1,690 California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
-
Cost Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 31 Results
Table 17: ADU Cost-Effectiveness: Comparison of All-Electric Efficiency Only, PV, and Battery Packages Climate
Zone
Electric
/Gas Utility
All-Electric Code Minimum All-Electric Efficiency Only All-Electric Efficiency + PV All-Electric Efficiency + PV + Battery On-Bill TDV On-Bill TDV On-Bill TDV On-Bill TDV
B/C
Ratio NPV B/C
Ratio NPV B/C
Ratio NPV B/C
Ratio NPV B/C
Ratio NPV B/C
Ratio NPV B/C
Ratio NPV B/C
Ratio NPV
CZ01 PGE 0.7 ($2,077) 3.9 $2,986 0.6 ($1,727) >1 $2,900 1.2 $2,003 1.5 $5,010 0.997 ($79) 0.9 ($2,884) CZ02 PGE 0.7 ($1,742) 2.7 $2,515 0.5 ($2,541) >1 $1,945 1.4 $3,532 1.8 $6,360 1.1 $1,302 0.98 ($410) CZ03 PGE 0.0 ($7,581) 0.0 ($1,489) 0.0 ($8,981) 0.0 ($2,680) 0.8 ($2,489) 1.1 $1,436 0.8 ($4,949) 0.8 ($5,369) CZ04 PGE 0.0 ($7,406) 0.0 ($801) 0.0 ($8,705) 0.4 ($1,762) 0.9 ($1,480) 1.3 $3,589 0.9 ($3,501) 0.8 ($3,849) CZ04 CPAU 6.9 $2,592 0.0 ($801) 1.3 $944 0.4 ($1,762) 1.7 $8,498 1.3 $3,589 0.7 ($9,161) 0.8 ($4,899) CZ05 PGE 0.7 ($1,912) 2.0 $2,021 0.4 ($3,310) 1.4 $650 1.6 $4,015 1.9 $5,436 1.1 $1,265 0.9 ($1,611) CZ05 PGE/SCG 0.9 ($574) 2.0 $2,021 0.6 ($1,972) 1.4 $650 1.8 $5,353 1.9 $5,436 1.2 $3,836 0.9 ($1,611) CZ06 SCE/SCG 0.9 ($318) 2.1 $2,135 0.6 ($1,579) 2.1 $1,103 2.0 $5,866 2.2 $6,551 1.1 $2,799 0.95 ($852) CZ07 SDGE 0.6 ($3,298) 2.2 $2,205 0.4 ($4,255) 1.8 $941 1.8 $5,667 1.9 $5,493 1.5 $10,358 0.9 ($1,804) CZ08 SCE/SCG 0.9 ($289) 2.3 $2,274 0.6 ($1,432) 2.1 $1,179 2.0 $6,364 2.3 $7,936 1.2 $4,058 0.97 ($609) CZ09 SCE 0.9 ($310) 2.4 $2,321 0.6 ($1,494) 2.3 $1,280 2.0 $6,568 2.4 $7,709 1.2 $4,314 0.99 ($279) CZ10 SCE/SCG 1.3 $976 2.8 $2,577 0.96 ($106) 3.7 $1,593 2.2 $734 6.7 $3,496 0.9 ($860) 0.7 ($3,944) CZ10 SDGE 0.8 ($1,084) 2.8 $2,577 0.6 ($1,787) 3.7 $1,593 0.0 ($1,465) 6.7 $3,496 1.3 $5,079 0.7 ($3,944) CZ11 PGE 1.1 $200 3.5 $2,870 0.96 ($96) >1 $2,531 0.7 ($602) 3.2 $4,037 0.9 ($1,125) 0.9 ($1,893) CZ12 PGE 0.7 ($1,710) 3.0 $2,684 0.5 ($2,538) >1 $1,878 1.6 $4,644 1.9 $6,675 1.1 $2,970 1.0 $178 CZ12 SMUD/PGE 5.7 $3,797 3.0 $2,684 13 $1,980 >1 $1,878 1.7 $5,737 1.9 $6,675 0.6 ($9,432) 0.96 ($872) CZ13 PGE 0.0 ($4,131) 0.0 ($858) 0.0 ($4,502) 0.6 ($1,223) 0.3 ($4,759) 1.1 $305 0.8 ($4,729) 0.7 ($5,491) CZ14 SCE/SCG 0.0 ($7,375) 0.0 ($1,089) 0.0 ($7,929) 0.5 ($1,684) 1.1 $1,555 1.5 $5,935 1.0 $1,222 0.9 ($1,525) CZ14 SDGE 0.0 ($10,790) 0.0 ($1,089) 0.0 ($10,375) 0.5 ($1,684) 1.2 $2,956 1.5 $5,935 1.4 $10,678 0.9 ($1,525) CZ15 SCE/SCG 1.4 $1,246 2.6 $2,477 2.4 $1,243 >1 $2,342 >1 $1,729 52.2 $3,560 1.2 $2,631 0.8 ($2,812) CZ16 PG&E 0.6 ($2,562) 2.1 $2,133 0.5 ($2,378) >1 $2,282 1.6 $5,433 2.0 $7,875 1.2 $3,618 1.0 $611 California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
-
Cost Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 32 Results
4.4 Mixed Fuel Results
Table 18 and Table 19 show results for the mixed fuel Efficiency + PV + Battery package for Single Family and ADU prototypes, respectively. On a TDV basis, this package is cost-effective only in Climate Zone 1 for single family and in no cases for ADUs. However, this package is cost-effective On-Bill for the single family home in all climate zones except 4 in CPAU territory and 12 in SMUD/PG&E territory. On-Bill cost-effectiveness for the ADU home, on the other hand, is seen only in Climate Zones 2, 5, 7 through 9, 10 in SDG&E territory, 12 in PG&E territory, 14, and 16.
Table 18: Single Family Cost-Effectiveness: Mixed Fuel Efficiency + PV + Battery Climate
Zone
Electric
/Gas Utility
Total
EDR1
Margin
Efficiency
EDR2
Margin
Annual
Elec
Savings
(kWh)
Annual
Gas
Savings
(therms)
Utility Cost
Savings Incremental Cost On-Bill TDV
First
Year
Lifecycle
(2022$)
First
Year
Lifecycle
(2022$)
B/C
Ratio NPV B/C
Ratio NPV
CZ01 PGE 22.6 18.8 1,571 116 $1,084 $26,667 $11,160 $20,166 1.3 $6,501 1.0 $500 CZ02 PGE 14.1 7.4 1,257 34 $913 $21,353 $10,268 $18,868 1.1 $2,486 0.9 ($1,282) CZ03 PGE 12.8 4.3 858 7 $785 $18,003 $8,708 $16,900 1.1 $1,104 0.7 ($4,777) CZ04 PGE 13.2 4.3 790 6 $803 $18,394 $9,623 $17,938 1.0 $456 0.8 ($3,925) CZ04 CPAU 13.2 4.3 790 6 $123 $2,877 $10,673 $19,172 0.2 ($16,295) 0.7 ($4,975) CZ05 PGE 14.8 4.9 1,178 13 $905 $20,821 $9,441 $17,885 1.2 $2,936 0.8 ($3,468) CZ05 PGE/SCG 14.8 4.9 1,178 13 $900 $20,690 $9,441 $17,885 1.2 $2,805 0.8 ($3,468) CZ06 SCE/SCG 18.3 5.5 888 6 $864 $19,539 $9,266 $17,587 1.1 $1,951 0.8 ($3,941) CZ07 SDGE 18.7 4.8 832 4 $1,134 $27,505 $9,214 $17,537 1.6 $9,867 0.7 ($4,817) CZ08 SCE/SCG 17.1 3.0 777 2 $920 $20,754 $9,134 $17,410 1.2 $3,344 0.7 ($4,341) CZ09 SCE 16.2 3.1 833 3 $922 $20,804 $9,152 $17,435 1.2 $3,369 0.8 ($3,839) CZ10 SCE/SCG 14.4 2.7 846 2 $958 $21,608 $8,489 $16,733 1.3 $4,875 0.7 ($3,859) CZ10 SDGE 14.4 2.7 846 2 $1,288 $31,210 $8,489 $16,733 1.9 $14,477 0.7 ($3,859) CZ11 PGE 12.9 5.1 1,025 26 $1,031 $23,949 $9,828 $18,296 1.3 $5,653 0.9 ($1,066) CZ12 PGE 13.2 4.8 1,098 23 $923 $21,415 $10,065 $18,616 1.2 $2,800 0.9 ($1,194) CZ12 SMUD/PGE 13.2 4.8 1,098 23 $253 $6,133 $11,115 $19,850 0.3 ($13,717) 0.9 ($2,244) CZ13 PGE 12.3 4.2 1,006 5 $1,016 $23,250 $9,831 $18,236 1.3 $5,013 0.9 ($2,354) CZ14 SCE/SCG 13.4 5.4 1,514 6 $1,093 $24,697 $10,741 $19,342 1.3 $5,354 0.9 ($1,910) CZ14 SDGE 13.4 5.4 1,514 6 $1,421 $34,477 $10,741 $19,342 1.8 $15,135 0.9 ($1,910) CZ15 SCE/SCG 13.5 3.8 531 2 $1,140 $25,708 $8,586 $16,630 1.6 $9,078 0.6 ($5,490) CZ16 PG&E 20.4 14.2 1,228 114 $1,070 $26,218 $12,086 $20,964 1.3 $5,254 0.98 ($444) California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
-
Cost Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 33 Results
Table 19: ADU Cost-Effectiveness: Mixed Fuel Efficiency + PV + Battery Climate
Zone
Electric
/Gas Utility
Total
EDR1
Margin
Efficiency
EDR2
Margin
Annual
Elec
Savings
(kWh)
Annual
Gas
Savings
(therms)
Utility Cost
Savings Incremental Cost On-Bill TDV
First
Year
Lifecycle
(2022$)
First
Year
Lifecycle
(2022$)
B/C
Ratio NPV B/C
Ratio NPV
CZ01 PGE 18.5 7.7 3,666 20 $1,078 $24,880 $15,432 $25,919 0.96 ($1,040) 0.7 ($6,719) CZ02 PGE 16.6 3.5 3,472 11 $1,042 $23,928 $13,846 $23,790 1.0 $138 0.8 ($4,128) CZ03 PGE 11.8 1.2 2,679 0 $781 $17,816 $11,879 $21,215 0.8 ($3,399) 0.6 ($6,826) CZ04 PGE 13.3 1.6 2,799 0 $859 $19,588 $12,213 $21,598 0.9 ($2,011) 0.7 ($5,306) CZ04 CPAU 13.3 1.6 2,799 0 $391 $8,911 $13,263 $22,833 0.4 ($13,922) 0.7 ($6,356) CZ05 PGE 16.9 1.1 3,309 2 $1,031 $23,539 $12,668 $22,274 1.1 $1,265 0.8 ($4,765) CZ05 PGE/SCG 16.9 1.1 3,309 2 $1,031 $23,520 $12,668 $22,274 1.1 $1,246 0.8 ($4,765) CZ06 SCE/SCG 19.8 1.2 3,285 1 $953 $21,468 $12,496 $22,043 0.97 ($575) 0.8 ($3,877) CZ07 SDGE 20.3 1.2 3,278 0 $1,296 $31,370 $12,869 $22,545 1.4 $8,825 0.8 ($4,633) CZ08 SCE/SCG 20.4 0.5 3,505 0 $1,040 $23,434 $12,952 $22,678 1.0 $755 0.8 ($3,522) CZ09 SCE 19.6 0.5 3,497 0 $1,030 $23,213 $12,691 $22,327 1.0 $886 0.8 ($3,318) CZ10 SCE/SCG 19.0 0.6 729 0 $537 $12,107 $8,436 $16,606 0.7 ($4,499) 0.5 ($7,344) CZ10 SDGE 19.0 0.6 729 0 $813 $19,671 $8,436 $16,606 1.2 $3,065 0.5 ($7,344) CZ11 PGE 17.6 3.0 871 10 $663 $15,273 $9,218 $17,568 0.9 ($2,295) 0.7 ($5,528) CZ12 PGE 16.7 2.7 3,594 9 $1,112 $25,496 $13,764 $23,710 1.1 $1,786 0.8 ($3,321) CZ12 SMUD/PGE 16.7 2.7 3,594 9 $537 $12,380 $14,844 $24,944 0.5 ($12,564) 0.8 ($4,371) CZ13 PGE 14.5 2.2 273 0 $551 $12,569 $7,979 $15,904 0.8 ($3,335) 0.5 ($6,903) CZ14 SCE/SCG 14.5 3.2 3,499 0 $1,006 $22,671 $12,815 $22,325 1.0 $346 0.8 ($3,423) CZ14 SDGE 14.5 3.2 3,499 0 $1,351 $32,711 $12,815 $22,325 1.5 $10,386 0.8 ($3,423) CZ15 SCE/SCG 19.2 1.8 551 0 $683 $15,387 $8,478 $16,574 0.9 ($1,187) 0.5 ($7,021) CZ16 PG&E 18.3 6.3 3,680 24 $1,117 $25,838 $13,872 $23,801 1.1 $2,037 0.8 ($3,759) California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
-
Cost Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 34 Results
4.5 Greenhouse Gas Reductions
Table 20 and Table 21 present greenhouse gas reductions for the single family and ADU prototypes, respectively. Savings represent average annual savings over the 30-year lifetime of the analysis. Greenhouse gas reductions are greatest for the all-electric Efficiency + PV + Battery package in all cases. For the single family homes, the all-electric Code Minimum case reduces greenhouse gas emissions as much or greater than the mixed fuel Efficiency + PV + Battery package in Climate Zones 1 through 4, 11 through 13, and 16—showcasing the benefit of all-electric construction over even the most ambitious of mixed fuel construction packages evaluated in this study. The trend differs for the ADU where the mixed fuel Efficiency + PV + Battery package results in more greenhouse gas savings than the all-electric Code Minimum in all climate zones except Climate Zones 3, 4, and 13. In most of the climate zones (1, 2, 5 through 12, 15, and 16) the all- electric ADU involves electrification of space heating, cooking, and clothes drying. The space heating loads for the ADU are very low, even in the colder climates , and as a result the greenhouse gas savings from efficiency measures, PV and battery are greater than just code minimum electrification. This is also the case for single family homes in Climate Zones 5 through 10, and 15 where space heating loads are low.
Table 20: Single Family Greenhouse Gas Reductions (metric tons) Climate
Zone
Single Family All-Electric Single Family Mixed Fuel
Code
Minimum
Efficiency
Only
Efficiency +
High
Efficiency
Equipment
Efficiency +
PV
Efficiency +
PV +
Battery
Efficiency +
High
Efficiency
Equipment
Efficiency +
PV +
Battery
CZ01 1.5 1.7 1.8 1.8 2.3 0.8 1.1
CZ02 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.1 1.6 0.5 0.7
CZ03 0.7 0.7 0.8 0.8 1.3 0.2 0.5
CZ04 0.7 0.7 0.8 0.8 1.3 0.2 0.5
CZ05 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.6 1.1 0.2 0.6
CZ06 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.9 0.1 0.5
CZ07 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.8 0.1 0.5
CZ08 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.8 0.1 0.5
CZ09 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.9 0.1 0.5
CZ10 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.5 1.0 0.1 0.5
CZ11 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.0 1.5 0.4 0.7
CZ12 0.7 0.8 0.9 0.9 1.4 0.4 0.6
CZ13 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.8 1.3 0.2 0.6
CZ14 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.4 0.2 0.6
CZ15 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.7 0.1 0.5
CZ16 1.4 1.7 1.7 1.9 2.3 1.0 1.1
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
-
Cost Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 35 Results
Table 21: ADU Greenhouse Gas Reductions (metric tons)
Climate
Zone
ADU All-Electric ADU Mixed Fuel
Code
Minimum
Efficiency
Only
Efficiency +
High
Efficiency
Equipment
Efficiency
+ PV
Efficiency +
PV +
Battery
Efficiency +
High
Efficiency
Equipment
Efficiency +
PV +
Battery
CZ01 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.6 1.0 0.2 0.5
CZ02 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.8 0.1 0.5
CZ03 0.5 0.5 0.6 0.7 1.0 0.1 0.3
CZ04 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.7 1.0 0.1 0.4
CZ05 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.7 0.0 0.4
CZ06 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.6 0.0 0.4
CZ07 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.6 0.0 0.4
CZ08 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.6 0.0 0.5
CZ09 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.7 0.0 0.5
CZ10 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.6 0.0 0.4
CZ11 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.7 0.1 0.4
CZ12 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.7 0.1 0.5
CZ13 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.9 0.1 0.3
CZ14 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.7 1.1 0.1 0.5
CZ15 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.6 0.0 0.4
CZ16 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.7 1.0 0.2 0.6
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
-
Cost Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 36 Results
4.6 Sensitivity Analysis
In response to jurisdictional interest, several cases were evaluated under circumstances different than those presented above in order to assess their impact on cost-effectiveness. Altered circumstances include:
1. CARE versus standard tariffs. This comparison is presented for the all-electric Code Minimum and the mixed fuel Efficiency + PV+ Battery packages and shows the impact on On-Bill cost-effectiveness for income qualified utility customers.
