Laserfiche WebLink
Community Choice Aggregation Feasibility Analysis Alameda County <br />June, 2016 35 MRW & Associates, LLC <br />Table 17. Initial Comparison of Proposed CCA Scenarios <br />2017  to   <br />2030  <br />Million$  <br />nominal Million $ nominal DEMAND  <br />Scenario Bill  <br />Savings  <br />CCA Renewable  <br />Investment  CCA Renewable O&M  <br />PG&E  <br />Offset  <br />Renew.  <br />O&M  <br />Alameda roCA  <br />PG&E  <br />offset RE  <br />invest.  <br />roCA  <br />Alameda roCA Alameda  <br />1 $1,574 $623 $1,676 ‐$1,946 $47 $133 ‐$153  <br />2 $1,513 $623 $2,217 ‐$2,446 $47 $190 ‐$206  <br />3 $522 $674 $2,514 ‐$2,785 $51 $200 ‐$219  <br />Note: Customers’ bill savings account for PG&E’s indifference charge, and any out‐of‐pocket  <br />expenditures for customer‐sited renewable or efficiency projects.  <br /> <br />Job and Gross Regional Product Total Impacts <br />The yearly profile for the county’s total impacts – whether as jobs (Figure 23) or dollars of gross <br />regional product (GRP) ( <br />Figure 24) – shows that scenario 1 outperforms the other two scenarios. All scenarios share the year 2023 as the year of maximum positive impact which is due to maximum net rate savings. <br />The cumulative GRP impact through 2030 for scenario 1 represents a 0.12% change relative to <br />the county’s forecasted GRP without a CCA.