The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About05/11/2023 - Energy Board - Agenda - Regular Meeting ENERGY BOARD REGULAR MEETING May 11, 2023 – 5:30 pm 222 Laporte Ave – Colorado Room Zoom – See Link Below 1. [5:30] CALL MEETING TO ORDER 2. [5:30] PUBLIC COMMENT 3. [5:35] APPROVAL OF APRIL 13, 2023 MINUTES 4. [5:45] PACKET ITEM Q&A (15 min.) • 2022 Energy Services Results • Quarterly Service Area Reports (QSAR) 5. [6:00] BUILDING ENERGY SCORING IMPACT STUDY & BUILDING PERFORMANCE STANDARDS PLANNING (Discussion + Activity, 75 Min.) Brian Tholl, Energy Services Supervisor Katherine Bailey, Project Manager 6. [7:15] OCF BOARD PRIORITIES (30 min.) 7. [7:45] BOARD MEMBER REPORTS (5 min.) 8. [7:50] FUTURE AGENDA REVIEW (5 min.) 9. [7:55] ADJOURNMENT Participation for this Energy Board Meeting will be in person in the Colorado Room at 222 Laporte Ave. You may also join online via Zoom, using this link: https://fcgov.zoom.us/j/96707441862 Online Public Participation: The meeting will be available to join beginning at 5:15 pm, May 11, 2023. Participants should try to sign in prior to the 5:30 pm meeting start time, if possible. For public comments, the Chair will ask participants to click the “Raise Hand” button to indicate you would like to speak at that time. Staff will moderate the Zoom session to ensure all participants have an opportunity to address the Board or Commission. To participate: • Use a laptop, computer, or internet-enabled smartphone. (Using earphones with a microphone will greatly improve your audio). • You need to have access to the internet. • Keep yourself on muted status. ENERGY BOARD April 13, 2023 – 5:30 pm 222 Laporte Ave – Colorado Room ROLL CALL Board Members Present: Bill Althouse, Marge Moore, Jeremy Giovando, Brian Smith, Thomas Loran (remote), Alan Braslau, Steve Tenbrink, Vanessa Paul Board Members Absent: Bill Becker OTHERS PRESENT Staff Members Present: Christie Fredrickson, Phillip Amaya, Rhonda Gatzke, Brian Tholl, Cyril Vidergar (remote), John Phelan Members of the Public: MEETING CALLED TO ORDER Chairperson Tenbrink called the meeting to order at 5:30 pm. ANNOUNCEMENTS & AGENDA CHANGES None. PUBLIC COMMENT None. APPROVAL OF MINUTES In preparation for the meeting, board members submitted amendments via email for the March 9, 2023, minutes. The minutes were approved as amended. STAFF REPORTS Federal & State Funding Update John Phelan, Energy Services Manager & Energy Policy Advisor The City has hired two consultant companies to assist with grant researching and writing. Light and Power (L&P) has contracted with StanTec, and the water utilities have contracted with TetraTech. Mr. Phelan reminded the Energy Board of their advisory role to City Council. The Board can offer refinement and feedback on staff strategies for funding opportunities, but they should stay within policy initiatives framed first by City Council or staff. The Board can be informed by but cannot direct or advise StanTec efforts or provide direction on funding opportunities. Mr. Amaya added that grant writing affects everyone, so staff do want the Board’s input and refinement; we may not be able to do everything, but he wants to make sure staff and the Board coalesce around what makes the most sense. There is an enormous spread of opportunities, so staff’s priorities in seeking funding are centered around the goals of Our Climate Future, specifically Big Move 6 (Efficient, Emissions Free Buildings), Big Move 12 (100% Renewable Electricity) and Big Move 13 (Electric Cars and Fleet). Additionally, within L&P, staff will be seeking funding opportunities for distribution system planning, visibility, control, ENERGY BOARD REGULAR MEETING assets, cybersecurity, and resilience. Within Energy Services, they’ll be seeking opportunities focused on customer resources, industry development, and resilience. Staff will be leaning on research and information sources to help secure funding and through several channels, including Stantec and a Grant Coordinator (a City employee). Federal funding may be available through the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL), also known as the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA), and the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA). IIJA primarily contains grants, loans, consulting, and research focused on infrastructure, resilience, and emissions. The IRA contains a combination of funding for states, grants, loans, consulting, and tax incentives. All proposals need to align with the Justice 40 Initiative goals (an initiative to confront and address decades of underinvestment in disadvantaged communities by directing 40% of the funding to these communities) and each proposal requires a community benefits plan. Many of the programs have multiple funding cycles, and while IIJA funding is more likely to flow directly to the City, IRA funding will likely flow through the state (primarily through the Colorado Energy Office). Mr. Phelan