2. Infill versus new subdivision single family developments. This comparison applied to the all-electric Code Minimum package demonstrates how cost- effectiveness is impacted due to the magnitude of cost savings for all-electric construction from elimination of the natural gas infrastructure.
3. Utility rate escalation factors. The impact on On-Bill cost-effectiveness is presented for the all-electric Code Minimum package from varying the assumptions for escalation of electricity and natural gas utility rates over the 30-year analysis period.
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
-
Cost Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 37 Results
4.6.1 CARE Rate Comparison
Table 22 and Table 23 present a comparison of On-Bill cost-effectiveness results for CARE tariffs relative to standard IOU tariffs for the all-electric Code Minimum package for the single family and ADU prototypes, respectively. Applying the CARE rates lowers both electric and gas utility bills for the consumer . In the case of the all-electric home, the net impact of CARE rates is improved cost-effectiveness relative to the standard tariffs. This is because the discount on electricity is greater than that for natural gas. The opposite trend occurs for the mixed fuel packages , where the lower CARE rates result in lower utility cost savings and subsequently lower benefit-to-cost ratios.
Table 22: On-Bill Cost-Effectiveness with CARE Tariffs: All-Electric Code Minimum Climate
Zone
Electric
/Gas Utility
Single Family ADU
Standard CARE Standard CARE
B/C Ratio NPV B/C Ratio NPV B/C Ratio NPV B/C Ratio NPV CZ01 PGE 0.9 ($268) >1 $3,886 0.7 ($2,077) 1.2 $696
CZ02 PGE 1.6 $2,355 5.1 $5,107 0.7 ($1,742) 1.1 $580
CZ03 PGE 0.98 ($90) 1.7 $1,968 0.0 ($7,581) 0.0 ($4,596) CZ04 PGE 1.3 $979 2.3 $2,619 0.0 ($7,406) 0.0 ($4,526)
CZ05 PGE 1.3 $1,373 2.2 $3,467 0.7 ($1,912) 1.1 $237
CZ05 PGE/SCG 1.4 $1,823 2.5 $3,841 0.9 ($574) 1.4 $1,321 CZ06 SCE/SCG 1.6 $2,339 2.3 $3,535 0.9 ($318) 1.4 $1,225 CZ07 SDGE 1.1 $624 2.1 $3,309 0.6 ($3,298) 0.9 ($627)
CZ08 SCE/SCG 1.7 $2,792 2.3 $3,945 0.9 ($289) 1.4 $1,231 CZ09 SCE 1.7 $2,831 2.4 $4,074 0.9 ($310) 1.4 $1,230
CZ10 SCE/SCG 1.6 $2,642 2.4 $4,083 1.3 $976 1.7 $1,923
CZ10 SDGE 1.4 $1,825 3.0 $4,642 0.8 ($1,084) 1.3 $1,114 CZ11 PGE 1.7 $2,552 5.0 $5,077 1.1 $200 1.6 $1,634
CZ12 PGE 1.9 $3,210 5.0 $5,587 0.7 ($1,710) 1.1 $545
CZ13 PGE 1.5 $1,480 2.7 $2,924 0.0 ($4,131) 0.0 ($2,754) CZ14 SCE/SCG 0.9 ($522) 1.3 $1,191 0.0 ($7,375) 0.0 ($4,754) CZ14 SDGE 0.7 ($1,717) 2.0 $2,295 0.0 ($10,790) 0.0 ($6,496) CZ15 SCE/SCG 1.4 $1,791 1.9 $2,831 1.4 $1,246 1.8 $2,031 CZ16 PG&E 0.2 ($5,394) 0.8 ($351) 0.6 ($2,562) 1.1 $453 California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
-
Cost Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 38 Results
Table 23: On-Bill Cost-Effectiveness with CARE Tariffs: Mixed Fuel Efficiency + PV+ Battery Package Climate
Zone
Electric
/Gas Utility
Single Family ADU
Standard CARE Standard CARE
B/C Ratio NPV B/C Ratio NPV B/C Ratio NPV B/C Ratio NPV CZ01 PGE 1.3 $6,501 0.9 ($2,072) 0.96 ($1,040) 0.7 ($9,009) CZ02 PGE 1.1 $2,486 0.7 ($5,286) 1.0 $138 0.7 ($7,683)
CZ03 PGE 1.1 $1,104 0.6 ($5,980) 0.8 ($3,399) 0.6 ($9,288) CZ04 PGE 1.0 $456 0.6 ($6,790) 0.9 ($2,011) 0.6 ($8,586) CZ05 PGE 1.2 $2,936 0.7 ($4,995) 1.1 $1,265 0.7 ($6,642) CZ05 PGE/SCG 1.2 $2,805 0.7 ($5,100) 1.1 $1,246 0.7 ($6,657) CZ06 SCE/SCG 1.1 $1,951 0.7 ($5,232) 0.97 ($575) 0.7 ($5,976) CZ07 SDGE 1.6 $9,867 1.1 $1,601 1.4 $8,825 0.9 ($2,435) CZ08 SCE/SCG 1.2 $3,344 0.7 ($4,574) 1.0 $755 0.8 ($5,331) CZ09 SCE 1.2 $3,369 0.7 ($4,547) 1.0 $886 0.8 ($5,198)
CZ10 SCE/SCG 1.3 $4,875 0.8 ($3,354) 0.7 ($4,499) 0.5 ($8,010) CZ10 SDGE 1.9 $14,477 1.3 $4,789 1.2 $3,065 0.8 ($3,001) CZ11 PGE 1.3 $5,653 0.8 ($3,358) 0.9 ($2,295) 0.5 ($8,074) CZ12 PGE 1.2 $2,800 0.7 ($5,212) 1.1 $1,786 0.7 ($6,653) CZ13 PGE 1.3 $5,013 0.8 ($4,024) 0.8 ($3,335) 0.5 ($8,497) CZ14 SCE/SCG 1.3 $5,354 0.8 ($3,665) 1.0 $346 0.7 ($5,727) CZ14 SDGE 1.8 $15,135 1.2 $4,127 1.5 $10,386 0.9 ($1,393) CZ15 SCE/SCG 1.6 $9,078 0.95 ($877) 0.93 ($1,187) 0.6 ($6,708) CZ16 PG&E 1.3 $5,254 0.8 ($3,523) 1.1 $2,037 0.7 ($6,282) California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
-
Cost Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 39 Results
4.6.2 Utility Infrastructure Cost Sensitivity
Table 24 compares cost-effectiveness results for the natural gas service line extension cost scenarios that inform the average values presented in Table 8. The average cost scenario reflects the cost-effectiveness results for the single family all-electric Code Minimum package presented in Table 16. Relative to a new subdivision, gas infrastructure cost savings are higher for the infill development case, which translates to higher cost-effectiveness. This is shown by positive cost- effectiveness in all metrics except one – On-Bill for Climate Zone 16 – for infill development. Compared to the average cost scenario, there are two cases – On- Bill for Climate Zone 4 in PG&E territory and Climate Zone 7 – where the all-electric Code Minimum package is no longer cost-effective based on the new subdivision costs.
Table 24: Single Family Cost-Effectiveness Comparison with Range of Natural Gas Utility Infrastructure Costs:
All-Electric Code Minimum
Climate
Zone
Electric
/Gas Utility
Average New Subdivision Infill Development
On-Bill TDV On-Bill TDV On-Bill TDV
B/C Ratio NPV B/C Ratio NPV B/C
Ratio NPV B/C
Ratio NPV B/C
Ratio NPV B/C
Ratio NPV
CZ01 PGE 0.9 ($268) >1 $5,702 0.6 ($1,492) >1 $4,612 2.2 $4,628 >1 $10,062 CZ02 PGE 1.6 $2,355 >1 $7,711 1.3 $1,131 >1 $6,621 2.8 $7,250 >1 $12,071 CZ03 PGE 0.98 ($90) 25.3 $3,887 0.7 ($1,314) 18.5 $2,797 2.0 $4,806 52.6 $8,247 CZ04 PGE 1.3 $979 >1 $4,494 0.9 ($245) >1 $3,404 2.6 $5,875 >1 $8,854 CZ04 CPAU >1 $10,437 >1 $7,762 >1 $10,437 >1 $7,762 >1 $10,437 >1 $7,762 CZ05 PGE 1.3 $1,373 6.1 $4,633 1.0 $149 4.9 $3,543 2.3 $6,269 11.0 $8,993 CZ05 PGE/SCG 1.4 $1,823 6.1 $4,633 1.1 $599 4.9 $3,543 2.5 $6,719 11.0 $8,993 CZ06 SCE/SCG 1.6 $2,339 4.7 $4,353 1.3 $1,115 3.8 $3,263 2.8 $7,235 8.4 $8,713 CZ07 SDGE 1.1 $624 4.2 $4,211 0.9 ($600) 3.4 $3,121 2.0 $5,519 7.5 $8,571 CZ08 SCE/SCG 1.7 $2,792 4.2 $4,674 1.4 $1,568 3.5 $3,584 2.8 $7,687 7.3 $9,034 CZ09 SCE 1.7 $2,831 5.5 $5,013 1.4 $1,607 4.6 $3,923 2.9 $7,726 9.5 $9,373 CZ10 SCE/SCG 1.6 $2,642 7.4 $5,287 1.3 $1,418 6.1 $4,197 2.7 $7,537 12.6 $9,647 CZ10 SDGE 1.4 $1,825 7.4 $5,287 1.1 $601 6.1 $4,197 2.3 $6,721 12.6 $9,647 CZ11 PGE 1.7 $2,552 >1 $7,153 1.3 $1,328 >1 $6,063 3.0 $7,448 >1 $11,513 CZ12 PGE 1.9 $3,210 >1 $7,504 1.5 $1,986 >1 $6,414 3.1 $8,106 >1 $11,864 CZ12 SMUD/PGE >1 $11,714 >1 $7,504 >1 $10,490 >1 $6,414 >1 $16,610 >1 $11,864 CZ13 PGE 1.5 $1,480 >1 $4,490 1.1 $256 >1 $3,400 3.0 $6,376 >1 $8,850 CZ14 SCE/SCG 0.9 ($522) >1 $4,105 0.7 ($1,746) >1 $3,015 1.8 $4,374 >1 $8,465 CZ14 SDGE 0.7 ($1,717) >1 $4,105 0.5 ($2,941) >1 $3,015 1.5 $3,179 >1 $8,465 CZ15 SCE/SCG 1.4 $1,791 3.0 $3,439 1.1 $567 2.4 $2,349 2.6 $6,687 5.6 $7,799 CZ16 PG&E 0.2 ($5,394) 0.4 ($1,339) 0.0 ($6,618) 0.0 ($2,429) 0.9 ($498) 2.4 $3,021 California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
-
Cost Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 40 Results
4.6.3 Utility Rate Escalation
In this sensitivity analysis, an alternative set of annual utility escalation rates was applied to the gas and electricity savings in select measure packages to show the impact that utility cost changes over time have on cost-effectiveness. This set of rates, detailed in Section 7.2.7, reflects those used by the Energy Commission in their development of the LSC factors for the 2025 code cycle (LSC replaces TDV in the 2025 code cycle). The rates assume steep increases in gas rates starting in 2030. Increased gas rates range from 2% to 6.7% higher than annual rates used in the 2022 code cycle; electricity rates are only marginally (about 0.5%) higher each year.
On-Bill cost-effectiveness results are shown for in Table 25 for the all-electric Code Minimum scenario and Table 26 for the mixed fuel Efficiency + PV + Battery measure package. The alternative rates described above (“2025 LSC”) are shown alongside those reported elsewhere in this report (“CPUC / 2022 TDV”, described in Section 2.1.3) for comparison. In all cases, the 2025 LSC escalation rates improve cost-effectiveness. In some cases, this improvement is enough to change the result from not cost-effective to cost-effective, these cases are summarized below:
• All-Electric Code Minimum package
o Climate Zones 1, 3, 14, and 16 for the single family home o Climate Zones 1, 5 in PG&E/SCG territory, 6, 8, 9, 10 in SDG&E territory, and 16 for the ADU home • Mixed fuel Efficiency + PV + Battery package
o Climate Zones 1, 6, and 15 for the ADU home
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
-
Cost Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 41 Results
Table 25: On-Bill Cost-Effectiveness, 2025 LSC Basis: All-Electric Code Minimum Climate
Zone
Electric
/Gas Utility
Single Family ADU
CPUC / 2022 TDV 2025 LSC CPUC / 2022 TDV 2025 LSC
B/C Ratio NPV B/C Ratio NPV B/C Ratio NPV B/C Ratio NPV CZ01 PGE 0.9 ($268) >1 $13,867 0.7 ($2,077) 1.2 $833
CZ02 PGE 1.6 $2,355 >1 $10,458 0.7 ($1,742) 0.95 ($228) CZ03 PGE 0.98 ($90) >1 $4,883 0.0 ($7,581) 0.0 ($4,465) CZ04 PGE 1.3 $979 >1 $5,728 0.0 ($7,406) 0.0 ($4,466)
CZ04 CPAU >1 $10,437 >1 $17,647 6.9 $2,592 20.7 $8,704
CZ05 PGE 1.3 $1,373 5.3 $5,148 0.7 ($1,912) 0.8 ($1,386) CZ05 PGE/SCG 1.4 $1,823 13.5 $5,884 0.9 ($574) 1.2 $807 CZ06 SCE/SCG 1.6 $2,339 4.0 $4,751 0.9 ($318) 1.2 $630
CZ07 SDGE 1.1 $624 1.9 $3,008 0.6 ($3,298) 0.7 ($2,394) CZ08 SCE/SCG 1.7 $2,792 3.0 $4,650 0.9 ($289) 1.1 $591
CZ09 SCE 1.7 $2,831 4.0 $5,233 0.9 ($310) 1.2 $634
CZ10 SCE/SCG 1.6 $2,642 5.4 $5,700 1.3 $976 1.9 $2,147
CZ10 SDGE 1.4 $1,825 7.4 $6,038 0.8 ($1,084) 1.0 $102
CZ11 PGE 1.7 $2,552 >1 $9,997 1.1 $200 1.6 $1,669
CZ12 PGE 1.9 $3,210 >1 $10,077 0.7 ($1,710) 0.9 ($430)
CZ12 SMUD/PGE >1 $11,714 >1 $19,028 5.7 $3,797 >1 $5,367 CZ13 PGE 1.5 $1,480 >1 $5,987 0.0 ($4,131) 0.0 ($1,228) CZ14 SCE/SCG 0.9 ($522) 6.0 $3,876 0.0 ($7,375) 0.0 ($4,363) CZ14 SDGE 0.7 ($1,717) >1 $4,799 0.0 ($10,790) 0.0 ($6,285) CZ15 SCE/SCG 1.4 $1,791 2.2 $3,214 1.4 $1,246 1.9 $2,210 CZ16 PG&E 0.2 ($5,394) >1 $8,516 0.6 ($2,562) 1.2 $629
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
-
Cost Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 42 Results
Table 26: On-Bill Cost-Effectiveness, 2025 LSC Basis: Mixed Fuel Efficiency + PV + Battery Climate
Zone
CZ01
CZ02
CZ03
CZ04
CZ04
CZ05
CZ05
CZ06
CZ07
CZ08
CZ09
CZ10
CZ10
CZ11
CZ12
CZ12
CZ13
CZ14
CZ14
CZ15
CZ16
Electric
/Gas Utility
PGE
PGE
PGE
PGE
CPAU
PGE
PGE/SCG
SCE/SCG
SDGE
SCE/SCG
SCE
SCE/SCG
SDGE
PGE
PGE
SMUD/PGE
PGE
SCE/SCG
SDGE
SCE/SCG
PG&E
Single Family
CPUC / 2022 TDV 2025 LSC
B/C Ratio NPV B/C Ratio NPV
1.3 $6,501 1.6 $12,598
1.1 $2,486 1.3 $4,914
1.1 $1,104 1.1 $2,287
1.0 $456 1.1 $1,645
0.2 ($16,295) 0.2 ($15,990)
1.2 $2,936 1.3 $4,506
1.2 $2,805 1.2 $4,291
1.1 $1,951 1.2 $3,420
1.6 $9,867 1.6 $9,930
1.2 $3,344 1.3 $4,750
1.2 $3,369 1.3 $4,812
1.3 $4,875 1.4 $6,334
1.9 $14,477 1.9 $14,289
1.3 $5,653 1.4 $7,967
1.2 $2,800 1.3 $4,806
0.3 ($13,717) 0.4 ($12,515)
1.3 $5,013 1.4 $6,448
1.3 $5,354 1.4 $7,138
1.8 $15,135 1.8 $15,116
1.6 $9,078 1.7 $10,819
1.3 $5,254 1.5 $10,999
ADU
CPUC / 2022 TDV 2025 LSC
B/C Ratio NPV B/C Ratio NPV
0.96 ($1,040) 1.0 $993
1.0 $138 1.1 $1,816
0.8 ($3,399) 0.9 ($2,462)
0.9 ($2,011) 0.95 ($980)
0.4 ($13,922) 0.4 ($13,453)
1.1 $1,265 1.1 $2,574
1.1 $1,246 1.1 $2,543
0.97 ($575) 1.0 $847
1.4 $8,825 1.4 $8,570
1.0 $755 1.1 $2,288
1.0 $886 1.1 $2,407
0.7 ($4,499) 0.8 ($3,703)
1.2 $3,065 1.2 $2,904
0.9 ($2,295) 0.94 ($1,126)
1.1 $1,786 1.1 $3,458
0.5 ($12,564) 0.5 ($11,582)
0.8 ($3,335) 0.8 ($2,674)
1.0 $346 1.1 $1,827
1.5 $10,386 1.5 $10,107
0.9 ($1,187) 0.99 ($182)
1.1 $2,037 1.2 $4,285
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
-
Cost Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 43 Summary
5 Summary
The purpose of this study was to examine and document the code compliance and cost-effectiveness impacts of improving performance among single family new construction – both standard sized homes and ADUs. To this end, the Reach Codes Team evaluated packages of energy efficiency measures as well as packages combining energy efficiency with solar PV generation and battery storage, 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.
