An Analysis of the Effects of Residential Photovoltaic Energy Systems on Home Sales Prices in California

An increasing number of homes in the U.S. have sold with photovoltaic (PV) energy systems installed at the time of sale, yet relatively little research exists that estimates the marginal impacts of those PV systems on home sale prices. A clearer understanding of these possible impacts might influence the decisions of homeowners considering the installation of a PV system, homebuyers considering the purchase of a home with PV already installed, and new home builders considering including PV as an optional or standard product on their homes. This research analyzes a large dataset of California homes that sold from 2000 through mid-2009 with PV installed. It finds strong evidence that homes with PV systems sold for a premium over comparable homes without PV systems during this time frame. Estimates for this premium expressed in dollars per watt of installed PV range, on average, from roughly $4 to$5.5/watt across a large number of hedonic and repeat sales model specifications and robustness tests. When expressed as a ratio of the sales price premium of PV to estimated annual energy cost savings associated with PV, an average ratio of 14:1 to 19:1 can be calculated; these results are consistent with those of the more-extensive existing literature on the impact of energy efficiency on sales prices. When the data are split among new and existing homes, however, PV system premiums are markedly affected. New homes with PV show premiums of $2.3-2.6/watt, while existing homes with PV show premiums of more than$6/watt. Reasons for this discrepancy are suggested, yet further research is warranted. A number of other areas where future research would be useful are also highlighted

Demand Response in U.S. Electricity Markets: Empirical Evidence

Empirical evidence concerning demand response (DR) resources is needed in order to establish baseline conditions, develop standardized methods to assess DR availability and performance, and to build confidence among policymakers, utilities, system operators, and stakeholders that DR resources do offer a viable, cost-effective alternative to supply-side investments. This paper summarizes the existing contribution of DR resources in U.S. electric power markets. In 2008, customers enrolled in existing wholesale and retail DR programs were capable of providing ~;;38,000 MW of potential peak load reductions in the United States. Participants in organized wholesale market DR programs, though, have historically overestimated their likely performance during declared curtailments events, but appear to be getting better as they and their agents gain experience. In places with less developed organized wholesale market DR programs, utilities are learning how to create more flexible DR resources by adapting legacy load management programs to fit into existing wholesale market constructs. Overall, the development of open and organized wholesale markets coupled with direct policy support by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission has facilitated new entry by curtailment service providers, which has likely expanded the demand response industry and led to product and service innovation

Financial Analysis of Incentive Mechanisms to Promote Energy Efficiency: Case Study of a Prototypical Southwest Utility

Many state regulatory commissions and policymakers want utilities to aggressively pursue energy efficiency as a strategy to mitigate demand and energy growth, diversify the resource mix, and provide an alternative to building new, costly generation. However, as the National Action Plan for Energy Efficiency (NAPEE 2007) points out, many utilities continue to shy away from aggressively expanding their energy efficiency efforts when their shareholder's fundamental financial interests are placed at risk by doing so. Thus, there is increased interest in developing effective ratemaking and policy approaches that address utility disincentives to pursue energy efficiency or lack of incentives for more aggressive energy efficiency efforts. New regulatory initiatives to promote increased utility energy efficiency efforts also affect the interests of consumers. Ratepayers and their advocates are concerned with issues of fairness, impacts on rates, and total consumer costs. From the perspective of energy efficiency advocates, the quid pro quo for utility shareholder incentives is the obligation to acquire all, or nearly all, achievable cost-effective energy efficiency. A key issue for state regulators and policymakers is how to maximize the cost-effective energy efficiency savings attained while achieving an equitable sharing of benefits, costs and risks among the various stakeholders. In this study, we modeled a prototypical vertically-integrated electric investor-owned utility in the southwestern US that is considering implementing several energy efficiency portfolios. We analyze the impact of these energy efficiency portfolios on utility shareholders and ratepayers as well as the incremental effect on each party when lost fixed cost recovery and/or utility shareholder incentive mechanisms are implemented. A primary goal of our quantitative modeling is to provide regulators and policymakers with an analytic framework and tools that assess the financial impacts of alternative incentive approaches on utility shareholders and customers if energy efficiency is implemented under various utility operating, cost, and supply conditions.We used and adapted a spreadsheet-based financial model (the Benefits Calculator) which was developed originally as a tool to support the National Action Plan for Energy Efficiency (NAPEE). The major steps in our analysis are displayed graphically in Figure ES- 1. Two main inputs are required: (1) characterization of the utility which includes its initial financial and physical market position, a forecast of the utility?s future sales, peak demand, and resource strategy to meet projected growth; and (2) characterization of the Demand-Side Resource (DSR) portfolio ? projected electricity and demand savings, costs and economic lifetime of a portfolio of energy efficiency (and/or demand response) programs that the utility is planning or considering implementing during the analysis period. The Benefits Calculator also estimates total resource costs and benefits of the DSR portfolio using a forecast of avoided capacity and energy costs. The Benefits Calculator then uses inputs provided in the Utility Characterization to produce a ?business-as usual? base case as well as alternative scenarios that include energy efficiency resources, including the corresponding utility financial budgets required in each case. If a decoupling and/or a shareholder incentive mechanism are instituted, the Benefits Calculator model readjusts the utility?s revenue requirement and retail rates accordingly. Finally, for each scenario, the Benefits Calculator produces several metrics that provides insights on how energy efficiency resources, decoupling and/or a shareholder incentive mechanism impacts utility shareholders (e.g. overall earnings, return on equity), ratepayers (e.g., average customer bills and rates) and society (e.g. net resource benefits)

Wind Energy Facilities and Residential Properties: The Effect of Proximity and View on Sales Prices

With increasing numbers of communities considering wind power developments, empirical investigations regarding related community concerns are needed. One such concern is that proximate property values may be adversely affected, yet relatively little research exists on the subject. The present research investigates roughly 7,500 sales of single-family homes surrounding 24 existing U.S. wind facilities. Across four different hedonic models, and a variety of robustness tests, the results are consistent: neither the view of the wind facilities nor the distance of the home to those facilities is found to have a statistically significant effect on sales prices, yet further research is warranted

Empirical Assessment of Shareholder Incentive Mechanisms Designs under Aggressive Savings Goals: Case Study of a Kansas "Super-Utility"

Achieving significant reductions in retail electric sales is becoming a priority for policymakers in many states and is echoed at the federal level with the introduction of legislation to establish a national energy efficiency resource standard. Yet, as the National Action Plan on Energy Efficiency (NAPEE) pointed out, many utilities continue to shy away from seriously expanding their energy efficiency program offerings because they claim there is insufficient profit motivation, or even a financial disincentive, when compared to supply-side investments. In response to an information request from the Kansas Corporation Commission staff, we conducted a financial analysis to assess the utility business case in Kansas for pursuing more aggressive energy efficiency that complies with recent state legislation. Kansas' utilities are vertically integrated and don't face retail competition. With historically low retail rates and modest experience with energy efficiency, the achievement of rapid and substantial sales reductions from energy efficiency will require a viable utility business model. Using a conglomerate of the three largest utilities in Kansas, we quantitatively illustrate the tradeoff between ratepayer and shareholder interests when a 1percent reduction in incremental sales is achieved through energy efficiency both with and without the impact of future carbon regulation. We then assess if the utility can be compensated in a manner that produces a sufficient business case but leaves an adequate amount of net resource benefits for ratepayers at a cost that is not overly burdensome. Finally, we show how several common shareholder incentive mechanisms would be designed to achieve this balance