noted that the tax rules are critical for many opportunities, but the details are lagging. Across all funding opportunities, StanTec will be looking to identify programs, links, funding types, agencies, purpose/goals, and many other factors, all of which will help staff and prioritize. Mr. Phelan discussed a few opportunities currently in progress. Staff submitted a grant application in the beginning of March for RECI (Resilient and Efficient Codes Implementation), which provides approximately $1 million toward a project implementing performance-based energy codes in Fort Collins, and to draft a national zero carbon code appendix to go in the IECC. This is a five-year process covering two code cycles. The City is partnering with New Buildings Institute (NBI), Florida Solar Energy Center (FSEC), International Code Council (ICC) and Colorado Energy Office (CEO). The Electric Vehicle Fleet Charging Management program is being led by Transfort with partners in Operations Services, Utilities, and in collaboration with Panasonic. Award negotiations are currently underway. . The City received an Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant (EECBG) formula award, and the funding will likely be directed to Operations Services for facility upgrades. Board member Paul asked if there are concerns about new affordable housing and how these programs and codes will affect that? Mr. Phelan said yes, the concerns are being heard; he noted that nationally we have seen that it doesn’t cost a lot more to build a very high performing building, but it is not always easy due to inertia in the industry. Board member Braslau asked if Utilities could take the lead to explain this point to City Council, the Affordable Housing Board and the Housing Catalyst as well as other concerned partners. The city is also actively interested in several upcoming opportunities: Grid Resilience and Innovation Partnerships (GRIP), Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund (via Environmental Protection Agency), Collaborating with CEO and Colorado Clean Energy Fund (CCEF), Charging and Fueling Infrastructure Grants (Community Charging), Through Department of Transportation (DOT), Colorado EV funding: Charge Ahead grants, EV public charging planning grants (with FC Moves), and Public Buildings Electrification: via the state, by Operations Services. Board member Braslau asked if there are any opportunities where Utilities could play a role in both developing and promoting public electric vehicle charging at businesses? Mr. Phelan said charging grants are a great option already for business customers, but there is much more to do. ENERGY BOARD REGULAR MEETING Board member Smith asked if the funding opportunities are mapped back to the primary goals of Our Climate Future. Mr. Phelan said no, the funding is not specifically mapped, but they will help all of the pathways become more feasible. The solutions range across multiple boundaries and chains of command. Mr. Smith asked how staff determine what opportunities are aligning with what goals. Mr. Amaya said the Utility does not want to go after every grant, staff wants to target the ones that make the most sense. Mr. Phelan added that not every opportunity staff pursues can be directly traced to a climate mitigation goal. There are needs the Utility has with infrastructure which bolsters the Utility’s resilience. He also pointed out that grants are not the only funding opportunities and staff needs to also consider what resources are already available; the end goal is to reduce the pressure on the rate payer. Board member Althouse said the Utility absolutely must evaluate how spending will impact rates. Staff should compare Virtual Power Plants and Distributed Energy Resource accelerators; an economic impact analysis must be done. There does not appear to be any data that will let us project what we will spend through Platte River. He wants to know if we change the goal from 5% local renewable resources to 20%, what would be the impact to the rate, how much less will the Utility be purchasing from Platte River, how much less does Platte River invest and charge back the community. He added that we have to heal a rift between our business community and our environmental community. Board member Paul said it feels like staff often come to the Board to educate them on what they do on a day-to-day basis, and she does not feel like that’s the best utilization of the Energy Board. She wants staff to come to the Board with problems staff need help with. Ms. Fredrickson noted that technically all direction needs to either come directly from, or trickle down from City Council through staff, because the Energy Board is a City Council advisory board and does not hold any quasi-judicial authority. Chairperson Tenbrink said Council has never directly engaged him, asking for guidance. Ms. Fredrickson asked the board to consider how much they have engaged Council or their Council