Table 27 (single family) and Table 28 (ADU) summarize results for each prototype and depict the EDR1 compliance margins achieved for each climate zone and package. Because local reach codes must both exceed the energy code (i.e., have a positive compliance margin in the performance approach) and be cost -effective, the Reach Codes Team highlighted cells meeting these two requirements to help clarify the upper boundary for potential reach code policies .
All results presented in this study have a positive compliance margin. • Cells highlighted in green depict a positive compliance margin and cost-effective results using both On-Bill and TDV approaches.
• Cells highlighted in yellow depict a positive compliance and cost-effective results using either the On-Bill or TDV approach.
• Cells not highlighted depict a package that was not cost-effective using either the On-Bill or TDV approach. • Cells highlighted in grey depict the high efficiency equipment packages where cost-effectiveness was not evaluated.
The following are key takeaways and recommendations from the analysis.
Conclusions and Discussion:
• All-electric buildings have lower GHG emissions than mixed fuel buildings, due to the clean power sources currently available from California’s power providers as well as accounting for increased penetration of renewables in the future. Almost all the all-electric packages evaluated resulted in greater GHG emission savings than the mixed fuel packages, with the exception of the mixed fuel package with battery storage in climate zones with low heating loads.
• The Reach Codes Team found code-compliant, all-electric new construction to be feasible and cost-effective based on TDV for single family homes in all cases except Climate Zone 16. • All-electric code minimum single family new construction was On-Bill cost-effective in all cases except Climate Zones 1, 3, 14, and 16.
• The all-electric code minimum ADU home was cost-effective based on TDV in all cases except in Climate Zones 3, 4, 13, and 14 where the higher cost of installing a ducted HPWH instead of the prescriptively required gas tankless water heater outweigh the resulting energy cost savings. In the other climate zones there were first cost savings for installing a heat pump space heater instead of gas furnace, contributing to an overall TDV cost-effective result.
• Few cases were cost-effective On-Bill for the ADU.
• All-electric code minimum construction results in an increase in lifetime utility costs relative to a mixed fuel home, except for CPAU and SMUD where electricity rates are much lower than for the IOUs . The addition of efficiency measures, market dominant HPWHs that meet NEEA’s Advanced Water Heating Specification, high efficiency heat pumps, increased PV, and batteries all reduce utility costs, and the combination of these options was found to reduce annual utility costs relative to a mixed fuel home in all cases. • Under NBT, utility cost savings for increasing PV system size beyond code minimum are substantially less than under prior net energy metering rules (NEM 2.0); however, savings are sufficient to be On-Bill cost- California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
-
Cost Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 44 Summary
effective in all climate zones for the all-electric single family home except climate zones 1, 3, and 16. Coupling PV with battery systems increases utility cost savings as a result of improved on- site utilization of PV generation and fewer exports to the grid.
• Applying CARE rates in the IOU territories improves On-Bill cost-effectiveness for all-electric buildings, as compared to the same case under standard rates, due to higher utility cost savings compared to a code compliant mixed fuel building also on a CARE rate, improving On-Bill cost-effectiveness. This is due to the CARE discount on electricity being higher than that on gas. • If gas tariffs are assumed to increase substantially over time, in-line with the escalation assumption from the 2025 LSC development, all-electric new construction was found to be On-Bill cost-effective in all single family and most ADU scenarios over the 30-year analysis period. There is much uncertainty surrounding future tariff structures as well as escalation values. While it’s clear that gas rates will increase, how much and how quickly is not known. Electricity tariff structures are expected to evolve over time, and the CPUC has an active proceeding to adopt an income-graduated fixed charge that benefits low-income customers and supports electrification measures.21 The CPUC will make a decision in mid-2024 and the new rates are expected to be in place later that year or in 2025. While the anticipated impact of this rate change is lower volumetric electricity rates, the rate design is not finalized. While lower volumetric electricity rates provide many benefits including incentivizing electrification, it also will make building efficiency measures harder to justify as cost-effective due to lower utility bill cost savings.
Recommendations:
• A reach code with a single performance target based on source energy (EDR1) can be structured to strongly encourage electrification. This approach requires equivalent performance for all buildings and allow s mixed fuel buildings which minimizes the risk of violating federal preemption. Below are examples of how a reach code for single family homes could be setup based on the results summarized in Table 27. o A jurisdiction in Climate Zone 12 could set a performance target at an EDR1 margin of 11.5 (the EDR1 margin for the all-electric Code Minimum package). Any all-electric home meeting or exceeding the prescriptive requirements would comply, and a mixed fuel home would likely need to incorporate a combination of efficiency measures and a battery system to comply. o Similarly, a jurisdiction in Climate Zone 7 may consider setting a performance target of 2.8 EDR1 margin (also the EDR1 margin for the all-electric Code Minimum package). Any all-electric home meeting or exceeding the prescriptive requirements would comply, but a mixed fuel home would likely be able to comply with only a suite of above-code efficiency measures (no battery). Alternatively, a higher EDR1 margin target of 5 would incentivize more energy efficiency or additional PV for all- electric construction, and mixed fuel construction would likely need to incorporate a battery system to comply.
o A jurisdiction in Climate Zone 16 may want to set a performance target at an EDR1 margin of 20. 4 (the EDR1 margin for the mixed fuel efficiency + PV + battery package). This would establish a target that a mixed fuel home could On-Bill cost-effectively meet, likely only after incorporating a combination of efficiency measures and a battery system, and that an all-electric home could easily meet. • The 2022 Title 24 code’s new source energy metric combined with the heat pump baseline encourage all - electric construction, providing an incentive that allows for some amount of prescriptively required building efficiency to be traded off, still meeting minimum code compliance. This compliance benefit for all -electric homes highlights a unique opportunity for jurisdictions to incorporate efficiency into all-electric reach codes.
Efficiency and electrification have symbiotic benefits and are both critical for decarbonization of buildings. As demand on the electric grid is increased through electrification, efficiency can reduce the negative impacts of additional electricity demand on the grid, reducing the need for increased generation and storage capacity , as well as the need to upgrade upstream transmission and distribution equipment. The Reach Codes Team recommends that jurisdictions adopting a reach code for single family buildings also include an efficiency 21 https://www.cpuc.ca.gov/industries-and-topics/electrical-energy/electric-costs/demand-response-dr/demand-flexibility-rulemaking California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
-
Cost Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 45 Summary
requirement with EDR1 margins at minimum consistent with the all-electric code minimum package results in Table 27.
• The code compliance margins for the ADU all-electric code minimum package are lower than for the single family prototype; code compliance and cost-effectiveness can be more challenging for smaller dwelling units.
As a result, the Reach Codes Team does not recommend EDR1 targets above those reported for the all- electric Code Minimum package in Table 28.
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. For example, jurisdictions may amend Part 11 instead of Part 6 of the CA Building Code requiring review and approval by the BSC but not the Energy Commission. Reach codes that amend Part 6 of the CA Building Code and require energy performance beyond state code minimums must demonstrate the proposed changes are cost-effective and obtain approval from the Energy Commission.
This report documents the key results and conclusions from the Reach Codes Team analysis. A full dataset of all results can be downloaded at https://localenergycodes.com/content/resources. Results alongside policy options can also be explored using the Cost-effectiveness Explorer at https://explorer.localenergycodes.com/.
Table 27: Summary of Single Family EDR1 Margins and Cost-Effectiveness Climate
Zone
Electric
/Gas Utility
All-Electric Mixed Fuel
Code
Minimum Efficiency
Efficiency +
High
Efficiency
Equipment
Efficiency
+ PV
Efficiency
+ PV +
Battery
Efficiency +
High
Efficiency
Equipment
Efficiency
+ PV +
Battery
CZ01 PGE 25.8 29.1 31.4 32.6 41.4 14.8 22.6
CZ02 PGE 14.0 16.3 18.0 18.9 28.3 9.1 14.1
CZ03 PGE 9.1 10.6 12.2 13.1 24.2 3.6 12.8
CZ04 PGE 8.8 10.4 11.9 12.8 24.6 3.8 13.2
CZ04 CPAU 8.8 10.4 11.9 12.8 24.6 3.8 13.2
CZ05 PGE 6.5 7.9 10.2 10.8 23.3 5.2 14.8
CZ05 PGE/SCG 6.5 7.9 10.2 10.8 23.3 5.2 14.8
CZ06 SCE/SCG 4.2 5.3 6.6 8.4 24.6 4.0 18.3
CZ07 SDGE 2.8 3.6 4.9 6.9 23.6 3.2 18.7
CZ08 SCE/SCG 2.1 2.9 4.2 5.6 21.3 2.7 17.1
CZ09 SCE/SCG 3.6 4.4 5.7 7.1 21.8 3.2 16.2
CZ10 SCE/SCG 4.8 5.8 7.2 8.5 21.9 3.9 14.4
CZ10 SDGE 4.8 5.8 7.2 8.5 21.9 3.9 14.4
CZ11 PGE 11.4 13.4 15.0 15.6 24.5 7.7 12.9
CZ12 PGE 11.5 13.3 14.8 15.5 25.2 7.2 13.2
CZ12 SMUD/PGE 11.5 13.3 14.8 15.5 25.2 7.2 13.2
CZ13 PGE 8.3 10.3 11.9 12.3 22.3 4.1 12.3
CZ14 SCE/SCG 8.8 11.5 13.2 14.3 24.7 4.7 13.4
CZ14 SDGE 8.8 11.5 13.2 14.3 24.7 4.7 13.4
CZ15 SCE/SCG 0.9 2.4 3.7 3.8 15.7 3.5 13.5
CZ16 PG&E 21.3 25.6 27.0 29.1 37.5 16.3 20.4
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
-
Cost Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 46 Summary
Table 28: Summary of ADU EDR1 Margins and Cost-Effectiveness Climate
Zone
Electric
/Gas Utility
All-Electric Mixed Fuel
Code
Minimum Efficiency
Efficiency +
High
Efficiency
Equipment
Efficiency
+ PV
Efficiency
+ PV +
Battery
Efficiency +
High
Efficiency
Equipment
Efficiency
+ PV +
Battery
CZ01 PGE 11.9 15.7 18.5 19.3 33.5 9.9 18.5
CZ02 PGE 5.7 7.9 9.7 10.8 25.4 5.6 16.6
CZ03 PGE 2.9 4.0 5.9 7.1 22.8 3.0 11.8
CZ04 PGE 2.4 3.9 5.5 6.8 23.5 3.7 13.3
CZ04 CPAU 2.4 3.9 5.5 6.8 23.5 3.7 13.3
CZ05 PGE 1.8 2.9 4.8 6.4 23.6 2.7 16.9
CZ05 PGE/SCG 1.8 2.9 4.8 6.4 23.6 2.7 16.9
CZ06 SCE/SCG 0.5 1.3 2.6 5.0 25.4 1.8 19.8
CZ07 SDGE 0.1 0.9 2.1 5.0 25.9 1.5 20.3
CZ08 SCE/SCG 0.1 0.7 1.8 4.2 25.4 1.6 20.4
CZ09 SCE 0.4 1.1 2.3 4.5 24.9 1.9 19.6
CZ10 SCE/SCG 1.0 2.0 3.5 5.4 25.3 2.5 19.0
CZ10 SDGE 1.0 2.0 3.5 5.4 25.3 2.5 19.0
CZ11 PGE 4.6 7.0 8.6 9.6 25.0 5.4 17.6
CZ12 PGE 4.6 6.6 8.3 9.3 24.4 5.0 16.7
CZ12 SMUD/PGE 4.6 6.6 8.3 9.3 24.4 5.0 16.7
CZ13 PGE 3.1 5.5 6.9 7.8 25.1 3.9 14.5
CZ14 SCE/SCG 3.5 6.3 8.0 9.6 26.8 4.3 14.5
CZ14 SDGE 3.5 6.3 8.0 9.6 26.8 4.3 14.5
CZ15 SCE/SCG 0.0 2.2 2.6 4.4 24.8 2.3 19.2
CZ16 PG&E 11.2 14.7 15.7 18.3 32.0 8.3 18.3
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
-
Cost Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 47 References
6 References
Barbose, G., Darghouth, N., O'Shaughnessy, E., & Forrester, S. (2021, October). Tracking the Sun. Pricing and Design Trends for Distributed Photovoltaic Systems in the United States 2021 Edition. Retrieved from https://emp.lbl.gov/tracking-the-sun
Barbose, Galen; Darghouth, Naim; O'Shaughnessy, Eric; Forrester, Sydney. (2022). Tracking the Sun: Pricing and Design Trends for Distributed Photovoltaic Systems in the United States 2022 Edition. Retrieved from https://emp.lbl.gov/tracking-the-sun
California Energy Commission. (2017). Rooftop Solar PV System. Measure number: 2019-Res-PV-D Prepared by Energy and Environmental Economics, Inc. Retrieved from https://efiling.energy.ca.gov/getdocument.aspx?tn=221366 California Energy Commission. (2018). 2019 Alternative Calculation Method Approval Manual for the 2019 Building Energy Efficiency Standards. Retrieved from https://www.energy.ca.gov/publications/2018/2019-alternative- calculation-method-approval-manual-2019-building-energy California Energy Commission. (2021a). Express Terms for the Proposed Revisions to 2022 Title 24, Part 1 and Part 6.
Retrieved from https://efiling.energy.ca.gov/Lists/DocketLog.aspx?docketnumber=21-BSTD-01 California Energy Commission. (2021b). Final Express Terms for the Proposed Revisions to the 2022 Energy Code Reference Appendices. Retrieved from https://efiling.energy.ca.gov/Lists/DocketLog.aspx?docketnumber=21- BSTD-01
California Energy Commission. (2022, Feb). 2022 Single-Family Residential Alternative Calculation Method Reference Manual. Retrieved from https://www.energy.ca.gov/publications/2022/2022-single-family-residential- alternative-calculation-method-reference-manual
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 California Public Utilities Commission. (2021b). Database for Energy-Efficient resources (DEER2021 Update). Retrieved April 13, 2021, from http://www.deeresources.com/index.php/deer-versions/deer2021 California Public Utilities Commission. (2022). Proposed Decision of Commissioner Rechtschaffen: PHASE III DECISION
ELIMINATING GAS LINE EXTENSION ALLOWANCES, TEN-YEAR REFUNDABLE PAYMENT OPTION, AND FIFTY PERCENT DISCOUNT PAYMENT OPTION UNDER GAS LINE EXTENSION RULES.
Department of Energy. (2022). Preliminary Analysis Technical Support Document: Energy Efficiency Program for Consumer Products and Commercial and Industrial Equipment. Retrieved from https://www.regulations.gov/document/EERE-2017-BT-STD-0019-0018 E-CFR. (2020). https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-
bin/retrieveECFR?gp=&SID=8de751f141aaa1c1c9833b36156faf67&mc=true&n=pt10.3.431&r=PART&ty=HTM L#se10.3.431_197. Retrieved from Electronic Code of Federal Regulations: https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi- bin/retrieveECFR?gp=&SID=8de751f141aaa1c1c9833b36156faf67&mc=true&n=pt10.3.431&r=PART&ty=HTM L#se10.3.431_197
Energy & Environmental Economics. (2019). Residential Building Electrification in California. Retrieved from https://www.ethree.com/wp-
content/uploads/2019/04/E3_Residential_Building_Electrification_in_California_April_2019.pdf Energy + Environmental Economics. (2020). Time Dependent Valuation of Energy for Developing Building Efficiency Standards: 2022 Time Dependent Valuation (TDV) and Source Energy Metric Data Sources and Inputs.
