My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
10A Action Items 2016 1121
CityHall
>
City Clerk
>
City Council
>
Agenda Packets
>
2016
>
Packet 2016 1121
>
10A Action Items 2016 1121
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/16/2016 5:08:45 PM
Creation date
11/16/2016 5:08:33 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CM City Clerk-City Council
CM City Clerk-City Council - Document Type
Agenda
Document Date (6)
11/21/2016
Retention
PERM
Document Relationships
Reso 2016-160
(Reference)
Path:
\City Clerk\City Council\Resolutions\2016
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
121
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Download electronic document
View images
View plain text
Community Choice Aggregation Feasibility Analysis Alameda County <br />June 2016 v MRW & Associates, LLC <br /> <br />Table ES-1 shows the average annual savings for Residential customers under Scenario 1. The <br />average annual bill for the residential customer on the Alameda CCA program could average <br />about 7% lower than the same bill on PG&E rates. <br /> <br />Table ES-1. Scenario 1 Savings for Residential CCA Customers <br />Residential <br />Monthly <br />Consumption <br />(kWh) <br />Bill with PG&E <br />($) <br />Bill with <br />Alameda CCA <br />($) <br />Savings ($) Savings (%) <br />2017 650 147 142 5 3% <br />2020 650 160 145 15 9% <br />2030 650 201 188 13 6% <br /> <br /> <br />Scenario 2 (Accelerated RPS) <br />Under Scenario 2, Alameda CCA meets 50% of its load through renewable power starting from <br />2017, while 50% of its non-renewable load is met through hydro-electricity (i.e., overall 50% <br />qualifying renewable. 25% hydro, 25% fossil or market). In this scenario, the differential <br />between PG&E generation rates and Alameda CCA customer rates is slightly lower than that under Scenario 1, but continues to follow a similar pattern over the years with respect to PG&E <br />rates. As was the case under Scenario 1, because of this positive differential, Alameda CCA <br />customers’ average generation rate (including contributions to the reserve fund) can be lower <br />than PG&E’s average customer generation rate in each year under this scenario as well. <br />The annual bill for a residential customer on the Alameda CCA program in Scenario 2 could about 6.5% lower than the same bill on PG&E rates (on average over the 2017-2030 study <br />period). This is less than, but close to, bill savings under Scenario 1. <br />Scenario 3 (80% RPS by 2021) <br />Under this scenario, the Alameda CCA starts with 50% of its load being served by renewable <br />sources in 2017, and increases this at a quick pace to 80% renewable energy content by 2021. In addition, 50% of its non-renewable supply is met through large hydro-electric sources. <br />The differential between PG&E generation rates and Alameda CCA customer rates in Scenario 3 <br />is the lowest of the three scenarios, as this scenario has the most expensive supply portfolio <br />(Figure ES-4). However, the expected Alameda CCA rates continue to be lower than the forecast PG&E generation rates for all years from 2017 to 2030. Although this positive differential still allows for the collection of reserve fund contributions through the CCA’s rates in all the years <br />under consideration, between 2026 to 2028 the differential is very small. Similarly, the annual
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.