Liaison (Councilmember Canonico) asked the Board. Board member Braslau added that the Board should be bringing community issues to the attention of City Council and specifically Councilmember Canonico. Board member Paul asked staff to please come with clearer direction and/or tangible actions on how the Board can support staff initiatives through City Council. Board member Giovando said he is personally not interested in discussing grants, but he is interested in understanding if any of the grant opportunities are tied to having a specific policy in place, and therefore as a Board they need to take action in removing barriers and/or supporting a policy change to be able to obtain that funding. Mr. Phelan said staff presented a Climate Action roadmap to City Council in October, which contains specific actions and results that must be in place to achieve some of the outcomes of OCF. Some will be controversial and will require some political will, but these are the steps necessary to achieve the goals. Staff asked the Board to consider what they would like to get out of their work session, whether that is funding related or an alternate topic, and to send that feedback to Chairperson Tenbrink. TRANSFORMER LOAD SHAPING ANALYSIS Brian Tholl, Energy Services Supervisor This project was completed to explore a few questions brought up by both the contractor and residential communities while the City works toward electrifying buildings in the community. Staff identified a few key findings through their studies. Winter peak demands associated with electrically heated homes are smaller than previously anticipated. In single family detached homes, electrically heated homes have about 5 kW higher winter peak day loads than similar non-electrically heated homes, and in multifamily ENERGY BOARD REGULAR MEETING homes, electrically heated homes have about 4 kW higher winter peak day loads than similar non- electrically heated homes. Homes with high performance envelopes and ground source heat pumps also have substantially lower loads, confirming the importance of weatherization for the existing building stock. Mr. Tholl explained the intent of the study was to bookend the best- and worst-case scenarios for electric heated homes and can be an input for the Utility’s distribution planning and sizing considerations for future development. Staff’s modeling approach was to develop and identify target a comparison group of transformers for sampling. Staff worked with a third party analytics vendor and processed, transformed, and aggregated AMI data. For each premise, the data was evaluated in 15-minute, hourly, 2-hourly, and 6-hourly periods. For each transformer and each strata, the vendor added up the 15-minute, hourly, 2-hourly, and 6-hourly data. Staff estimated the distribution of loads on each of the equipment pieces by day, hour of day, and an average daily temperature, and then for each aggregation and time horizon the maximum load, minimum load, and distribution of loads was calculated. Additionally, the distributions in each neighborhood were compared to the distributions of the comparison group to estimate the difference in typical loads for all-electric homes versus homes with gas. Generally, Mr. Tholl said staff found maximum loads (winter) of around 10kW in electrically heated single- family premises. Compared to non-electric heat transformers, there was about 5kW difference, which is lower than overall anticipated. Staff were also interested in summertime loading and found that in electrically heated homes reached a maximum load of around 7kW (compared to ~5kW in non-electric homes). Even though these homes are not heating in the summer months, they are likely also electrically heating their water, have electric ranges, etc. (rather than natural gas). Mr. Tholl displayed a graph plotted with a 2021 annual load comparison of electric and non-electric heated single-family premises. In February 2021, Winter Storm Uri brought historic cold temperatures to Northern Colorado, so staff can use these data points for load planning purposes. Electric heat homes showed about a 5kW difference from non-electric heat homes. Mr. Tholl pointed out that a high performing home envelope with ground source heat pump during Winter Storm Uri (where there is very little solar and wind generation) had electric loads comparable to homes with natural gas heating loads. Chairperson Tenbrink noted that ground source heat pumps are extremely expensive and is trying to understand the impact if people come off electric heat and move toward air-source heat pumps. He wondered if the City is planning for that type of scenario. Board member Braslau said that is highly dependent on the market, because in Europe ground source heat pumps are very competitively priced. Board member Paul asked if staff are utilizing this data to do a financial comparison year over year in single and multifamily homes. Mr. Tholl said this year staff is working on