E-Source companies. (2020). Behind-the-Meter Battery Market Study. Prepared for San Diego Gas & Electric.
Retrieved from https://www.etcc-ca.com/reports/behind-meter-battery-market-study?dl=1582149166 California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
-
Cost Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 48 References
Horii, B., Cutter, E., Kapur, N., Arent, J., & Conotyannis, D. (2014). Time Dependent Valuation of Energy for Developing Building Energy Efficiency Standards.
Proctor, J., Wilcox, B., & Chitwood, R. (2018). Central Valley Research Homes Project. California Energy Commission.
Retrieved from
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/342135376_Central_Valley_Research_Homes_Project_-- _Final_CEC_Report
RSMeans. (2022). Cost data obtained from the 2022 RSMeans online database.
Statewide CASE Team. (2017). Residential High Performance Windows & Doors Codes and Standards Enhancement (CASE) Initiative 2019 California Energy Code. Retrieved from http://title24stakeholders.com/wp- content/uploads/2017/09/2019-T24-CASE-Report_Res-Windows-and-Doors_Final_September-2017.pdf Statewide CASE Team. (2018). Energy Savings Potential and Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of High Efficiency Windows in California. Prepared by Frontier Energy. Retrieved from https://www.etcc-ca.com/reports/energy-savings- potential-and-cost-effectiveness-analysis-high-efficiency-windows-california Statewide CASE Team. (2020a). Nonresidential High Performance Envelope Codes and Standards Enhancement (CASE) Initiative 2022 California Energy Code. Prepared by Energy Solutions. Retrieved from https://title24stakeholders.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/2020-T24-NR-HP-Envelope-Final-CASE- Report.pdf
Statewide CASE Team. (2020b). Residential Energy Savings and Process Improvements for Additions and Alterations Codes and Standards Enhancement (CASE) Initiative 2022 California Energy Code. Prepared by Frontier Energy. Retrieved from https://title24stakeholders.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/SF-Additions-and- Alterations_Final_-CASE-Report_Statewide-CASE-Team.pdf
Statewide CASE Team. (2020c). Multifamily All-Electric Codes and Standards Enhancement (CASE) Initiative 2022 California Energy Code. Prepared by TRC.
Statewide Reach Codes Team. (2019, August). 2019 Cost-effectiveness Study: Low-Rise Residential New Construction.
Prepared for Pacific Gas and Electric Company. Prepared by Frontier Energy. Retrieved from https://localenergycodes.com/download/800/file_path/fieldList/2019%20Res%20NC%20Reach%20Codes Statewide Reach Codes Team. (2021a). Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Batteries in Single Family Homes. Prepared by Frontier Energy. Retrieved from
https://localenergycodes.com/download/930/file_path/fieldList/Single%20Family%20Battery%20Cost- eff%20Report.pdf
Statewide Reach Codes Team. (2021b). 2020 Reach Code Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Detached Accessory Dwelling Units. Prepared by TRC. Retrieved from
https://localenergycodes.com/download/760/file_path/fieldList/2019%20New%20Detached%20ADUs%20Co st-effectiveness%20Report.pdf
Statewide Reach Codes Team. (tbd). 2022 Cost-Effectiveness Study: Existing Single Family Building Upgrades.
Prepared by Frontier Energy. Not yet published.
TRC, P. E. (2021). 2020 Reach Code Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Detached Accessory Dwelling Units.
UC Berkeley Center for Community Innovation. (2021). Implementing the Backyard Revolution: Perspectives of California’s ADU Owners.
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
-
ing Climate Zones
California, 2017
50 cJ Building Climate Zones
LJ County Boundary
SoorCE1: Califomla Energy Commission
100 200
Cost Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 49 Appendices
7 Appendices
7.1 Map of California Climate Zones
Climate zone geographical boundaries are depicted in Figure 4. The map in Figure 4 along with a zip-code search directory is available at: https://ww2.energy.ca.gov/maps/renewable/building_climate_zones.html Figure 4: Map of California climate zones.
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
-
2023 Electric California Climate Credit Schedule
PG&E
SCE
SDG&E
February or
March
$38.39
$71.00
$60.70
April May June July
Residential Natural Gas California Climate Credit
Aug
In 2023, the 2023 Natu ral Gas Califo rnia Climate Credit will be d istri bute d in February or Mar ch instead of April.
Sept Oct
$38.39
$71.00
$60.70
2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Value Received Per Househo ld 2018-2023 PG&E $30 $25 $27 $25 $48 $52.78 $208
SDG&E $34 $21 $18 $43 $43.40 $162
Southwest Gas $22 $25 $27 $28 $49 $56 .35 $207
SoCalGas $50 $26 $22 $44 $50.77 $194
Cost Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 50 Appendices
7.2 Utility Rate Schedules
The Reach Codes Team used the CA IOU and POU rate tariffs detailed below to determine the On-Bill savings for each package. The California Climate Credit was applied for both electricity and natural gas service for the IOUs using the 2023 credits shows below.22 The credits were applied to reduce the total calculated annual bill, including any fixed fees or minimum bill amounts.
Electricity rates reflect the most recently approved tariffs. Monthly gas rates were estimated based on recent gas rates (November 2023) and a curve to reflect how natural gas prices fluctuate with seasonal supply and demand. The seasonal curve was estimated from monthly residential tariffs between 2014 and 2023 (between 2017 and 2023 for CPAU). 12-month curves were created from monthly gas rates for each of the ten years (seven years for CPAU).
These annual curves were then averaged to arrive at an average normalized annual curve. This was conducted separately for baseline and excess energy rates. Costs used in this analysis were then derived by establishing the most recent baseline and excess rate from the latest tariff as a reference point (November 2023), and then using the normalized curve to estimate the cost for the remaining months relative to the reference point rate . 22 https://www.cpuc.ca.gov/industries-and-topics/natural-gas/greenhouse-gas-cap-and-trade-program/california-climate-credit California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
-
Cost Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 51 Appendices
7.2.1 Pacific Gas & Electric
The following pages provide details on the PG&E electricity and natural gas tariffs applied in this study. Table 29 describes the baseline territories that were assumed for each climate zone. A net surplus compensation rate of $0.07051/ kWh was applied to any net annual electricity generation based on a one- year average of the rates between December 2022 and November 2023.
Table 29: PG&E Baseline Territory by Climate Zone
Climate Baseline
Zone Territory
CZ01 V
CZ02 X
CZ03 T
CZ04 X
CZ05 T
CZ11 R
CZ12 S
CZ13 R
CZ16 Y
The PG&E monthly gas rate for G-1 in $/therm was applied on a monthly basis according to the rates shown in Table
30. These rates are based on applying a normalization curve to the November 2023 tariff based on ten years of historical gas data. Corresponding CARE rates reflect the 20 percent discount per the GL-1 tariff.
Table 30: PG&E Monthly Gas Rate ($/therm)
Month Total Charge
Baseline Excess
January $2.05 $2.43
February $2.08 $2.46
March $1.92 $2.31
April $1.80 $2.20
May $1.77 $2.18
June $1.78 $2.18
July $1.80 $2.20
August $1.85 $2.26
September $1.92 $2.33
October $1.99 $2.40
November $2.06 $2.46
December $2.05 $2.44
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
-
idential
GAS
Baseline Territories and Quantities 11
______ E_ff_ e_ ct _iv_e_,AP.ril 1, 2022 - Prese nt
BASELINE QU ANTITIES (Therms Per Day Pe r Dwelling Unit) Individual!}'. Metered
Baseline Summer Winter Off-Peak
Territories (April-October) (Nov, Feb, Mar)
Effective Apr. 1, 2022 Effective Nov. 1, 2022
p 0.39 1.88
Q 0.56 1.48
R 0.36 1.24
s 0.39 1.38
T 0.56 1.31
V 0.59 1.51
w 0.39 1.14
X 0.49 1.48
y 0.72 2.22
Master Metered
Baseline Summer
Territories (April-October)
Effect ive Apr. 1, 2022
p 0.29
Q 0.56
R 0.33
s 0.29
T 0.56
V 0.59
w 0.26
X 0.33
y 0.52
Summer Season: Apr-Oct
Winter Off-Peak: Nov, Feb, Mar
Winter On-Peak: Dec, Jan
Advice Letter: 4589, -G
Decis ion 2 1-11-0 16
GRC2020 P h II [Appli cati on 19-11 -019]
Fil ed: Nov 22, 2019
Winter Off-Peak
(Nov, Feb, Mar)
Effect ive Nov. 1, 2022
1.01 0.67
0.87 0.61
1.01 1.28
0.71 0.
67 1.01
Winter On-Peak
(Dec, Jan)
Effective Dec. 1, 2022
2.19 2. 00
1.81 1.94
1.68 1.71
1.68 2. 00
2. 58
Winter On-Peak
(Dec, Jan)
Effect ive Dec. 1, 2022
1.13 0.77
1.16 0.65
1.10 1.
32 0.87
0.77 1.13
Cost Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 52 Appendices
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
-
Gas and
Elet:tlic Compaay·
Revised
Cance.1/'irrg' Revised
Cal. P.. U. C. Sheet No.
Cal. P.U.C. Sh eet No.
U JQ, Oakland , Califomia
ELEClR IC SCIHElilULIE E-TOULC Sheet 2
RESI DENTIAL TIM E-OF-USE (PEA K PRICI NG 4 - 'El p.m . EVERY DAYJ RATES :
(Coofd. j
E-TOU'-C TOTAi.. BUt~lilLED RATE'S
Total En l!f", g(Y Re es (S pe; r kWh)
Su-mmer
ota'I Us9sge
Bas,e ine Ciredil ,(App l" d to Baseli11e Usqe 0 11ly)
Winte r
ol Us9sge
Base ine Ciredil ,(Appl" d to Baseli11e Usage 0 11ly)
Delivery Minimum Bi Amount per meter pl!I" day }
Californ ia Clim ate Cred it (per household. per sem i anm1an paym eill occurr ing • the Maren • and Octobe r
bill cycles)
PEAK
~0 . .53933 1 ( 1)
0..()885 1), (R)
~0.43002 (I)
f$01l8 8.51), (R)
~0 . .37612
($3R3Q)
OFIF-PEAK
3().4558-Q !I)
(3().08851) (R)
3().40827 !I)
(3().08851} (R)
56550- E
5622.Q.!E
Total bt md d service charg es s ~ □ w n on cust □rnl!l" ' s bi s are unbundl ed accord ing to the component rs es slhown below. Wh ere the d ive;ry m·nimum bi ll amount appl s. lhe cust □m er ' s bill wil e qual lhe, sum of (1) tti e de.livery min·mum b .ill amoun t.p us, (2) for bu11dled service. the ge.nerafion rs e , • es lhe num ber o kWh usedl. For revenue acco u.n i11. g1 purposes. lhe revenues from the delivery l'l'.-nimum bill amou11I I be assi.gned o the T ransmiissioo. Tran smi!.sion Ree Adjusl meni:s, Re sbilJly SeNi ces, Public P u rp □-se Programs , Nucl ear Dec□ m m rssi oo i ng, , Competilioo Tra ns:ition Cnar,ges, Ellergy O□-s t Recovery Amoun Wil dfire Fund Ch!arge, and N ew System Gelle.ati□ n C!i arges b.ased on kWh usa.ge im es the corres, poooing u nbundled! ral:e compooe:n per kWh. with any r esiidual r evenue asisigned to Dis ,"bution.
• Pursua:n . to D.23.-02--01 . disbursem!!ll t o' t he Apr il 20'23 resiiden ·al Climate Cre dit s'hall begi11 b.y March 1, 2023.
Advice
Decisio n
7iOOQ..E fssriedby
Meredlith Alfen
I/foe PrEeidenf , Regu lat.c,y Afrairtt
Submitt ed'
Effective
Re,sorutfrm
(Con ·nued)
Au gust 25, 2023
Cost Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 53 Appendices
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
-
Ga.s ,and
Electric Campany"
Revised
Ca.ooelTirig Revised
car. P.U.G . Sheet UD.
Cal. P.U.G . Sheet Wo..
U 39 OiJWimd, Callfumia
ElJECTRIC SOHEDULE E-liOli.l-C Sheet 3
RESIDE!NTIAL TIME-OF-USE ,EAK IPRtCI G - Q pJm. EVERY DAY) RATES:
(Oonfdlj U BU f/lDUNG OF E-T~C TOTAllRAli ES
IErterg~ Rai,,, by Component ($ JI"" Wh) PEM
G,oraen'lion:
S!!Jrraner( .,, ago-) $(1.1!1rnl
Worris( u, age) $0 .1'916
Distribul i'on..,:
S!!Jrnm,r (31 .,, ago-) $(1.17112!1
WoniB( u, age) $(1.11618
Co 11,.,.rv.rtiion1 l 11<"'1.ll.,e, Adj,us'lm.errt ~ • o!ino U, ogi,) Co.11, .,.rvi:ltion ,....,1 1 .... Adj,u,.im.e rrt (O.,, r 131,:.,. lin"' UsaiJOj lrara ,mission" (a 11, 090-)
lrara ,m sion Rai:e Adjusim.,nls" (all """!!" )
R:.!liiabllity S.-:n,t<>es" (all "'""!II' ►
Pub lt<: PulJI"""' P,o.ip-.,,ms (aU " ' "3"')
u::cl9r De,i:;:cmm i~ sKNl~ 1 { ml usage')
ComplO!ition lra □ s ili <111 Cl'l..-gl'!•• (d "'"9" )
E □ ""9)' C·o:•I Re "o""'.I}' Am<iu □ I (all "'"3")
llfi«, Fu □ d Cho rgi, (all us3gi,)
IN- Sys.ii,m Gl!'.n<1ra.Uo11 Cl'r"'lJ" (all =IJ"r'
llfi«, H;:,;1dcmi□9 Cb..-g:o, (:oil us390,)
RMc ..,ry IBood Cb..-gl'! (,ill u=gJOj
RMC'11',Y IBood c...m (a, .,, ago-)
Bu □ rl l r,d ~aw..- Clhiorgo, ra rlll:f...., □ c:e Adj us.iml!'.nl jail u••ge)"' jl)
jl)
OFF•PEAK
$0.13432
$0.1241 3
$(1.15112!1
$0.11286
(Sll.ll2:2161 II)
:SILil6635 II)
$1Ul5254
SIUl0069
$1Ul0069
$1Lil2578
$1Lilll 135
$1Lil0030
(SILil0071 I
$0.llll530
SIUlll3-46
SIUlll254
(llLilll528 IR)
(SILil(l5281 II)
SILil1300
II)
jl)
' Tr ansmission, ransmis;sian R-ale~ is anm R~ SEil'Vioe ciilarges are combined .r prese11i aiian oo oosiama bills..
Disi:lbru on and ew System Ge111Braiion Oharge:s are cantited far presentation , om customer bills, .
... Direct A~ Camnwn il'f Chaioe ~~"1iorn "nd T,..,,,i,.,,... 1 Bun Setvioe• CLimDm..-. µ• y " ~plicaliile· Visit,,gr:<1 Power Qhzugi, I err:mcr, Adjimrnenl . G..,,_.,,.,,.,., "ml 8ur,:l led F'CIA ari, oombinedl for "'"""""''ion o:□ l:<Jndled c:usD:lrnor bills.
~ 1 -E
56230-E
(Comtinued)
Aa'.-ice 7CKKlcE
Deci;S;ioo
is,5ue,d , by
Meredith Allen
Vice Presid'ellf, Regulatwy Affair5
S!mm!l'i'ed
Bfedm,
Reroll.t5oo
Augus,t Z5. 2023
Sep ember . 2023
Cost Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 54 Appendices
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
-
ific Gas and
Electric Com pany
U 39 Oakland, California
Revised
Cancelling Revised
Cal. P.U.C. Sheet No.
Cal. P. U. C. Sheet No.
ELECTRIC SCHIEDULE E-ELEC Sheet 2
RESI DENTIAL TIIME-O F-USE (ELECTRIC HOME)
SE RVICE FOR CUSTOM ERS WITH QUALI FY ING ELECTR IC T ECHNOLOGIES 56547 -E
56226- E
RA TES:(Cont'd.)
