IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jeners/v14y2021i23p8060-d693291.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Empirical Estimation of the Energy Impacts of Projects Installed through Residential Property Assessed Clean Energy Financing Programs in California

Author

Listed:
  • Jeff Deason

    (Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, CA 94720, USA)

  • Sean Murphy

    (Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, CA 94720, USA)

  • Charles A. Goldman

    (Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, CA 94720, USA)

Abstract

We examine the energy use impacts of energy efficiency and solar PV projects financed by residential property assessed clean energy (R-PACE) programs in California. We leverage household-level interval meter data to apply normalized metered energy consumption (NMEC) methods at significant scale—more than 25,000 electric meters and more than 15,000 gas meters. We develop a comparison group to account for non-project-related changes in usage. The projects include homes that replaced existing HVAC equipment with higher-efficiency units and homes that installed central heating or air conditioning equipment for the first time. We have limited information on pre-project household equipment stock so we develop a method to infer new installations. We find that projects that installed energy efficiency technologies reduce electricity consumption by approximately 3% and gas consumption by approximately 3.5% on average. When we remove homes that installed new cooling and heating equipment for the first time, savings rise to approximately 5% for electricity and approximately 6% for gas. Given the California climate and the results of an existing study of similar California projects, these results are in line with expectations. Solar PV projects produce electricity that offsets approximately 69% of household electricity consumption on average. We estimate that California R-PACE projects installed through the end of 2019 produce annual reductions in grid-tied electricity consumption of 506 GWh (equivalent to the electricity consumption of approximately 74,000 California households) and gas consumption reductions of 2 million therms (equivalent to the gas consumption of approximately 4700 California households) in a typical weather year.

Suggested Citation

  • Jeff Deason & Sean Murphy & Charles A. Goldman, 2021. "Empirical Estimation of the Energy Impacts of Projects Installed through Residential Property Assessed Clean Energy Financing Programs in California," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(23), pages 1-23, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:14:y:2021:i:23:p:8060-:d:693291
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/14/23/8060/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/14/23/8060/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kirkpatrick, A. Justin & Bennear, Lori S., 2014. "Promoting clean energy investment: An empirical analysis of property assessed clean energy," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 68(2), pages 357-375.
    2. Ameli, Nadia & Pisu, Mauro & Kammen, Daniel M., 2017. "Can the US keep the PACE? A natural experiment in accelerating the growth of solar electricity," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 191(C), pages 163-169.
    3. Jaffe, Adam B. & Stavins, Robert N., 1994. "The energy paradox and the diffusion of conservation technology," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(2), pages 91-122, May.
    4. Rose, Adam & Wei, Dan, 2020. "Impacts of the Property Assessed Clean Energy (PACE) program on the economy of California," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 137(C).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ruth Winecoff & Michelle Graff, 2020. "Innovation in Financing Energy‐Efficient and Renewable Energy Upgrades: An Evaluation of Property Assessed Clean Energy for California Residences," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 101(7), pages 2555-2573, December.
    2. Kircher, Kevin J. & Zhang, K. Max, 2021. "Heat purchase agreements could lower barriers to heat pump adoption," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 286(C).
    3. Todd D. Gerarden & Richard G. Newell & Robert N. Stavins, 2017. "Assessing the Energy-Efficiency Gap," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 55(4), pages 1486-1525, December.
    4. Bruno Ferman & Cristine Pinto & Vitor Possebom, 2020. "Cherry Picking with Synthetic Controls," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 39(2), pages 510-532, March.
    5. Schleich, Joachim & Faure, Corinne & Guetlein, Marie-Charlotte & Tu, Gengyang, 2020. "Conveyance, envy, and homeowner choice of appliances," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    6. Martin, Ralf, 2009. "Why is the US so energy intensive? Evidence from US multinationals in the UK," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 28703, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    7. Sanstad, Alan H. & DeCanio, Stephen J. & Boyd, Gale A. & Koomey, Jonathan G., 2001. "Estimating bounds on the economy-wide effects of the CEF policy scenarios," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(14), pages 1299-1311, November.
    8. Corral, Leonardo R. & Schling, Maja, 2017. "The impact of shoreline stabilization on economic growth in small island developing states," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 210-228.
    9. Arlan Brucal & Michael Roberts, 2015. "Can Energy Efficiency Standards Reduce Prices and Improve Quality? Evidence from the US Clothes Washer Market," Working Papers 2015-5, University of Hawaii Economic Research Organization, University of Hawaii at Manoa.
    10. DeCanio, Stephen J. & Watkins, William E., 1998. "Information processing and organizational structure," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 275-294, August.
    11. Olsthoorn, Mark & Schleich, Joachim & Hirzel, Simon, 2017. "Adoption of Energy Efficiency Measures for Non-residential Buildings: Technological and Organizational Heterogeneity in the Trade, Commerce and Services Sector," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 240-254.
    12. Faure, Corinne & Schleich, Joachim, 2020. "Poor energy ratings when appliances convey?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 139(C).
    13. AZOMAHOU, Théophile & BOUCEKKINE, Raouf & NGUYEN-VAN, Phu, 2009. "Promoting clean technologies under imperfect competition," LIDAM Discussion Papers CORE 2009011, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
    14. Stavins, Robert & Jaffe, Adam & Newell, Richard, 2000. "Technological Change and the Environment," Working Paper Series rwp00-002, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    15. Sébastien Foudi, 2024. "Are risk attitude, impatience, and impulsivity related to the individual discount rate? Evidence from energy-efficient durable goods," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 96(4), pages 627-661, June.
    16. Tolliver, Clarence & Keeley, Alexander Ryota & Managi, Shunsuke, 2020. "Policy targets behind green bonds for renewable energy: Do climate commitments matter?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 157(C).
    17. Purohit, Ishan & Purohit, Pallav, 2018. "Performance assessment of grid-interactive solar photovoltaic projects under India’s national solar mission," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 222(C), pages 25-41.
    18. Lianne Foti & Avis Devine, 2019. "High Involvement and Ethical Consumption: A Study of the Environmentally Certified Home Purchase Decision," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(19), pages 1-11, September.
    19. Kaisa Alavuotunki, 2015. "General budget support, health expenditures, and neonatal mortality rate," WIDER Working Paper Series 108, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    20. Marek Vochozka & Veronika Machová & Eliška Sedmíková, 2021. "Fixing a payout ratio by dividend policies: a case of the utility sector," Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, VsI Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Center, vol. 9(2), pages 416-432, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:14:y:2021:i:23:p:8060-:d:693291. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.