a tool that will help customers with that very thing, but noted it is a sensitive and complex process due to the Utility’s time of day rate structure. Without that tool it is difficult for the Energy Advisors to give a clear picture. Board member Moore asked about panel size upgrades (200 amp to 400 amp) with retrofitted homes. Mr. Phelan said most homes should be able to go to an all-electric home with electric vehicle charging with a standard 200-amp panel. Board member Smith asked what the average size homes and occupancy rates are and does that translate easily across the footprint. Mr. Phelan said this study was designed more to look at the best- and worst-case scenarios, it wasn’t intended to characterize everything, but rather the bookends so staff can better inform the design. The study was done mostly in the absence of the adoption of high performing heat pumps, and internally staff will be looking at administrative rules around how we design ENERGY BOARD REGULAR MEETING panel and service size, and electric capacity fees. Mr. Amaya said when the new Advanced Distribution Management System, Demand Response Management System, and Customer Information System are all online, they will work in concert together to provide near real-time information. This can help staff identify if a transformer may become compromised if all attached homes are spiking in usage around the same time. Board members and staff discussed how to get electric-forward households to be more participatory in sharing their data, and the value behind knowing what kind of electric devices they have or are planning to have in the future. CITY BOARDS & COMMISSIONS SCHEDULE Ms. Fredrickson created a spreadsheet containing meeting information for every City Board or Commission, broken down by Type, (Type 1, 2, or Quasi-Judicial). The Board will use this information to follow other Boards or Commissions to try and find areas where there may be overlapping areas of interest and purview. Each Board member will send Chairperson Tenbrink a Board they are interested in following along with (monitoring agendas, meeting minutes, attending when prudent), and report back to the Energy Board during Board member reports. BOARD MEMBER REPORTS Board member Moore attended a seminar about heat pumps, and she will send the slides, and possibly a link to the recording, to Ms. Fredrickson to distribute to the Board. Board member Althouse said he does not want the Board or staff to chase money, his point is to help identify the grants that can help the City get to and achieve the big ideas of the future. FUTURE AGENDA REVIEW The Board will send focused ideas to Chairperson Tenbrink for their upcoming work session. The Board’s May 11 meeting will have a discussion about Building Energy Scoring, as well as a Quarterly Service Area Report update and an Energy Services program update. ADJOURNMENT The Energy Board adjourned at 8:31 pm. Utilities’ Energy Services Program Portfolio 05-11 -2023 2022 Results Update Brian Tholl, Energy Services Supervisor Policy Background 3 Energy Services’ Guiding Policy Our Climate Future •Adopted 2021 •Encompasses previous -Climate Action Plan -Energy Policy -Road to Zero Waste Plan •Focused on mitigation, equity, resilience •Learn more at ourcity.fcgov.com/ourclimatefuture 4 Our Climate Future Energy Related Goals for 2030 Achieve 2022 goals and on target for all categories except natural gas goal •Reduce 20% of forecasted electricity consumption •Reduce 10% of forecasted natural gas consumption •100% renewable electricity, with 5% local •Zero carbon new construction •Maintain current Utilities distribution reliability metrics •Achieve a demand flexibility capacity of 5% of peak loads 5 Our Climate Future 13 Big Moves Program Portfolio 7 2022 Portfolio Highlights Accomplishments •Our Climate Future implementation •Building Code Update implementation •Electrification benefit cost framework •DER strategy creation with Platte River 8 Consumption per Capita MWh per Resident Inventory Year Consumption Consumption MWh % Change vs 2005 MWh Per Capita % Change vs 2005 2005 (reference)1,459,376 11.0 2021 1,553,968 +6.5%9.1 -17.4% 2022*1,572,265 +7.7%9.2 -16.7% *not yet final, includes some preliminary data 2022 Portfolio Results Community Electricity Consumption 2022 consumption per capita was 17% below 2005 Consumption MWh 9 New 1st Year Savings Percent of Retail Consumption Program Year Cumulative Savings 1st Year Savings MWh % of Retail MWh % of Retail 2020 262,277 17.8%44,248 3.0% 2021 297,063 19.8%42,139 2.8% 2022 335,632 22.3%45,776 3.0% 2022 Portfolio Results Electricity Savings Consumption with Avoided Electricity MWh 2022 retail consumption would have been 22% higher, on track for 2030 10 Local Renewable Generation Percent of Community Resource Mix Program Year Generation Capacity Storage Capacity kWdc MWh kW MWh 2020 19,346 25,568 352 0.878 2021 23,491 34,158 709 1.708 2022 29,216 41,939 999 2.459 2022 Portfolio Results