TOTAL BUNDLED RATES
Base Services Charge ($ per meter per day)
Total Energy Rates ($ per kWh)
Summer Usage
Winter Usage
California Climate Credit (per house: hold, per
semi-annual payment occurring in the March1
and October bill cycles)
$0.49281
PEAK
$056589 (I)
$033438 (I)
($38.39)
PART-PEAK
$0.40401 (I)
$0.31 229 (I)
OFF-PEAK
$0 34733 (I)
$029843 (I)
Total bundled service charges shown on a customer's bills are unbundled according lo the component rates shown below. .. ...
t
UNBUNDLING OF TOT A!l RATES
Energy Rates by Component($ per kWh) PEAK PART-PEAK OFF-PEAK Generation:
Summer Usage $0.28 164 $0.18253 $0.1 3743
Winter Usage $0. 11951 $0.09954 $0.086 19
Distribution"":
Summer Usage $0 17932 (I) $0.11 655 (I) $0 10497
Winter Usage $0. 10994 (I) $0.1 0782 (I) $0 1073 1
Transmission* (all usage) $0.0525 4 $0.0525 4 $0 05254
Transmission Rate Adjustments* (all usage) $0 00059 $0.00059 $0 00059 Reliability Services• (all usage) $0.0006 9 $0. 00069 $0.00069 Public Purpose Programs (all usage) $0.02578 $0.02578 $0.02578 Nuclear Decommissioning (all usage) $0.00 135 $0.00135 $0.00 135 Competition Transition Charges (all usage) $0.00030 $0.00030 $0.00030 Energy Cost Recovery Amount (all usage) ($0.0007 1) ($0.00071 ) ( $0.00071 ) Wildfire Fund Charge (all usage) $0.00530 $0.00530 $0.00530 New System Generation Charge (all usage)** $0.00346 $0.00346 $0 .00346 Wildfire Hardening Charge (all usage) $0.0025 4 $0. 0025 4 $0 .00254 Recovery Bond Charge (all usage) $0.00528 (R) $0.00528 (R) $0.00528 Recovery Bond Credit (all usage) ($0.00528 ) (I) ($0.00528 ) (I) ($0.00528 ) Bundled Power Charge Indifference $0.01309 $0.01309 $0.01309 Adjustment (all usage)***
Transmission, Transmission Rate Adjuslrnenls and Reliability Service charges are c ombined for presentation on customer bflls.
Oistrlbulion and New System Generation Charges are combined for presentation on cu stomer bills .
Direct Access, Community Choice Aggregation and Transitional Bundled Service Customers pay the applicable Vintaged Power Charge Indifference Adjustment. Generation and Bundled PCIA are c ombined for p reserilation on b undled customer bflls.
Pursuant to D.23- 02-014, disbursement of !he April 2023 r esidential Clim ate Credit shall begin by Maret, 1, 2023. (I)
(I)
(R)
(I)
(Continued)
Advice
Decision
7009-E Issued by
Meredith A.lien
Submitted
Effective
Resolution
Aug ust25 , 2023
September 1, 2023
Vice President, Regulatory Affairs
Cost Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 55 Appendices
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
-
Gas and
Eteclric Compaav·
U 3g, San Francisco, California
Revised
Carree.I/JIN)' Revised
Cal. F':.U.C. Sheet No.
Cal. P'.U.C. Sheet No.
EILECTRIC SCHIED'U LE ID-CARE Shee,t 1
LINE-ITEM DISOOUNT FOR CALIFORN IA AL TERNA TE RA TES FOR EN ERG Y (CARIE)
CU STOMERS
APPLICAB IL!llY: This sched ule is s pp'.licab lo s·ngle-phase and pofypllas,e, residen ·a1 service iri single- a:mily dwellings ,and in ·flats arid apantmenls separstel )" me!sed by PG& E and domeslre submetered tenants r,esid ng iri mu • smily a:ccommodafions. mobi hom e park s and to qu a: ifying re creat ional vehicle p ks , and ma:ririas and to, farm selVice on lhe premises operat ed b-y ne per soo whose residence is supp'.lied lhrough the same meter, where the appfican , qualifies for Ca!ifomiB Alternat e, Rs te.s for Energ y (CAIRE) un der lhe eligib ility and certificat ion criteria set rorlh in Elec ric Riule lG. 1. CARIE service is availab le on Schedu les E- 1, E-6. E-T OU-8 , 54734 -E
534.24.JE
E-TOIJ-C , E~TOU-D. EV2. E-EILEC. EIM. ES. E SR ET and EM-TOU.. (T) TEIRRITORY :
RA ES:
This rs : e schedu le app lies eve rywhere PG&E !Provides e ciric service.
Custom ers. I ·ng se,rvice on this rs e sche dule whose , ofueJWise app licable rs e schedule has 1no Delivery ~fin·mum Bi ll Al'llloun ( Sched ule E -iEl EC)will receive a GARE percenlag e disoount of 35.000% on heir to! bu ndled ooarg es (eJ{cept for lhe California er ate Credit, which will rio bed sco1mted )c CuiStol'lllers l:a~irig service on lhis rate schedule w hose ofherw ise ap ica'bte rate schedu'le has a Delivery Minimum 8 I Amount ( I other schedu!es) willl rece ive a CARIE percentage ,disecount f' A" or ·c· bel ow} on lhe " tota'l lbundled charg es on In • r otherw ise app ca'ble rate, sched ule (el{CE!pt for the Cali omia, C:lima :e a rec:1· , 'Whicll will no.t be, discounted) and so will recej'Je a percentage disco un ("8" or "D" below) on the d.elivery mi im um bi amount, i applicable. T he CARE d1sco1mt will be calculated for dire ct BCCess and ,community choi ce aggregal!ioo custo mers based Ofl the tof ch arges as i ttiey were :subjecl o bund led service ra es.
Discounts will be app ed as a residual reducli'ori to di:stribuliori cha rg;es.. after l:l GARE cusf:omers , ar, e, exempted from 1he Wildfire Fund Charge. !Recovery Bood Gharg e, Recovery Borid Cr,edi and lfl e CARE surdla: rge portion ,o.f the pub'lic pu rpose program cha:i;g;e u;sed to fund lhe CARE discoun t These cond inoris afso app~ : o ma,ster-metered ,customers . and to qua lified , sub-m etere d · enan,ts where lhe msster-flileter customer is join ry serve d u der PG&Fs Rate Sched ule D GAIRE and :either SC:hedu IBM. ES. E SR ET. ,or EIM-TOU.
For m aster-metered c1,1s om ers 'Whe.re one or more of the subme· :er·ed ten ants qlllBlifies for CARE rates under the elg ility and certiiical ion criteria sel forth iri Riute Ul. , 19.2. or 19.3. tile CAR E disco unt is equ to ,BJ per cen :a,-ge ("C" below) of the total bundl ed char,g;es. mull iplied by the numhe .r of CARIE units. di,.,ided by lhe ota l num ber of uniis. l ri addi:lion, master-met, ered customers eligible for D-CARIE I r eceive a perce ntage discount ("O" below) ori lhe d i v::ery minimum bil amo unt, i ,applicable .
I ii. is fhe re5(por.sibility of he, mas. er-metere cus omer to Brlvise, PG&IE wtlh in 15 days following an',' chal'l!lle iri Ill e num ber o· ·dwe il'l!ll 111ntts andfor , an',' ,decrease in lhe num ber of qu ifyi,_g CARIE 9spplicarits lhat results w hen such , app1 icant:s move out of lheiir su'bmetered or rion-subm etere d dwe l mg uni or submete red pe:rmar.ent-res idence RV or permane nt-residen ce boat. { )
I
I
{N)
(T)
I
(T)
(T)
(L)
I
(L)
(Con ·nued)
Cost Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 56 Appendices
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
-
Gas and
Elecllic Compaav·
Revised
CaIJce.1/irrg Revised
Cat P. U. C. Sheet No.
Cal_ P. IJ. C. Sheet No.
5620i8-iE
56020JE
U lQ, Sa11 Francis co, Ca lifornia
EILECTRIC SCHIED'ULE ID-CARE Shee,t 2
UN E-ITEIM DISOOUN T FOR GAU FORN IA ALT1 ERNA l"E RA TES F OR ENERG Y (CAIRE)
CUSTOM ERS
RATES : (Cont'd)
S!PECIAL
CO NDITIONS:
Advice
Decisio11
61l68-E
A . D-CAIRE Di;scount 34.96<5 % (Percent) rn
B. Delivery Minimum I Bi Ois=un - 50.000 % (Percent )
C. Mlasrer-Meter D-CARE Di;scount 34.96<5 (Percent) (ll D. MlasterJMeter Delivery Minimum 50.000 % (Percent )
Bill Disco un t
1. OTHERWISE APP LICABL E SCH ED ULE: T he Special Coooi'liions of t he Oustomer"s othe11Wise app ica'bl.e rate sche,a 'le will apply l:o tti is schedule ..
2. ELI GIBILITY: T, o be elrgible to receive D-CARIE the .applican.t rrwst , qu alify under he criteria. set forlh in PG& E." s E!ectric Ru s. 1'!l1 . . 1, 19.2. and 19.3 and mee lhe certffice ion requi rements hereof ro the salisfact iOill of PG& E. Q ualifying Oirecl Access . Community Choice Aggreg , a ion Service. and Tr ansi'liionel Bundle Service custometrS are also eligible to tal e service on Sched ule 0 -GAR E.
Appl icanls may q;ualify· for ID-CAR E at tti e·r pt"irnairy re-siden.ce only. Cu stom e,rs or sub- me : ered t.e;nan1s. participating ·n · lne Family E clric IRa.te Assistance (FE:RA) progra m cannot concummf ly partic ipa e in lhe CAIRIE iml!gram. 1-s.sr,edby
Me,;e-d"i.th Aile-a
Vice Pf"esidfmt, Regu ,ato,y Affa irs
Subm itted
Effective
Res ofufi.oo
.luly 1, 2023
Cost Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 57 Appendices
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
-
Summer Daily Alloca tions (June through September) Winter Daily Allocations (October through May) All-
Daily kWh Electric
Baseline Region Number Allocation Allocation Baseline Region Number 5 6
8 9
10 13
14 15
16 17.2 17.9
11 .4 8.8
12.6 9.8
16.5 12.4
18.9 15.8
22.0 24.6
18.7 18.3
46.4 24.1
14.4 13.5
SPECIAL CONDI TIONS
5 6
8 9
10 13
14 15
16 Schedule TOU-D
TIME-OF-USE
DOMES TIC
(Continued)
1. Applicable rate lime periods are defined as follows:
Option 4-9 PM, Option 4-9 PM-CPP, Option PRIME, Option PRIME-CPP :
Sheet 12
TOU Period Weekdays Weekends and Holidays
Summer Winter Summer Winter
On-Peak 4 p.m. - 9 p.m. N/A NIA N/A
Mid-Peak N/A 4 p.m. - 9 p.m. 4 p.m. - 9 p.m. 4 p.m. - 9 p.m.
Off-Peak All other hours 9 p.m. - 8 a.m. All other hours 9 p.m. - 8 a.m.
Super-Off-Peak N/A 8 a.m. - 4 p.m. NIA 8 a.m. - 4 p.m.
CPP Event 4 p.m. - 9 p.m. 4 p.m. - 9 p.m. NIA N/A Period All-
Daily kWh Electric
Allocation Allocation
18.7 29.1
11.3 13.0
10.6 12.7
12.3 14.3
12.5 17.0
12.6 24.3
12.0 21 .3
99 18.2
12.6 23.1
(T)
(T)
Cost Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 58 Appendices
7.2.2 Southern California Edison
The following pages provide details on the SCE electricity tariffs applied in this study. Table 31 describes the baseline territories that were assumed for each climate zone. A net surplus compensation rate of $ 0.06030/ kWh was applied to any net annual electricity generation based on a one-year average of the rates between December 2022 and November 2023.
Table 31: SCE Baseline Territory by Climate Zone
Climate Baseline
Zone Territory
CZ06 6
CZ08 8
CZ09 9
CZ10 10
CZ14 14
CZ15 15
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
-
ern C ifom· Eidis.on
RDS-emea d. California (U l38-E)
Revised
Caooe i~ Revised
Cal. PUC Sheet No. B5 11-E
Cal. PIUC Sheet No. 745D2--E
S@edule JOY-P
TIM E-OF-USE
DOM ESTIC
(Continued )
Shee 2
Custo mers weoeiving service uooer lhis Sched ule wi be charged lhe applicable re es un er Opt or1 4-9 PM.
Opi ion 4,Q P MI-CPP. Op!i:or1 5-8 PM. Option 5-8 PM-C PP, Opt ion PRIME. Option PR IME-GIPP Opiia n . A.
Opt ion A-CPP, qplic:m B, , o:r Option B-OPiP. as li sted bel ow. CPP E vent C lla1rg;es wi aipply to all , energy usage du rir191 CPP Ev errl E n.ell'{ly C h.arg e periods and CPP Non-Evenl Energy Cre dits will apply a,s a, red11ctiOJ1 OJ1 CPP NOJ1-Event Ene rgy Cr,edit Periods duri ng S• ummer Season days_ 4 :00 p.m. to 9:00 p .m.,. as de.!>cribe.d in Special Cond i ions 1 and 3. below:
PvUm,1-a FMl •PlzllFE :f:4, P.M-etF'
Ea, ■ c!iD" OJ,~• - &ih.Whi
~rnm•r !?i• ■ :acm - 0111-J>.M
Mid-Pa.a.
O t~P.aill.
W rnla r ~ ... :iu::m - •1itrrP..ai.
tla ■ l c Ot targ ■ - $1'd•y
O t1-l'w
S upt1r-OII!--,-.
D.:til~!I tfi!J
0.22:l~~lfi!J
D.::t+>1Zl~tfi!J
D.:niitol"ll<J
o .:;...,;i:;11<1
0 .::2':2511 51 IA J
Sm~ I __,: ■ , ¥ fe-,:itu1c ■ D.03 ii
Mu tt t-fi ■ m1l :,i R-td..-.c ■ 0.024
M•m nourn Ca,..11;1.- - litday
g;lnJilhl F ■ r nilllv R_td_..c ■ 0 .341!!i
Mu tt1 -fl ■ mll:,i fi!-tdlU"lc ■ Cl .341!!i
M m nnirn Ctt..ll;I ■ (1Mat1 1c_. 8_,. l l n ■ t· - • - St\clay !l lnlil hl ■ rrui.y- H-tdanc ■ 0 . 1 f ::S
Mu tt l -F ■ m1l y R-ii:1 ■:nc ■ 0 . 1 1;S
C...11lttm II C I 1nu l:■ CNllcH m
C...11f1:1tr.1l11 A1 ll ■ i: r.u1 L■ F-i! ■ ltl::1 ia r En ■ • 'ljD'[).acaWlL - %
11n1il:, E lac'lmc Kail::. Awam., 11 r.1c ■ IChac:ciu
0eflm 1 1a FM::!stt
CiPiPo E.,,..nl Ent1rH¥ Cti11.r:lijltl - !l.!kV'.-ih
Bt:.un:m•r 0-1"1 N'c:l~E.-.. ITI Cil'!IIIM
On ~ ■::. Ii: &~r Or.tr - '$ni.Wh
M11,umum A..,11il11b 'hl C ru :11I - SJ1i:: w11· ~--
S:um rrN r 8•aaian1
100 .01.Y
l fll) ..00
tw.tlr.111r ■ .filcl11J '
ucH-
D.2:!S43 Cl~
IJ .1'r2ifU' 41~
o .1 , ~2 c1,
0 .2 , , ~2 c•~
u .1~1:1~1 c1,
u .1 11:1510 41 ~
o..uouou
0.00000
0 .00000
0 .00000
0 .00000
o.ououo
o.ououo
" RIIPRI"°""' 10lni ol lho ds>:oonl. PlilllO'll'lagO .. ""'°"' In "F!'ll:o'Ullo Spo<lo'I OXa:l llcn oll lht. ~lo. "" 11ha ~lillmum Clllat{I• ·~ ¥<ho;o Dolhaty Slinllce Ena,w Chorga. ~us Iha ,.~ le...Jc Ch•rg,o lo lciss 11\a;O MltBnum Ch•rg;t> ... Th•Ofl9!'i111! C001pa!JkJn T,..,.llo nC11arga C1iC (!l>l.C!Xm r,orkWh Is rK<J"....-..:lln lha UGcom~ci'Gcmor.J {I) """"11ha B.aisa' na c...m" • .,. up ID t lllnl ol'lho s- na Jllb:a r~lo<• ci' llma-Ol'-Usa· llme p<Hbll. .ildl~Jkln>II Ba..i -on• ai:;,lr tor OUSll>ma,.. 11o,at Pump W....,. H-. oal\lO!I ..,_ Opll:ill. illlfl l!.aoa na Jllb:all:m ara "'"kclh POii nal)l ,5tll4man l, IP..-t H . --·~n.e M;axlrurmA'...n.tlo Oradn r• c• ~pad <Ndl omoum l:ltrCRP CU.lllffili<S a..i paJtlcJliO'".ng Lo at.or <lcmand ,..pon.., puq • , T lltll = iT<rtill Ol>ll;Ol)I &Mc,o r ... •PP1- ID Et.ullad ~ lllract Ac-• (CAI and Domnru COOil>o Aqg~n s.r-.1<!e (OCA ,5""""' ) OUSIDmo .... ~ l)j), - C-0!. San,.,.. Ousli>mlJr> ... not "-tl!DC!"' Iha CWRBC la c,mponan1 (If &:'had bul lo<laall - Iha CWRBC"' l><tnlldad lrf Smodll la DA-CR.8 or Bc/urdula OCA-CRS . 2 Ganar.allon: Tha G.ofl ,_ ... •P~ a ant, ID Eil:dad S<ilMco Cll<IDtnlOS. &:<> 8,poc:J;II Goodl1l ll<lk>w PCL!I """""'Y · ~ Dl\'R EG = ~ oll ,..,.1. , Fill-- ID'NR) E""'V, C.-.dlt - For mD<e lnllin'nOIJcn'"' Iha [Jl'IR Enorgf G r..:! ..... B l'ltJ Galwl !>Pli<I °""1lkio oll IN• Smtd.Ja.
