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 34 MRW & Associates, LLC <br />How Job Impacts Are Measured <br />The scenario-specific elements described in the prior section are expressed as annual dollar amounts (plus or minus) in comparison to what would have been expected in the county <br />economy without a CCA. Initially these amounts supplied by MRW and Tierra are general, <br />representing total project cost by year. The annual investment for specific types of renewable <br />energy projects and of making further energy-efficiency improvements are really comprised of <br />some portion spent on installation labor, a large portion for the equipment (either manufactured in the region or if not, a leakage to imports), and some small portion soft project costs. These <br />details are necessary for modeling impacts on the county economy due to a CCA program. <br />A macroeconomic impact (industry) forecasting model of Alameda County41 is used, the dollar <br />amounts, with further data refinement (detail) are introduced to the model, the economy adjusts <br />to these spending and savings changes by year and then identifies annual impacts in terms of dollar concepts (wages, sales, prices, gross regional product) and jobs, among numerous other <br />metrics. Appendix E provides some high-level background on the REMI Policy Insight model. <br />This model was chosen since it is uniquely qualified over other models and approaches to <br />understand how price (or rate) changes on the business segment (Commercial /Industrial energy <br />customers) influence business activity levels. Since electric rate differentials are a key consideration in pursuing a CCA, the study required a method that would adequately address <br />this. <br />Scenario Results <br />MRW created the three supply scenarios by considering how much within county RE investment <br />(for future generating assets) the CCA could fund, and how much it might invest elsewhere in <br />California (rest of California or roCA). Program administration and energy efficiency deployment investments are the same in all three scenarios. As can be seen from Table 17, scenario 3 has the most proposed CCA renewables investment within county but, it has the <br />lowest bill savings. In contrast scenario 1 would site a smaller renewables investment by the <br />CCA as within county, but has proportionally much higher bill savings. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />41 The model is a Policy Insight model by Regional Economic Models, Inc. (REMI) of Amherst, MA. It is a model that has been used by the CA Energy Commission, CALTrans, Los Angeles MTA, ABAG, City of San Francisco, <br />and the South Coast AQMD. For this study a two-region socio-economic forecasting model (the county, and balance of State) with 23- industries was used.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.