SCE's ELP program provides support to local governments to assist in achieving a joint vision of energy efficiency and sustainability. SCE works closely with partners to address key issues that act as barriers to achieving this vision, and to develop long-term energy efficiency strategies. The program helps identify and address energy efficiency and Demand Response (DR) opportunities in municipal facilities, develop long-term energy and sustainability plans, and increase community awareness of Integrated Demand-Side Management (IDSM) opportunities. In addition, ELP supports cities in strategic initiatives and policy development in climate action planning, reach codes, benchmarking, and other longer-term objectives.
ELP involves partnerships with local governments, or groups of local governments, working together with SCE to achieve IDSM goals. A single city or county can directly participate as a partner, while groups of cities, counties, or other jurisdictional entities can participate as bundled partners. The comprehensive program has three major elements: 1) Municipal Facilities Retrofits; 2) Strategic Plan Support; and 3) Core Program Coordination. The target audience is the municipalities and the residential and business communities they serve.
Local governments often lack the funds and time to pursue energy efficiency opportunities. SCE’s ELP is designed to help local governments by providing integrated technical and financial assistance, so local governments can address opportunities to:
The Government Facilities element helps local governments lead by example, identifying and implementing "clean energy" projects (energy efficiency, DR, and renewable energy) in municipal facilities and operations. Standard measures are available to local government partners. Program energy savings are derived from energy efficiency retrofits and retro-commissioning of municipal facilities. Specific energy efficiency measures for each local government depend on technical audits and assessments to identify retrofit opportunities. Buildings include libraries, fire stations, police stations, public works department facilities, and streetlights. The Government Facilities element works by:
The ELP Strategic Plan Support element focuses on helping local governments to:
This effort provides local governments with access to extensive peer networks and databases of best practices, tools, and techniques, and code enforcement training. It also provides best practices for “reach” codes and policies, goals, codes, standards, plans, and practices (“reach” being defined as efforts which exceed statutory requirements approved by the California Energy Commission).
Overall, the Strategic Plan Support effort will yield important outcomes, such as completed climate and energy action plans, trained energy plan checkers and inspectors, installation of enterprise energy management systems to assist local governments with ongoing assessments of energy efficiency opportunities, and new policies to promote energy efficiency for over 112 participating local governments.
The Core Program Coordination element:
ELP has four tier levels: Valued Partner, Silver, Gold, and Platinum. All levels receive SCE support, including marketing, education, outreach and training, technical assistance, and direct implementation. To reward and motivate partners to increase IDSM efforts, ELP offers increased incentives to offset project costs as partners move progressively up the tiers. Ascending enhanced energy efficiency incentives (greater than SCE standard incentives) are paid at progressively higher levels of achieved municipal energy savings (5%, 10%, and 20%). DR incentives are also provided at regular tariff rates for participating entities.
ELP at a Glance:
Program name | Energy Leader Partnership |
Targeted Customer Segment | Local Government |
Program Start Date | 2010 |
Annual Energy Savings Achieved | 2010 Reported*: 16.76 GWh |
Peak Demand (Summer) Savings Achieved: | 2010 Reported*: 2.69 MW |
Other Measures of Program Results to Date: | Reach Codes |
Budget for most recent year (and next budget cycle if available): | 2012 Authorized Budget of $28.7M |
Funding Sources (name and description): | Ratepayers |
Website: | http://www.sce.com/business/energy-solutions/energy-efficiency-partnerships.htm |
Best Person to Contact for Information about the Program: | |
Name | Nancy Jenkins, P.E. |
Position | Manager, Energy Efficiency Partnership Program |
Organization | Southern California Edison |
Phone number | 626-302-0655 |
Email address | |
*In July 2011, the CPUC adopted the final 2010-12 ex ante assumptions, and retroactively applied them to January 1, 2010. As a result, the 2011 reported activity is derived as the difference between the adjusted cumulative 2010-11 performance and SCE's 2010 Energy Efficiency Annual Report.
Before 2002, SCE initiated a limited number of informal arrangements, which helped develop stronger relationships with cities to address energy efficiency opportunities. In the 2002-2003 program cycle, third-party programs solicited by the CPUC worked with a select number of local government entities. Under this early model, third parties proposed specific activities, energy savings goals, deliverables, and program budgets, while the IOU performed direct administration and oversight. However, these third-party programs did not fully capture the spirit and intent of a partnership, were not coordinated, and varied significantly in incentive levels, approach, and expectations, resulting in program inconsistencies
In the 2004-2005 program cycle, the CPUC program decision encouraged IOU/Local government partnerships. The third-party model evolved into a rudimentary partnership model, which retained much of the existing program design. This change enabled the IOUs to better coordinate partnerships, and to build consistency and efficiencies in incentives, processes, communications, and implementation. While many of the prior third-party partnerships were continued, new partnerships were also developed and added to the portfolio.
In the 2006-2008 program cycle, SCE continued to improve overall effectiveness by refining partnership implementation processes, and improving program internal controls and communications. The partnerships improved in consistency and cost-effectiveness.
Lessons Learned – Advice for utility program managers working in partnership with local governments to be gleaned from SCE’s ELP program experience centers around the relationship, coordination, and mutual awareness of organizational needs and strengths:
More than 112 cities and counties are included in SCE’s ELP program. Customers in these jurisdictions are also served by the partnerships.
In 2009-2011, there were several significant changes to program design and implementation. Based on lessons learned, ELP was redesigned to capture key elements that were the most effective and compelling for the local government sector. The new model was designed to recognize local governments for taking progressively-comprehensive actions in demonstrating IDSM leadership. The actions rewarded and recognized include retrofits that achieve tangible energy and demand savings, and longer-term energy action planning to ensure a sustained focus on IDSM actions.
Within this model, as local governments achieve milestones in energy savings through municipal retrofits, they are rewarded with higher incentives to drive to deeper, more comprehensive retrofits. The new model includes DR initiatives, as well as a requirement to develop and adopt longer-term energy action plans to ensure a sustained focus on energy efficiency within local government policies.
During this time, program spending almost doubled, from 2010 $7.32 million reported to $13.43 million in 2011 reported. Preliminary figures indicate spending has tripled in 2012 to $23.21 million.
Annual savings (shown in the table below) have not tracked annual spending, dropping in 2011 over 2010. This dynamic may have changed, as preliminary savings for 2012 point to a dramatic increase:
| Savings (GWh) | Savings (MW) | Cost Effectiveness |
2010 Reported* | 16.76 | 2.69 | Cumulative for 2010 and 2011 results: |
2010 Reported* | 15.48 | 2.57 | |
2010 Reported* | 12.16 | 1.76 | |
2010 Reported* | 13.44 | 1.88 | |
2010 Reported* | 22.47 | 4.58 |
*In July 2011, the CPUC adopted the final 2010-12 ex ante assumptions, and retroactively applied them to January 1, 2010. As a result, the 2011 reported activity is derived as the difference between the adjusted cumulative 2010-11 performance and SCE's 2010 Energy Efficiency Annual Report.