4 APf!l '"'an aqua! b•"•· parh<rus"'1ol:I, samls .alt,. Boa Spodl>I C<>!dtlcm offlilla &::hadulo !or'""'" l\>m'>:lllon. (To be inser!e<I by ulility)
Advice 'IQ2QJE -----------Dec i iSio l'I
:l\'fJ:!
(Conlin u:ed)
lssu:ed by
Michae!l Bacllslrom
Vice...,E sident
(To be in,s-erted
Date S>ubm" i e.d
Eifectiv e
Reso i on
yCa l. PUC)
Dec 28, 2002
Jlen 1. 2023,
Cost Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 59 Appendices
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
-
lHI -L..N.. IIUnl ._
ED ISO
-'•l:n'lllU/1'.LVfT-A,Ar.lo:.•~ ·,w,:, _ _,...,
Southern California Edison
Rosemead, California (U 338-E) Cancelling
Revised
Revised
Cal. PUC Sheet No.
Cal. PUC Sheet No.
RATES(Con tinued)
Schedule TOU-0
TIME-OF-USE
DOMESTIC
(Continued)
Option PRIME I Option PRIME-CPP
Energy Cnarge - $/kWh/Mele r/Day
Summe r Seasc n
I
Delivery Service
Tota l'
W inter Seas-on
On.Pesk
Mid.Peak
0 .Peak
Mid.Peak
0 .Peak
St1per-O ef' esk
Fixed Reco very Charge - SJ1.Wh
Basic Charge - $!'Mete r/Day
EV Meler Credrt (Separate ly M etered E
EV Submele , Credit - $/Meler/Day
Cefifomia C limate Credit 10
Cefifom ia Alternat e Raf es. for
Energy Discou nt - %
Family Electric Rate Assistance- Discou
M edical Line Item Discount - %
Option PRIME-CPP
CPP Event Energ y Charge - SJ1.Wh
Summer CPP Nor>-Event Ctedil
On.Peak Ene,g y Cre cfrt - $/kWh
Maximwn Ava ilable Credit - $/kWh m '
Summer Seas-on
0.22789 (I)
0.22789 (I)
0.15191 (I)
0.23353 (I)
0.14 530 (I)
0.14 530 (I)
0.00260 (I)
0.427 [/)
(0.323 )(N)
(0.111 )(R)
100.00'
100.00
100 .000
Gen.eratioo'
U G,. I DWREC'
0.42769 (1 ) 0. 00000
0.1 522 1 ([) 0, 00000
0.10 1 162 (1 ) 0, 00000
0. :Je028 (I) 0.00000
0.00630 (/) 0. 00000
0.00630 (I) 0. 00000
0.80000
(0.15 170)
(0.7 1812) (R)
Rep,esenis 100% of the discoont percen1.lge as shOWTI in the applicable Special Coodition oifhis S~u/e. ~ Thoqoing Compecition T,ansition Charge (CTC} ol" (S0.00003) per kWh is recovered in !he UG oomponetll of Generation.
SheetG
I
I
Tho Maxiroom Available Credit is me capped credit amount ior CPP Customers dual participa1 ing in other demand respoose programs. 86132-E
85624-E
TCllal = Total Delivery Service rates are applicable to Burded Service, Dwect Access (DA) and C<immuoi1y Choice~regation Servic,, (CCA Serwie ) Customers.. except 0A and CC.A SeNice Customers are not -subject to me D'INRBC ra:e co.mpooem of this Schedule but instead pay the- DWRBC as provided by Schedtte DAsCRS or Sch CCA-ORS.
2 Genera:ioo = The Gen rates are appka'ble 0Jiy to Bundled Semce Ctis1omers. See Special Condition below for PCIA reoove,y. 3 DWREC = Departmenl of Water Resouroes (DWR) 81',ergy Oredit - F or more iniormatton on he DWR Ene<IJI' Credit, SE<: ~ Billing Cale Son Special Condiiion of this Scheclule.
4 App Tied on an equal basis.. per househo'k:j, -semi-aMUli:llly. See-the Special Cond'ffions of this Schedi:6e for mo.re informatooffl. (To be inserted by utility)
Advice _5=---'0'--'4---'--1--=E'------
Decision
(Continued)
Issued by
Michael Backstrom
Vice President
(To be inserted by Cal. PUC)
Date Submitted Ma 30 2023
Effeotive Jun 1, 2023
Resolution
Cost Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 60 Appendices
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
-
C iforn· Edi son Revi:sed Cal. PUC Sheet No. 85618-E
Rosemead. car 01111ia (U 3-38-E) Cance i~ Revi:sed Cal. PUC Sheet No. 85109-E S .cbepU')e D-CA81E .Shee 1
CALIFORN IA AL TERNA TE RA TES FOR ENERG Y
DOMES C S5 RV IGE
Af'PU ICAB ILITY
~pp licab le to domes lic service to CARE househo lds re sidmg in a pe. rmanen t Sing -F amily Aoc ommod!alion ,or M'u[tifamily Accom mod ation wh ere he customer meets al t he Special Coru:laions of this Scll edu'le. C ustomers emolled • Ute CARIE program are, not eligible for lhe Family Bl ectric Rafe Assis ance , (FERA} program.
Rursua nt ro Spec ial Corwffio n 12 nere illl. customers receiwng se.rvice unde.r fh"s Scnedule are e~ le · o receive lhe, Californ ia er ate Credit a:s snown in the Rates secti oo below.
I ERRITQBY
Witihi'n tll e entire terri my s!!1Ve<il.
RATES
The ,applica,ble cnarges set orth in Sdhedu D sna I s pp/ly to Customers served under this Sc'.hedu _ CAR E Discounl:
A 2Q1.8 pe.roent discounl is ,app lied o a CARE Customer's Dill prior o lhe app l" lion o ·the I Pu ic U i · e-:s Oommis ,s.ion 1R, ·rnbursem enl Fee (PUCR F) and s ny applicable UiSe r fees . t axes. and !ale payment charges . GARE Cus om ers are r equired to pay the PUC!RF and a ny applicable u se:r fees . taxes . s ndl late payment charges ·n ru'IL In addition . CARE Custom ers sre exempt from pa·ying lhe CAIRE Surcllarge , of $0.0088S per Wh and t he lNild re F und Non--Byp,assable Clla:rg;e , of $10.00,5310, per kWn. tR) The ,:W.S percent di scount, i11 add i ion ro tll es-e exemp tion s res,u in an averag e e .'ectivE CARiE Discount of 3-2.5 pe:r·ce:n
(To be inserted by ulility)
Adivice '1977-iE ----------
Deci:sion 23- 01-'002
rHri 22- 1.2.!00 1
tCon ·111.red }
Issued by
Mic.hse'I Bacllslrom
Viice_ Preside nt
(To be inserted by Cal. PUC)
Date Sub mitted Feb 27. 2023
E; ecliv e M a:r '1, 20123-
Resotu ion
Cost Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 61 Appendices
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
-
California Gas Company
Residential Rates
N0\--23
l"rocur ment Transportation ew Rat. e ew Rat. e Absolute Custome r Tyl)9 Commodty Rate, Chaige Charge Elfecdve Effecdve Rate % I Ra,te Sc!hooull!I Charg. e Type ¢fth8rm ¢ftl'lerm 11'112023 10/112023 Change Citlange, Resld0ntlal l lndlMdually M tfll'8d
Scoodu ,No. GR GR 13.asel oo 67.806 86-490 154296 125.096 29200 23.3% Res. SeMCa GR on Basel oo 67_806 131_037 198.843 1 69.726 29.117 17.2% GT-R Basel ne 0('-000 86-490 86.490 87.03S -00.54S -0.6% GT-R on Base ne 0C UI00 131_037 131.037 131.66S -00.631 -0.5% Cost Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 62 Appendices
7.2.3 Southern California Gas
Following are the SoCalGas natural gas tariffs applied in this study. Table 32 describes the baseline territories that were assumed for each climate zone.
Table 32: SoCalGas Baseline Territory by Climate Zone
Climate Baseline
Zone Territory
CZ05 2
CZ06 1
CZ08 1
CZ09 1
CZ10 1
CZ14 2
CZ15 1
The SoCalGas monthly gas rate in $/therm was applied on a monthly basis according to the rates shown in Table 33.
These rates are based on applying a normalization curve to the November 2023 tariff based on ten years of historical gas data. Long-term historical natural gas rate data was only available for SoCalGas’ procurement charges. 23 The baseline and excess transmission charges were found to be consistent over the course of a year and applied for the entire year based on 2023 rates. CARE rates reflect the 20 percent discount per the GR tariff.
Table 33: SoCalGas Monthly Gas Rate ($/therm)
Month Procurement
Charge
Transportation Charge Total Charge
Baseline Excess Baseline Excess
January $0.72 $0.86 $1.31 $1.92 $2.36
February $0.50 $0.86 $1.31 $1.57 $2.02
March $0.44 $0.86 $1.31 $1.48 $1.93
April $0.39 $0.86 $1.31 $1.39 $1.84
May $0.41 $0.86 $1.31 $1.43 $1.87
June $0.46 $0.86 $1.31 $1.49 $1.93
July $0.47 $0.86 $1.31 $1.51 $1.96
August $0.51 $0.86 $1.31 $1.58 $2.03
September $0.46 $0.86 $1.31 $1.52 $1.96
October $0.45 $0.86 $1.31 $1.48 $1.92
November $0.48 $0.86 $1.31 $1.54 $1.99
December $0.57 $0.86 $1.31 $1.63 $2.08
23 The SoCalGas procurement and transmission charges were obtained from the following site: https://www.socalgas.com/for-your- business/energy-market-services/gas-prices RES2023.xlsx (live.com) California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
-
line Usage: The following quantities of gas used in individually metered residences are to be billed at the baseline rates:
All Customers:
Summer (May to Oct)
Winter On-Peak (Dec, Jan & Feb)
Winter Off-Peak (Nov, Mar, & Apr)
Daily Therm
Allowance
0.359
1.233
0.692
Cost Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 63 Appendices
7.2.4 San Diego Gas & Electric
Following are the SDG&E electricity and natural gas tariffs applied in this study. Table 34 describes the baseline territories that were assumed for each climate zone. A net surplus compensation rate of $0.04542/ kWh was applied to any net annual electricity generation based on a one-year average of the rates between December 2022 and November 2023.
Table 34: SDG&E Baseline Territory by Climate Zone
Climate Baseline
Zone Territory
CZ07 Coastal
CZ10 Inland
CZ14 Mountain
The SDG&E monthly gas rate in $/therm was applied on a monthly basis according to the rates shown in Table
35. These rates are based on applying a normalization curve to the November 2023 tariff based on ten years of historical gas data. CARE rates reflect the 20 percent discount per the G-CARE tariff.
Table 35: SDG&E Monthly Gas Rate ($/therm)
Month Total Charge
Baseline Excess
January $2.34 $2.63
February $2.28 $2.57
March $2.21 $2.51
April $2.14 $2.45
May $2.18 $2.48
June $2.23 $2.55
July $2.26 $2.57
August $2.32 $2.62
September $2.26 $2.59
October $2.21 $2.55
November $2.24 $2.57
December $2.38 $2.70
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
-
• --IE
s.., l:lii,;;io G,n & 181ecrric· C:ompillny
Sam Diego,, C.lifwnia
Total Rates :
IDescription - T OI.II DR
S11mme.r;
o,, . P,,,k
Off.P,,,k
S..per Ofl>P,,ak
Winter.
o,, .p,,,1,_
Off. P,,,k
Super Oiff.p,,,1,_
.Sumrn.,, ll,,.oli11ie hljuolm" nl Cn! dil up ID
1311% ol lfaooli""'
1Mn1 .. 1 B- li 111, AiljuolrnKII Cm:fii u p lo
1311% o1 e,,,o1;,..
l.!lininwm Bill (l,'d;,,y)
IDes.c~ption - TOU DR - UDCT<1li>I
CARE R:ri<!
Summe r - CAIRE Rates:
o,, .p,,,1,_ 0.2568 2
Oif1°P,,ak 0.25682
S..per Oiff.p,,,1,_ 0.25682
Winter - CAIRE IRates :
Qn. P,,,k 0.4-37'.!9
Off•P,,ak 0.4-'.!739
Super Off.P,,a k 0.437'.!9
.Sumrn~r Bi?llselirl!e!
~ •lrn"'-"I Ced il up lo ((1.117241
1311% ol B,,,o1;,..
!Mnt .. I B- li111i, AiljuolrnKII
Cn!ilii up lb 30 11. cil (l!l.117241
0i3"5eline
lllini111Um Bill (l,'d"'J') 0.190
Mote:
Re,,.Jsed Ca l. P.U.G. Sheet No.
Canceling Re- 'iised Ca l. P.U.G. S heet No.
SCHEDULE l 0 11..11-DR1
IRES ID ENT IAL T l ME-OF-US!E
l!IWRBC • EEC::C IR:ata, + U DC Tota l R"-t" WF BC DWR Cr,odit
0.2 !>762 R 0. 005:lO I 0.670 ~ll
0.2!>762 R 0! 0053 0 I o.2sag1
0.2 !>762 R 0.00530 I 0.09Zlll
0.43809 I 0.0053 0 I 0. 93(17
0.43809 I 0.0053 0 I 0.101156
0.43809 l 0!0053 0 I 0.08402
(0.1 724) R
(0.11724 ) R
1)..3811 I
IDWR BC • EECC Rartc, 4 T,01, I
WF,NBC DWiRCred li Rata•
R 0.llOOOO 0..57()4-'.l I l!l.82725
R 0.llOOOO 0.251197 I l!l.1513~
R O.llOOOO 0.119:233 l l!l.349 15
I 0.llOOOO 0.1 9307 I ll.630411
I 0.110000 0.1 (!185!> I l!l.15415!14
I O.llOOOO 0.064():2 I l!l.1521,41
R (0.11724)
R (0.1172.t)
I (U SO
I
I
I
I
I
I
37i022-E
36337 -E
Sl-1€et 2
fota l
R:rt,,
OJ~3325 [
0.61979 [
0$ 5515 [
0.6:3646 [
0.6!i l 94 [
0.6274 1 [
(0. 117241 ft
(0.1 724 1 ft
0..38!11 [
l'oita.1
Eff!!odiivl!o
cue Rate
I 0..55368, I
I 0..:l3'96!i, I
I 0.227 25, I
I o.41900 I
I 0..36160 I
I 0..34485, I
R (11_08004) R
R (0.08004 ) R
I 0.190 I
( H T cdill Rall:!• a:,i ois! ol I.EC , S.,l11,dule D\'IR .SC (IDoparlmonl ol W..1..- R<,...,,.,,,.,. Bond Dhari,,, ~ Sdlo1i :Jio W F,NBC (CA Wli:!fre Fund d!arg;o j ~rd Scho&le E:E'CC (El'.e:;iric Enet-w Commodtf Ca, Q ie,s.. •Mlh lll;;o EECC: r;JJ<,• rellecli~ DWR c,,.,rn. EEOC..,;., , ""' "RPI""' ~" kl t.uooleil G.Jsiomer, ,l>llly. See Specia l Cood... 111 for l'IOlll< (Pl>.I C:llargi, nlillo!nenci, A,!ju:ttm ... 1 ) """""""Y · ~ Taia l Ral!e• P""'""ll:d ar,e liJr ,oooicmo,;s Iha!""'"'""' ccrnmocliy ~pt, ,mil dolM:I)' sema, from Uil ily. (3) □ WR- BC andl WF-NBC ch;,rgeo d o nd1 "l'Plr ,,, CARE cuo lc:moro. (4) A,, idi,n - d iE, 11,i, ral!eo I.alb!..._, c,imorn., t,; will .tsc ird..t,l., lini,,ilem 01a:11nu,r and wira\er-cn,d ~• for"'"""" l!\P lo 130'!1 c'f ba2lir11, io P' °""" " - h,. rate c,1'1':.,111,en_,.r,;, "rlt1te t! lt-y ru,...,btr Bill 1X andl Setn:.ii, I Bi 69S.. (6) WF! C rate i, . 0.005'.lO + DV,\R.BC Bond Ch "'90- is 0.000 00 . 2C8
Ad'o'ice Ltr. No.