Local Renewables 2022 local renewable generation was 2.7% community consumption, on track for 2030 Local Renewable Generation Capacity kWdc 11 2022 Portfolio Results Grid Flexibility •Redeployed hundreds of Water Heater controls in 2022 -Approximately 1/3 of controlled water heater units •Developed contract and SOW for EV flexibility pilot •Continued operation and insights for deployed DERs -Including water heaters, thermostats, EV, EV chargers •Planned RFP for Grid Flexibility services -Interviews underway 12 2022 Portfolio Results Electricity Savings by Program Program Participation (audits, projects, etc.) Customer Electric Savings First Year (gross MWh) Customer Electric Savings Lifetime (gross MWh) Total Cost of Saved Energy ($ per kWh levelized) Efficient, Emissions Free Buildings New Construction 351 553 7,512 0.017$ Business Efficiency 1,140 12,015 107,818 0.032$ Home Efficiency 12,687 3,191 23,445 0.068$ Income Qualified Efficiency 353 173 1,083 0.140$ Behavioral Efficiency 34,964 15,353 14,762 0.033$ Other (special projects)68,000 6,710 6,452 0.003$ 100% Renewable Electricity Distributed Generation 500 7,782 105,754 0.008$ Grid Flexibility - - 117,995 45,776 266,826 0.025 13 Inventory Year Consumption Consumption dthm % Change vs 2005 dthm Per Capita % Change vs 2005 2005 (reference)7,290,852 55.0 2021 8,178,025 +12.2%47.9 -13.0% 2022*8,287,513 +13.7%48.4 -12.1% *not yet final, includes some preliminary data 2022 Portfolio Results Community Natural Gas Consumption 2022 consumption per capita was 12% below 2005 Consumption thm Consumption per Capita thm per Resident 14 New 1st Year Savings Percent of Retail Consumption Program Year Cumulative Savings 1st Year Savings dthm % of Retail dthm % of Retail 2020 209,746 2.6%10,734 0.3% 2021 216,868 2.7%3,513 0.1% 2022 223,552 2.7%3,683 0.1% 2022 Portfolio Results Natural Gas Savings Consumption with Avoided Natural Gas thm 2022 retail consumption would have been 2.7% higher 15 Looking Ahead 2023 and Beyonc •Our Climate Future Equitable implementation •Mobile Home Efficiency Acceleration project •Building Code Performance Pathway development •Electrification for Efficiency Works Homes •EV public charging incentives •Connected EVs and Smart Inverters with storage/solar •PRPA collaboration on DERMs Light & Power Operations Quarterly Service Area Report –Q1 2023 Phillip Amaya, L&P Director, Utilities Outline 2 •2022 By The Numbers •Functional Area Accomplishments •Outage Report •In Case You Missed It •Energy Board •Technology •Overhead to Underground Conversions •Safety •Opportunities & Challenges •5G Small Cell Project 2022 Review and Accomplishments Current State and Additional Detail on OMAP Priorities Opportunities and Challenges Ahead Outline 3 •2022 by the numbers •Functional area Accomplishments •Outage Report •In Case You Missed It 2022 Review and Accomplishments 42022 Accomplishments Project Management & Electric Field Services Construction: 86 Projects Released for Construction 715 Customers added last year. 91,500' Feet of primary cable installed 96,000' Feet of secondary cable installed 249 Transformers installed 4 OH-UG Complete:1 in construction, 3 in design 49 Small Cell Projects 2022 by the numbers . . . 52022 Accomplishments Data Warehouse Project: •Proof of Concept for Data Warehouse (Currently, requesting support and resources from IT to develop) Substations: •8 Circuit Switcher Upgrades in 3 Substations •Modified protection schemes to trip circuit switchers instead of PRPA high side breakers, hardening the resiliency of the City grid. The City no longer falls under NERC regulations in this category. Operations: •17 solar units commissioned at CSU, totaling almost 2.8kV AC. Operations & Technology •Administration Co-Facilitated Racial Justice Curriculum:L&P Leadership & Employee Committee (with John Song) Onboarding and guidance to new L&P Director, Phillip Amaya 62022 Accomplishments Warehouse Takes On Connexion Materials Connexion is transitioning to in-house materials management for ongoing operations. So far, 90 items (about $1.09M) are handled by the Utility Warehouse, helping the Connexion Outside Plant team to focus their efforts on construction & operations work. Electrical Engineering: Partial Discharge / Tangent Delta Diagnostics: Outage frequency and duration indices help to drive efforts to assess distribution system health and focus future maintenance efforts. L&P is using new electrical diagnostic equipment to identify the condition and direct replacement projects prior to failure. 7Reliability in 2022 82022 Accomplishments •Electrical Engineering & Reliability Reliability Data for the Past Five Years Evaluation Period CAIDI SAIFI SAIDI MAIFI Q4 2018 44.68 0.38 16.82 0.18 Q4 2019 70.83 0.25 17.71 0.13 Q4 2020 59.36 0.17 10.16 0.00 Q4 2021 59.09 0.32 18.96 0.00 Q4 2022 67.48 0.33 22.29 0.00 Fort Collins Light & Power reliability in one sentence: •On average, a customer in Fort Collins can expect a 67.48-minute outage about every 3.03 years. Analysis: •The 22Q4 SAIDI value of 22.29 minutes increased from the 21.17-minute value for the 12-month measurement period for 22Q3. •The 22Q4 CAIDI and SAIFI values have oscillated. •Outage frequency indices have gone up slightly over the year, but outage durations show a more marked increase due to the types of equipment failures we are experiencing (splices on feeder circuits). 