Decision No,.
4 129-E
lsswed by
Da111 Skopec
Sellioir Vice Presidenl
Regulatory M:ar s
Submitted
Bfec iive
R,escluiion No.
Dec 30. , 2022
Jara . 2023
E-5217
R, I
Cost Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 64 Appendices
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
-
Time Periods
All time periods listed are applicable to l~ocal time. The definition of time willl be based upon the date service is rendered.
TOU Periods - Weekdays
On-Peak
Off-Peak
Super Off-Peak
TOU Period - Weekends and
Holidays
On-Peak
Off-Peak
Super Off-Peak
Seasons: Summe r
Winter
Summer
4:00 o.m. - 9: 00 D.m.
6:00 a.m. - 4:00 p.m.;
9:00 p.m. - midnight
Midnight - 6: 00 a.m.
Summer
4:00 o.m. - 9:00 o.m.
2:00 p.m. - 4:00 p m.,
9:00 o.m. - midniqht
Midniaht - 2: 00 D.m.
June 1 - O ctober 31
Novembe r 1 - May 31
Winter
4:00 o.m. - 9 :00 D .m.
6:00 a.m. - 4:00 p.m.
Excluding 10:00 a.m. - 2:00 p.m. in March and April;
9:00 p.m. - midniQht
Midnight - 6:00 a.m.
10:00 a.m. - 2: 00 o.m in M arch and Aoril
Winter
4:00 o.m. - 9:00 o.m.
2:00 p.m. - 4:00 p. m.;
9:00 p.m. - midniQht
Midniaht - 2:00 D.m.
15. Baseline Usag, e: Tlhe followifilg quantities of electricity are used to calculate the baseline adj ustment credit
Baseline Allowance For Climatic Zones•
Coastal In l and Mountain Desert
Basic Al!owanc--e
Summer (June 1 to October .31) g,_o 11t4 13.6 15, .91
Winter (No1Vember 1 to Miay 3, 1 ) 9.2 19.6 12.9 101.91 AIIII Elecm cK
Summer (June 1 to October 31) 6.0 8.7 15,2 17.1)
Winter (No1Vember 1 to May 31) 8.8 12. 2 22.1 17 . . 1
.. ... Clfmalic z,ones are shown ,on the Territory Seived, Map No. 1 . ~ I Eleotric allowances are available upon applica:tion to !hose customers who have penmanenlly nsta11ed s-paoe healing ,or who, have e'lectrlc water heatfng and receive no energy fl',om another sol.lrce.
Cost Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 65 Appendices
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
-
Diego Gas & Electric Company
San Diego , Califomia
Revised CaL P.U.C. Sheet No.
Canceling Re~ised CaL P.U.C. Sheet No.
SCHEDU LE EV-TO U-5
37217- E
370 16-E
Sheet 1
COST-BASED DOMESTIC TIME-OF-USE FOR HOUSEHOLDS WITH ELECTRIC VEHICLES
APPLICABILITY
Service under this schedule is specifically limited to customers who require service for charging of a currently registered Motor Ve hicle, as defined by the California Motor Vehicle Code, which is: 1) a battery electric vehicle (BEV) or plug-in h ybridl electric vehicle (PHEV} recharged via a recharging outlet at the customer's premises; or 2} a natural gas vehicle (NGV} refueled via a home re~ ueling appliance (HRA) at the customer's premises. This schedule is not available to customers with a conventional charge sustaining (battery recharged solely from the vehicle's on-b oard generator) hybrid electric vehicle (HEV).
Residential customers taking service on Schedule NBT, who are required to utilize EV-TOU-5 as their otherwise applicable schedlule (OAS) for electric service, do not require a qualifying motor vehicle, as described above to participate on Schedule EV-TOU -5.
Customers on this schedule may also qualify for a semi-annual California Climate Credit $(60. 70) per Schedule GHG-ARR.
TERRITORY
Within the entire territory served by the utility.
RATES
Total Rates:
UDCTotal DWRBC +
Descr iption - EV-TOU-5 Rates Rate WF-NBC
Basic Service Fee 16.00
Summer
On-Peak 028032 I 0.00 530
Off-Peak 0.28032 I 0.00 530
Su per Off-Peak 0.05588 I 0.00 530
Winter
On-Peak 0.28032 I 0.0053 0
Off-Peak 028032 I 0.00 530
Su per Off-Peak 0.05588 I 0.00 530
1C5
Advice Ltr. No. 41 54-E
Decision No. D.22-12--056
EECC Rate +
DWR Credit
I 0.53067 I
I 0.19567 I
I 0.09233 I
I 022587 I
I 0.16213 I
I 0.084 02 I
C-ontinued
Issued by
Tota l
Rate
16.00 0.81 629 I
0.4-8129 I
0.1 535 1 1 I
0.511 49 I
0.44775 I
0.14 520 I
Submitted
Effective
Resolution N'o.
Jan 30, 2023
Mar 1, 2023
N
N
N
Cost Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 66 Appendices
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
-
vised Cal. P.UC. Sheet No. 37019-E
San Diego G as & Elec tric Company
San Diego. C alifornia Cance ling Revised Cal. P.U.C. Sh eet No. 35912-E SCHEDULE EV-TOU-5 Sheet 4
COST-BASED DOMESTIC TIME-OF-USE FOR HOUSEHOLDS WITH ELECTRIC VEHICLES Notes: Trans mission Energy charges i nclude the Tran smission Revenue Balancing Account Adjusbnent (T RBM ) of S(0.00242) per kWh and the Transmission A ccess Charge Bala ncing Account Adjustment (T AGBAA ) of $(0.01 631) per kWh. PPP Energy c harges includes l ow I ncome PPP r ate (LI-PPP) S0.016 69/l(Wh, No n-low Income P PP rate (Non- LI PPP) So.0033311(Wh (pur.iuant to PU C ode Section 399.8_ , the Non-LIi-PPP rate may not exceed January 1, 2000 levels), Procureme nt : Energy Efficiency Surcharge Rate of S0.00422 /kWh, California Solar ln ttiative rate (CS\) of $0.0 0000/kWh and S elf-Generalion Incentive Program rate (SG IP) $0.00122/kWh. The b asic seivi ce iee of $16 per month is applied to a customers bill and a 50% discount is aw li e<I for CARE, Medical Baseline, or Family Eleobic Rate Assistance Program (FERA) customers resulting in their basic service fees to be $8 per month.
Rate Components
The Utility Distribution Company Total Rates (UDC Total) shown above are comprised of the following components (if applicable) (1) Transmission (Trans) Charges, (2) Distribution (Distr) Charges, (3) Public Purpose Program (PPP) Charges, (4) Nuclear Decommissioning (ND) Charge, (5) Ongoin_g Competition Transition Charges (CTC), (6) l ocal Generation Charge (LGC), (7) Reliability Services (RS), and (8) the Total Rate Adjustment Component (TRAC).
Certain Direct Access customers are exempt from the TRAC, as defined in Rule 1 - Definitions.
Franchise Fee Differential
A Fr anchise Fee Differential of 5.78% will be appli ed to the m onthly bi llings calculated under this schedule for all customers w ithin tlie c orporate limits of t he City of San Diego. Such Franchise Fee Differential shall be so indicated and added as a separate item to bills rendered to such customers.
Time Periods:
All lime periods listed are applicable to actual "clock" time) TOU Period - Weekdays Summer Winter
Or1-Peak 4:00 p.m. - 9:00 p.m. 4:00 p.m. - 9:00 p.m.
t>:w a.m. - 4: uu p.m. 6:00 a.m. - 4: 00 p.m.; Off-Peak 9:00 p.m. - midnight Exd uding 10:00 a.m.- 2:00 p.m.in March and April; 9:00 p.m. - midnight
Super-Off-Peak Midnight - 6:00 a.m. Midnight - 6 00 a_ m_ 10:00 a.m. - 2: 00 p.m. in March and April
1 uu t'enoa - vveeK enas Summer Winter and Holidays
Or1-Peak 4:00 p.m. - 9: 00 p.m. 4:00 p.m. - 9:00 p.m.
Off-Peak 2:00 p.m. - 4: 00 p.m.; 200 p.m. - 4: 00 p.m.
9:00 p.m. - midnight 900 p.m. - midnight
Super-Off-Peak Midnight - 2:00 p .m. Midnight - 2:00 p.m.
Seasons:
Summer June 1 - October 31
Winter November 1 - May 31
Continued
4C8 Issued by Submitted Dec30 20 22
Advice Ltr. No. 4129-E Dai n Skopec Effective Jan 1, 20 23 Senior Vi ce President
Decision No. Regulatory Affairs Resolution No. E-5217
R , R
I
R
Cost Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 67 Appendices
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
-
_rt Revised Ca:J. P.U.C. Sheet No.
San Diego, Gas & Electric Ccmipany
San Diego, Cal:iiomia Canceling Revised Cal P.U.C. Sheet No.
APPLICABILIITY
SCHEDULE E-CARE
CALI FORN IA ALTERNA TE RATES FOR ENEIRGY
357 18-E
32576-E
Sheet 1
This schedule provides a California Al ternate Rates for Energy (CARE) di soount to each of the following types of customers listed below that meet the requirements for CARE eligibility as defined in Rule 1; Definitions, and herein; and is t aken in oonjunction with the customer's otherwise applicable service schedule.
1) Customers residing In a permanent single-family accommodation, sep.arately metered by the Utility.
2) Multi-family dwelling units and mobile home parks supplied through one meter on a s ingle premises where the individua l unit is submetered.
3) Non-profit group living facilities.
4) Agricultural employee housing facilities.
TERRITORY
Within the entire territory served by the Utility.
DI ISCOUNT
1) Residential CARE: Qualified residential CAR, E customers will receive a t otal effective discount according to the following:
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 and
beyond
t:.ne-ctIve 40% 39% 38% 38% 36%R 35%, Discount
tC5
Pursuant to Com mission Decision {D,) 15--07 ~001 , the average effectiv, e CARE discount for residential customers will decrease 1% each year until an average effective discount of 35% is reached in 2020.
The average effective CARE disoount consists of: {a) exemptions from paying the CARE Surcharge, Department of Water Resources Bond Charge (DWR-BC), Vehicle-Grid Integration {VGI) costs, and California Solar Initiative {CSI I); {b) a 50% minimum bill relative to Non-CARE; (c) the California W ildfire Fund Charge (WF-NBC) and (d) a separate line item bill discount for all qualified residential CARE customers with the exclusion of CARE Medical Baseline customers taking service on tiered rates schedules. D .1 5~07~001 retained the rate subsidies in Non-CARE Medical Baseline tiered rates and thereby a separate line-item discount is provided for these CARE Medical Baseline customers Contirnued
Dec 30, 2021
Advice U r. Nb. 3928 -E
lss,ued by
Dan Skopec
Subm itted
Effeclive Jan 1, 2022
\lif"'P Pir9'fii:irlent
T
Cost Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 68 Appendices
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
-
Cost Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 69 Appendices
7.2.5 City of Palo Alto Utilities
Following are the CPAU electricity and natural gas tariffs applied in this study. The CPAU monthly gas rate in $/therm was applied on a monthly basis according to the rates shown in Table 36. These rates are based on applying a normalization curve to the October 2023 tariff based on seven years of historical gas data. The monthly service charge applied was $14.01 per month per the November 2023 G-1 tariff.
Table 36: CPAU Monthly Gas Rate ($/therm)
Month G1
Volumetric
Total
Baseline
G1
Volumetric
Total
Excess
January $1.83532 $3.35639
February $1.38055 $2.59947
March $1.32506 $2.47695
April $1.29680 $2.44038
May $1.29511 $2.43804
June $1.32034 $2.45406
July $1.35688 $2.61519
August $1.40696 $2.67944
September $1.42130 $2.70301
October $1.42310 $2.48300
November $1.46286 $2.45547
December $1.62415 $2.62128
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
-
APPLI ABILITY:
RE . IDENTIAL ELECTRIC ERVI E
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE E- 1
This Rate Schedule applies to separately metered single-fami ly r esidential dwellings re.ceiving Electric Service from the City of Palo Alto Utilities.
B. TE RRITORY:
This rate schedule applies everywhere the City of Palo Alto provides Electr ic Service.
NB DLED RA TE :
Per kilowatt- hour (kWh) Commodity
Tier I u age
0.09999
Tier 2 usage
Any usage over Tier 1
0.13873
Minimum Bill {. /day)
D. PECIAL NOTES :
l. alculation of ost Components
Distribution Public Benefits
$ 0.06954 . 0.00568
0.10225 0.00568
Total
$ 0.1752 1
0.24666
0.4!181
The actual bill amount is calculate,d base<l on the applicable rates in Section C above and adjusted for any applicable discounts, surcharges and/or taxes. On a Cu stomer's bill statement, the bill amount may be broken down into appropriate components as calculated under Section C.
2. alculation of Usage Tiers
Tier 1 Electricity usage shall be calculated and billed based upon a level of 11 kWh per day, prorated by Meter reading days of Service. As an example, for a 30-day bill, the Tier 1 level would be 330 kWh. For forther discussion of bill calculation and proration, refer to Rule and Regulation 11.
ITY OF PALO AL TO
Issued by the City Council
Supersedes Sheet No £-1-1
dated 7-1-2022
O
CITYOF
PALO ALTO
UTI LI TIES
{End}
Sheet o E-1-1
Effective 7- 1-2023
Cost Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 70 Appendices
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
-
idential Tiime-of-Day Service
Rate Schedule R-TOD
II. Firm Serv ice Rates
A. TimL"-<>r-D•y (S-8 p.m.) Rate
Eltt!Cli't,1! W1 f1' Jlh:ih r lei of flr~ b \r Xi of 0'1'cc lh-e :iti or EJTed h1! M J JJii ■■ llr V 1, 2023 J amllln' 1~2a2ol l\hl1,• 1. 11 241 Janu a r f 1~ 202.S f\'li't' I , 2025 1 U11 Ulilllit"!r elftli .-., (Otlubl!I" .. May)
S )'t ie1n lnfr:H ln.J.d.u r e fi.u!d C.llq t! fJt!r mu11 th pl!r lffl!tu $23.SO $14. IS S24.80 $2S.~ O«iri icl1~ • l.li 111,tr 0.1 1 u11,1:.•
f',,, k$A ,.~ S0.1547 S0.lS90 $0.1613 $0.1 6 7 g
oo.r-.,,t A n1t S0.1120 SO.llSl $0.l l83 $0.1215
S u1ti111l!r Seiti et11 (Juoer • Scptlmlbc:r)
Jl..
S)-t iem lnfn . Hn.1.ctu r e fi.u~ d C.llq e pt!r l'l'Kl'll th prr ~,u $23.so $14. IS S24.80 $2S.~ O.«:iri1Cii1~ • lli ll(tr C• ■ 'll. e
f',,, k$A ,.~ S0.3279 S0.33<,11 $03462 $0.3551
Mid,P.,.k rn~ SO.lll64 S0.l914 $0.19'51 $0...'021
()ff.f',,, k$A n7t SO.IW SO.l)g7 $0.1425 $0.1464
Optional ritieal Peak Pricing Rak
I. T he CPP Rate base prices per ti.m, -or-d.oy period nrc lhe same as the prices per ti.m,-or-day period for TOD (5-8 p.m.).
2. The CPP Rate pro,•ides a discount per kWh on lhe Mid-Peak and Off-Peak prices during summer months.
3. During CPP fa·ents, customers will be charged for energy used at the applicable lime-of-day period rate plus lhe PP Rate E,·enl Price per kWh asshown on www.smud.org.
$26.20
$0.17'..A
$0.1248
$26.20
$0.36S5
$0.2077
$0.1505
4. Dur ing CPP E,·cn ts, cne-rro• exported lo the grid will be compcnsa.tc:d n l the CPP Rate fae nl Price per kWh as shown on www_smud.org.
5. The CPP Rate fae nl Price and djscounl wtll be upda.tc:d annually at SMUD's djscn,tion and posted on www.sm.ud.org.
C. Plug- In Ekdric ,hi d e Cm.Iii (rafc ca.kgories RT0l and R TC I) 11,js credit is for residential customers who have a licensed passenger batt. ery electric plug-in or plug-in hybrid dcc tric vehicle.
Credit applies 1 0 all declricity usage charges l'rnm midnjght to 6:00 a.m. daily.