9Reliability in 2022 •2022 Outage Analysis •Analysis of outage statistics allows us to focus on the outage causes that are having the most impact on indices like CAIDI and which impact more customers. •Equipment failures affect the most customers but aren’t always the greatest CAIDI impact. 10Reliability in 2022 •2022 Outage Analysis Cont. •Analysis of outage statistics allows us to focus on the equipment types that are having the most impact on indices and which impact more customers. •200A Primary Cable has generally impacted more customers over the last 5 years. •Currently 600A splices have impacted more customers. •Ventilator Assistance •Crews provided a backup generator for customer with child on a ventilator during an outage. •Stuck Horse •Dispatched to help a stuck horse. Fallon, Jay, and Ross were on duty and were called to bring out a line truck to help a horse with a broken leg. The vet onsite wanted to try other methods first because of the danger of putting all the weight of the horse on the abdomen. They medicated the horse, and he was able to get up after that. •Generator on Cherry •We had a boring company hit the primary and secondary line that fed a commercial building and a house. They utilized the pull behind generator to power the business and home until repairs could be made. 11In Case You Missed It •Electric Field Services •In case you missed it (cont.): •House Fire Assistance •In the aftermath of a home fire, PFA asked and received the help of Mike Speight to assist with his backhoe to remove a wall and expose the interior for authorities to enter the premises. •Remote Worker Outages •Crews are working to minimize the inconvenience to our remote worker customers working from home Crews are working closely with customers to set up outages later in the day or even on weekends if needed. •Freezing Temps and Outages •Working hard to avoid planned outages when the temperature is below freezing for a long outage. 12Opportunities & Challenges Ahead •Electric Field Services Outline 13 •Energy Board •Technology •Overhead to Underground Conversions •Safety Current State Updates •Bill Althouse (Term 12/31/2023) •Vanessa Paul (Term 12/31/2023) •Brian Smith (Term 12/31/2024) •Thomas Loran (Term 12/31/2026) •Phillip Amaya started as the Energy Board’s new staff liaison in February 2023. 14Energy Board •Energy Board Welcomes New Members: 15L&P Operations: Q1 2023 •Predictive Material Consumption/Receiving Model: Consumption up to current date and stock levels are pulled from Warehouse Data. Future consumption is predicted based on: •Material reservations, •Past usage profiles, •Inferred consumption model derived from past and predictive use models Consumption is known to this date. Timeline-based receiving model allows better understanding of: •ordering needs and lead time impacts •Necessary usage restrictions •Budgeting requirements to meet responsibilities to customers This model is currently being automated to facilitate more efficient analysis. 16L&P Operations: Q1 2023 •2023: Current Overhead to Underground Conversions 99.905% 97.500% 98.000% 98.500% 99.000% 99.500% 100.000% 100.500%Q4 2004Q4 2005Q4 2006Q4 2007Q4 2008Q4 2009Q4 2010Q4 2011Q4 2012Q4 2013Q4 2014Q4 2015Q4 2016Q3 2017Q4 2017Q1 2018Q2 2018Q3 2018Q4 2018Q1 2019Q2 2019Q3 2019Q4 2019Q1 2020Q2 2020Q3 2020Q4 2020Q1 2021Q2 2021Q3 2021Q4 2021Q1 2022Q2 2022Q3 2022Q4 2022Percent Underground Electrical Percent Underground Distribution Target Teft Acres OH –UG (75%) •1,700’ overhead cable removed •36 customers •29 poles removed Lynn & Kyle OH –UG •3,700’ overhead cable removed •24 customers •32 poles removed •Hyline OH -UG •850’ overhead cable removed •8 customers •5 poles removed 17Safety Update •Safety Training: Active Threat : •63 employees high level training. Blood Borne Pathogen Certification: •70 employees received training on how bloodborne pathogens are spread, how to avoid exposure and what to do if there is an exposure. CPR/First Aid Certification: •70 employees receive training on First Aid, CPR, along with AED. OSHA 10 Card: •63 employees received training on safety and health in construction and general industry. AARs: Injury Reports & Near Misses: •Currently utilizing After Action Reviews (AARs) to learn from mistakes and acknowledge achievements. •This approach is creating more engagement, resulting in positive changes to procedures, equipment, materials, and in one case brought back the Quad Map. •The Quad Map use to inform SCO of changes on the system and the equipment numbers installed on the system. Outline 18 •Opportunities & Challenges •5G Small Cell Project Opportunities and Challenges Ahead •Created a cross functional planning team to create a “roadmap” to get to the City’s 2030 goals •Working to replace the ADMS/OMS •Intelligent and proactive infrastructure planning, analytics, testing and reviews: •O&M, aging infrastructure and overloaded infrastructure •Utility Technology enhancements such as OMS, ADMS, GIS, Engineering Analysis, Maximo •Intelligent substation (water plant) surveillance) •Working with PRPA to find areas to support storage facilities. •Improving the “windowing” process for Electric Field Services •Evaluating a substation to support future growth to the east. •Increasing the accuracy of GIS system and asset management. •Data Management -automating processes that previously were manual. 19Opportunities & Challenges Ahead •Opportunities •Aging Infrastructure resulting in more outages and O&M Needs •Find and address most critical infrastructure O&M needs (cables and transformers) •Lack of useful data and analytics and lack of dedicated O&M testing (asset health) •Grid Hardening –Substation surveillance and walls, Water Plants •Prepare existing system and potential service upgrades •Electric Vehicle Chargers •Beneficial Electrification •Other 2030 challenges •Exploring opportunities to support larger service sizes and different loading profiles (BE). •Cellular 5G Small Cell Sites: •Crews have completed 49 small cells in 2022 •1200 more expected in 2023 20Opportunities & Challenges Ahead •Challenges 21Opportunities & Challenges Ahead Small Cell Overview Small cells are mini cellular towers that cellular carriers are installing in the Right of Way (ROW) to bolster their connectivity and capacity. To limit the number of structures in the ROW, we work to co-locate small cells with existing streetlights. Each installation is a metered customer of L&P. So far, we have designed and completed installation of 49 small cell installation projects of roughly 80 that have been approved in the ROW so far. 1200 more expected in 2023 & beyond. BEWS Impact and BPS Engagement Katherine Bailey 1 2Existing Programs •Adopted by City Council December 2018 •Requires benchmarking and transparency, commercial and multifamily buildings 5,000 sq. ft. and above Fuel Efficiency: MPG Building Score: 1 to 100 Benchmarking 3Local Buildings Understanding Fort Collins Buildings Who is complying •~1,400 included in BEWS •94% compliance •Staggered implementation Benchmarking provides detailed Energy Use Intensity (EUI) data for buildings 5,000 sq. ft.and above •This provides a baseline for BPS 3rd party review (Apex Analytics) found 2.4-4% savings directly attributable to BEWS •Utilities had ascribed 2% savings to BEWS, applying a discount •EUI analysis showed consistency across the various data sources Compounding effects: •More savings for EWB and BEWS savings than either alone •BEWS directs more building owners/managers to EWB Uncertainty: COVID-based influence, other external factors may influence commercial building energy use 4BEWS Savings Savings Verification BEWS likely responsible for more savings than previously claimed Electric EUI changes between 2019 (pre-COVID) and 2022 from Fort Collins billing data: •Non-BEWS commercial buildings: slight increase in building electric EUI (2.4%) •BEWS participants: 7.1% reduction in building electric EUI 5BEWS Program Savings EUI Changes In annualized metrics, BEWS participants showed 3.2% average annual improvement to the electric EUI regardless of EWB participation Goal: Conduct a business survey to understand attitudes towards energy use in general and the BEWS system in particular. •The survey sample was limited to non-governmental buildings that: 1) began BEWS reporting in 2020 or 2021, 2) were currently in compliance with program reporting requirements, and 3) had an email address on file •Final sample included 359 participants, representing 722 buildings •56 participants completed the survey (16% response rate) •Building owners and managers received a $25 gift card for their participation 6Building Owner Survey Process and goals 7Building Owner Survey Subset of participant questions Feedback was gathered from questions including: •Participant level of decision-making authority •Prior to and post BEWS understanding of building’s systems •Prior to and post BEWS attention paid to energy use •Operational changes or capital improvements made as a result of measuring energy performance •Barriers to making operational changes or capital improvements •Operational changes or capital improvements made •A few participants found substantial value in BEWS •A few participants had outspoken negative opinions about BEWS •Most participants report little difficulty complying with BEWS, but also little benefit relative to time and effort required Benefits: Transparency map considered very valuable.Results show increased attention to energy use. Complaints: 1. Frustration with ESPM; or 