Electric Vehjcle Cmcfa. .. .. -$0.0150/kWh
ID. E:; lectr lclty Usage Surcharges
Refer lo the fol lowing ra.te sc:hcdulcs for dc:1:11ils on these surcharges.
A. Hydro Genera tion Adjurtment (HCA) . Rcfor to Rate Schedule HGA.
IV. Rat. e O1pllon Menu
A. Enu -gy As,ida ncc Program Rak Refer lo Rate Schedule EAPR.
Jl.. M e dic'al Equipment Di«im nl Pro gram , Refer to Rate Schedule MED.
C. J oint P•rtici pa tion in l\'kdical Eciuipmcnt Oi5COu.nt and Ener gy A · i,tanc• Program Rak. Refer lo Rate Schedule MED .
SACRA'ME:NTO MU NICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT
Resolution No. 23-09.09 adopted September 21, 2023
Sheet No. R-TO0-2
Effective: September 22, 2023
Cost Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 71 Appendices
7.2.6 Sacramento Municipal Utilities District (Electric Only) Following are the SMUD electricity tariffs applied in this study. The rates effective January 2023 were used.
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
-
n1e-nf-Ua r (5-8 p.m.) R te (r, u e 1!11:lf'gor R--00-2) I. The TOD (5-. S p.m.) Ra.te is die tanda. rd rate for S t ID re ide-ntil!l.l cu tomers" Eligible c:ustome0 rs c n elect l!he Fi. ed R te under Rate Schedule R a an alte,rn ti . rale.
2. Th TOD (5-S p.m.) Ra.te is l!ln. optrona!l rate for cus.tom ho ha .. e an eligible re-fi'lei. ab! e!ecirical generotion facility un. d.er Rate Sch dule E I l!hat as approved for installation by SM D prior 10 Jl!JJW I 20 I 8.
3. Thi rote I.ta five. ldfcn alt-hour (k\\fh) price depending on the time-ot~ay and. e on deta.i. e.J j n Section . Conditions f Service.
hown belo . Holida re
'S mmer
!Jun 1 - - • ptJO)
Off-Peal:
Weekdays bemreen 5:00 p.m. nJ 8,tl(I p.m.
Week.clay bem en noon and midnight except during die
Pe.ak. hours.
Cost Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 72 Appendices
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
-
Cost Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 73 Appendices
7.2.7 Fuel Escalation Assumptions
The average annual escalation rates in Table 37 were used in this study. These are based on assumptions from the CPUC 2021 En Banc hearings on utility costs through 2030 (California Public Utilities Commission, 2021a) . Escalation rates through the remainder of the 30-year evaluation period are based on the escalation rate assumptions within the 2022 TDV factors. No data was available to estimate electricity escalation rates for CPAU and SMUD, therefore electricity escalation rates for PG&E and statewide natural gas escalation rates were applied. Table 38 presents the average annual escalation rates used in the utility rate escalation sensitivity analysis shown in Section 4.6.3. Rates were applied for the same 30-year period and are based on the escalation rate assumptions within the 2025 LSC factors from 2027 through 2053.24 These rates were developed for electricity use statewide (not utility-specific) and assume steep increases in gas rates in the latter half of the analysis period. Data was not available for years 2024, 2025, and 2026 and so the CPUC En Banc assumptions were applied for those years using the average rate across the three IOUs for statewide electricity escalation.
Table 37: Real Utility Rate Escalation Rate Assumptions, CPUC En Banc and 2022 TDV Basis
Year
Statewide Natural
Gas Residential
Average Rate
(%/year, real)
Electric Residential Average Rate
(%/year, real)
PG&E SCE SDG&E
2024 4.6% 1.8% 1.6% 2.8%
2025 4.6% 1.8% 1.6% 2.8%
2026 4.6% 1.8% 1.6% 2.8%
2027 4.6% 1.8% 1.6% 2.8%
2028 4.6% 1.8% 1.6% 2.8%
2029 4.6% 1.8% 1.6% 2.8%
2030 4.6% 1.8% 1.6% 2.8%
2031 2.0% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%
2032 2.4% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%
2033 2.1% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%
2034 1.9% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%
2035 1.9% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%
2036 1.8% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%
2037 1.7% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%
2038 1.6% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%
2039 2.1% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%
2040 1.6% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%
2041 2.2% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%
2042 2.2% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%
2043 2.3% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%
2044 2.4% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%
2045 2.5% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%
2046 1.5% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%
2047 1.3% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%
2048 1.6% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%
2049 1.3% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%
2050 1.5% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%
2051 1.8% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%
2052 1.8% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%
2053 1.8% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%
24 https://www.energy.ca.gov/files/2025-energy-code-hourly-factors. Actual escalation factors were provided by consultants E3.
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
-
Cost Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 74 Appendices
Table 38: Real Utility Rate Escalation Rate Assumptions, 2025 LSC Basis Year
Statewide Natural
Gas Residential
Average Rate
(%/year, real)
Statewide
Electricity
Residential
Average Rate
(%/year, real)
2024 4.6% 2.1%
2025 4.6% 2.1%
2026 4.6% 2.1%
2027 4.2% 0.6%
2028 3.2% 1.9%
2029 3.6% 1.6%
2030 6.6% 1.3%
2031 6.7% 1.0%
2032 7.7% 1.2%
2033 8.2% 1.1%
2034 8.2% 1.1%
2035 8.2% 0.9%
2036 8.2% 1.1%
2037 8.2% 1.1%
2038 8.2% 1.0%
2039 8.2% 1.1%
2040 8.2% 1.1%
2041 8.2% 1.1%
2042 8.2% 1.1%
2043 8.2% 1.1%
2044 8.2% 1.1%
2045 8.2% 1.1%
2046 8.2% 1.1%
2047 3.1% 1.1%
2048 -0.5% 1.1%
2049 -0.6% 1.1%
2050 -0.5% 1.1%
2051 -0.6% 1.1%
2052 -0.6% 1.1%
2053 -0.6% 1.1%
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
-
Cost Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 75 Appendices
7.3 Summary of Efficiency Measures
Table 39 provides the details of the efficiency (non-preempted) measures, by climate zone, included in the following all-electric packages for the single family prototype:
• Efficiency Only
• Efficiency + High Efficiency (Preempted) Equipment
• Efficiency + PV
• Efficiency + PV + Battery
The efficiency measures for the single family mixed fuel packages are presented in Table 40, and Table 41 presents the efficiency measures for all the ADU packages. In all tables, the lack of an “X” indicates that the prescriptive values for that climate zone were not changed. See Appendix 7.4 for a list of prescriptive values by climate zone. Efficiency measures are described in Section 3.3.1.
Table 39: All-Electric Single Family Efficiency Measures, Various Packages Climate
Zone
3 ACH50
R-10
Slab
Attic Ceiling
Insulation
0.25 Roof
Solar
Reflectance
0.24 U-Factor /
0.50 SHGC
Windows
0.35 W/cfm
Buried
Ducts
Basic Compact
Hot Water
Credit
1 X R-60 X
2 X R-60 X X X
3 R-60 X X X
4 X R-60 X X X
5 X1 R-49 X X X
6 R-60 X X X
7 R-49 X X
8 R-60 X X X
9 R-60 X X X
10 R-60 X X X X
11 X R-60 X X X X
12 X R-60 X X X X
13 X R-60 X X X X
14 X X R-60 X X X X
15 X R-60 X X X X
16 R-60 X X X
1 This measure in Climate Zone 5 was only evaluated for the Efficiency + PV + Battery package.
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
-
Cost Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 76 Appendices
Table 40: Mixed Fuel Single Family Measures, Efficiency Only & Efficiency + PV + Battery Packages
Climate
Zone
3 ACH50
R-10
Slab
Attic:
EE Only
Attic:
EE + PV
+ Bat
0.25 Roof
Solar
Reflec-
tance
0.24 U-
Factor / 0.50
SHGC
Windows
0.30 U-
Factor / 0.50
SHGC
Windows
0.35 W/cfm
Buried
Ducts
CDHW1:
EE Only
CDHW:
EE + PV
+ Bat
1 X R-60 vs R-38 X X
2 X R-60 vs R-38 R-49 X X X X
3 R-60 vs R-30 R-38 X EE Only X X
4 X R-60 vs R-38 R-49 X X X
5 R-60 vs R-38 R-49 X X X X
6 R-49 vs R-30 R-49 X X X X
7 R-49 vs R-30 R-49 X X X
8 R-60 vs R-30 R-49 X X X X
9 R-49 vs R-30 R-49 X X X X
10 R-60 vs R-38 X X X X X
11 X R-60 vs R-38 R-49 X X X X X
12 X R-60 vs R-38 R-49 X X X X X
13 X R-60 vs R-38 R-49 X X X X
14 X X R-60 vs R-38 R-49 X X X X
15 X R-60 vs R-38 R-49 X X X X X
16 R-60 vs R-38 R-49 X X X
1 CDHW stands for basic Compact Domestic Hot Water credit Table 41: Efficiency Measures for All ADU Packages
Climate
Zone
3 ACH50
R-10
Slab Attic1
0.25 Roof
Solar
Reflectance
0.24 U-Factor /
0.50 SHGC
Windows
Ductless
VCHP2
Basic
Compact Hot
Water Credit3
1 X R-60 vs R-38 X
2 X R-60 vs R-38 X X
3 R-60 vs R-30 X X
4 X R-60 vs R-38 X X
5 R-60 vs R-38 X X
6 R-60 vs R-30 X X
7 R-60 vs R-30 X X
8 R-60 vs R-30 X X
9 R-60 vs R-30 X X
10 R-60 vs R-38 X X X
11 X R-60 vs R-38 X X X
12 X R-60 vs R-38 X X X
13 X R-60 vs R-38 X X X
14 X X R-60 vs R-38 X X X
15 X R-60 vs R-38 X X X
16 R-60 vs R-38 X X
1 This measure was added to all ADU packages except the Mixed Fuel Efficiency + High Efficiency Equipment package.
2 The ductless VCHP measure was only applied to the all-electric packages; the mixed fuel packages instead applied
0.35 W/cfm fans in Climate Zones 2, 4-6, and 8-15.
3 The compact hot water measure was only applied to the all-electric packages.
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
-
Cost Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 77 Appendices
7.4 Summary of Applicable Prescriptive Base Case Measures This appendix lists the prescriptive values, by climate zone, of building components relevant to the measures included in this analysis. Table 42 outlines envelope, PV, and battery values; Table 43 outlines space conditioning values, and Table 44 outlines domestic water heating (DHW) values.
Table 42: Prescriptive Envelope, PV, and Battery Measures by Climate Zone CZ Air
Infiltration1 Foundation Wall
Insulation2
Attic
Insulation3
Roof Aged
Solar
Reflectivity
Window
U-Factor /
SHGC
PV4 Battery
1 5 ACH50 Uninsulated slab R-21 + R-5 R-38 0.1 0.30 / 0.35 code min. none 2 5 ACH50 Uninsulated slab R-21 + R-5 R-38 0.1 0.30 / 0.23 code min. none 3 5 ACH50 Uninsulated slab R-21 + R-5 R-30 0.1 0.30 / 0.35 code min. none 4 5 ACH50 Uninsulated slab R-21 + R-5 R-38 + R-19 0.1 0.30 / 0.23 code min. none 5 5 ACH50 Uninsulated slab R-21 + R-5 R-30 0.1 0.30 / 0.35 code min. none 6 5 ACH50 Uninsulated slab R-15 + R-4 R-30 0.1 0.30 / 0.23 code min. none 7 5 ACH50 Uninsulated slab R-15 + R-4 R-30 0.1 0.30 / 0.23 code min. none 8 5 ACH50 Uninsulated slab R-21 + R-5 R-38 + R-19 0.1 0.30 / 0.23 code min. none 9 5 ACH50 Uninsulated slab R-21 + R-5 R-38 + R-19 0.1 0.30 / 0.23 code min. none 10 5 ACH50 Uninsulated slab R-21 + R-5 R-38 + R-19 0.2 0.30 / 0.23 code min. none 11 5 ACH50 Uninsulated slab R-21 + R-5 R-38 + R-19 0.2 0.30 / 0.23 code min. none 12 5 ACH50 Uninsulated slab R-21 + R-5 R-38 + R-19 0.2 0.30 / 0.23 code min. none 13 5 ACH50 Uninsulated slab R-21 + R-5 R-38 + R-19 0.2 0.30 / 0.23 code min. none 14 5 ACH50 Uninsulated slab R-21 + R-5 R-38 + R-19 0.2 0.30 / 0.23 code min. none 15 5 ACH50 Uninsulated slab R-21 + R-5 R-38 + R-19 0.2 0.30 / 0.23 code min. none 16 5 ACH50 R-7, 16” slab
insulation R-21 + R-5 R-38 + R-19 0.1 0.30 / 0.35 code min. none 1 5 ACH50 is prescriptively required however verification is not required. 2 Cavity wall insulation + continuous rigid insulation. 3 Ceiling/attic insulation R-value. R-38 + R-19 reflect High Performance Attics (HPAs) as defined by Option B in Table 150.1-A. 4 Prescriptive PV capacities (kW-DC) by climate zone are summarized in Table 4.
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
-
Cost Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 78 Appendices
Table 43: Prescriptive HVAC Measures by Climate Zone
CZ Heating
Type AC Type Heating
Efficiency1
HVAC
Efficiency
(SEER2/EER2)
HVAC Fan
Efficacy
(W/cfm)
Ducts2
1 Gas Furnace AC 80% 14.3 / 11.7 0.45 R-8, 5%, in attic (not buried) 2 Gas Furnace AC 80% 14.3 / 11.7 0.45 R-8, 5%, in attic (not buried) 3 Heat pump Heat pump 7.5 14.3 / 11.7 0.45 R-6, 5%, in attic (not buried) 4 Heat pump Heat pump 7.5 14.3 / 11.7 0.45 R-8, 5%, in attic (not buried) 5 Gas Furnace AC 80% 14.3 / 11.7 0.45 R-6, 5%, in attic (not buried) 6 Gas Furnace AC 80% 14.3 / 11.7 0.45 R-6, 5%, in attic (not buried) 7 Gas Furnace AC 80% 14.3 / 11.7 0.45 R-6, 5%, in attic (not buried) 8 Gas Furnace AC 80% 14.3 / 11.7 0.45 R-8, 5%, in attic (not buried) 9 Gas Furnace AC 80% 14.3 / 11.7 0.45 R-8, 5%, in attic (not buried) 10 Gas Furnace AC 80% 14.3 / 11.7 0.45 R-8, 5%, in attic (not buried) 11 Gas Furnace AC 80% 14.3 / 11.7 0.45 R-8, 5%, in attic (not buried) 12 Gas Furnace AC 80% 14.3 / 11.7 0.45 R-8, 5%, in attic (not buried) 13 Heat pump Heat pump 7.5 14.3 / 11.7 0.45 R-8, 5%, in attic (not buried) 14 Heat pump Heat pump 7.5 14.3 / 11.7 0.45 R-8, 5%, in attic (not buried) 15 Gas Furnace AC 80% 14.3 / 11.7 0.45 R-8, 5%, in attic (not buried) 16 Gas Furnace AC 80% 14.3 / 11.7 0.45 R-8, 5%, in attic (not buried) 1 AFUE for gas furnaces, HSPF2 for heat pumps.
2 Duct insulation R-value, duct leakage, duct location.
Table 44: Prescriptive Water Heating Measures by Climate Zone CZ DHW Type
Location:
Single
Family
Location: ADU
Basic
Compact
Distribution
Credit
1 Heat pump Garage In conditioned space, ducted to/from outside Yes 2 Heat pump Garage In conditioned space, ducted to/from outside No 3 Gas tankless Garage In conditioned space, ducted to/from outside No 4 Gas tankless Garage In conditioned space, ducted to/from outside No 5 Heat pump Garage In conditioned space, ducted to/from outside No 6 Heat pump Garage In conditioned space, ducted to/from outside No 7 Heat pump Garage In conditioned space, ducted to/from outside No 8 Heat pump Garage In conditioned space, ducted to/from outside No 9 Heat pump Garage In conditioned space, ducted to/from outside No 10 Heat pump Garage In conditioned space, ducted to/from outside No 11 Heat pump Garage In conditioned space, ducted to/from outside No 12 Heat pump Garage In conditioned space, ducted to/from outside No 13 Gas tankless Garage In conditioned space, ducted to/from outside No 14 Gas tankless Garage In conditioned space, ducted to/from outside No 15 Heat pump Garage In conditioned space, ducted to/from outside No 16 Heat pump Garage In conditioned space, ducted to/from outside Yes California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
-
Cost Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 79 Appendices
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 Contact Follow us on LinkedIn access our resources and sign up [email protected] for for newsletters. no-charge assistance from expert
Reach Code advisors.
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26