2. Opposed to the general concept Further opportunity: 1. Further share program benefits; and 2. Energy savings resources (EWB) 8Program Opportunities Survey results Pre BEWS 27% Pre BEWS 39% Post BEWS 12% Post BEWS 34% Post BEWS 54% Pre BEWS 34% 0%10%20%30%40%50%60% A lot/Very Close A Moderate Amount Little/None •BPS require buildings to meet carbon or energy performance targets by specific deadlines •Can include multiple standards, allowing for flexibility while increasing performance for a different aspect of a building •Targets become stricter over time, driving continuous, long-term improvement in the building stock 9Building Performance Standards (BPS) What is BPS? Building Performance Standards drive gradual efficiency improvements in existing building stock 10Our Climate Future Goals Our Climate Future (OCF) implementation intensifies our community efforts to achieve these primary environmental goals: •Reduce greenhouse gas emissions 80% below 2005 baseline levels by 2030 •Carbon neutral by 2050 •Provide 100% renewable electricity by 2030 with grid and local sources •Achieve zero waste, or 100% landfill diversion, by 2030 Our Climate Future Energy Services’ Big Move Focus 11 12 Community Emissions Pathways to 2030 Last 10% requires additional community leadership action Pathways Electricity Buildings Industrial Manufacturing Transportation Waste Land Use Undetermined to Goal 2030 24.5% 15.0% 4.5% 4.0% 0.9% 0.1% 10% 13 Community Emissions Pathways to 2030 Majority of savings from improving existing buildings Pathways Electricity Buildings Performance Construction Electrification Industrial Manufacturing Transportation Waste Land Use 2030 24.5% 15.0% 14.0% 0.5% 0.5% 4.5% 4.0% 0.9% 0.1% 16Timeline Since BEWS Adoption Initial BEWS code prevented performance standards;subsequent changes led to revision Council adopts BEWS. Provision prevents performance standards. Governor Polis signs HB 21-1286, requiring State benchmarking and BPS. Biden launches BPS coalition with 33 inaugural jurisdictions. Mayor Arndt announces our participation the same day. FC municipal code updated to exclude prohibition of performance standards, add for City buildings. 1.2022 3.20226.2021 12.2018 17Co-Created Policy Stakeholder engagement is needed to craft policy with full consideration of local conditions Outreach Task Force •March –October •~12 members •‘10-30,000 ft.’ policy recommendations Technical Committee •June –2024 •Support Task Force Equity Board •Convenes throughout implementation Broad outreach efforts •Roadshows,open houses,listening sessions,website, surveys Representatives from: •Multifamily housing •Affordable housing •Small business-south end •Service provider •Commercial real estate (Waypoint, RPT) •Sustainable Living Association •DDA •North Fort Collins Business Association •Commercial building inspection •City (David Suckling, Stu Reeve) 18Task Force Task Force The Task Force provides high level policy recommendations that are implementable & account for goals Task Force ‘task’: •Provide critical perspectives •Design an effective, implementable policy •Build support •Address social and racial inequities •Create new partnerships *Formation in process* Sets specific efficiency targets that account for local build stock and opportunity Comprised of: Consultant •Scope of Work is out, bids being reviewed •Crunches data Technical experts •Local experts with ‘boots on the ground’ experience •Balances raw data with experience in local buildings 19Technical Committee Technical Committee Affordable Housing Group •Isolate NOAH in FC •How to improve housing without reducing affordable options •Likely alternatives needed for subsidized affordable housing Equity Team •Climate Equity Committee •Grant funding potential •Reviews policy recommendations from equity lens •Convenes throughout implementation to determine if negative impacts on community 20Equity in the Center Equity Work Activity Pete Iengo and Katherine Bailey 23 •Clarifying questions? •What consequences (intended or unintended) of implementing BPS do you imagine exist that we may not have considered yet? •Based on the presentation, what potential gaps do you see in the engagement strategy? 24Large Group Discussion Stakeholder Inventory Activity •Quality is good, quantity is better •Defer judgement •Stakeholder vs. audience •Repetition OK •Shoot for ~20 or more entries 25 Preparing to Brainstorm Stakeholder Inventory Activity 26 Directly impacted Indirectly impacted May want to provide input even though are unlikely to be impacted 27Stakeholder Inventory Activity Who wasn’t represented in the brainstorm that: •may be impacted? •Jobs? •Health? •Housing? •has historically been excluded from providing input on decisions impacting them? Who else should we hear from? Consider these social identities: •Race or ethnicity •Culture •Gender •Sexual orientation •Social or economic classification •Age •Disability •Religion Thank you Pete Iengo and Katherine Bailey 28