BILL ANALYSIS �
AB 2581
Page A
GOVERNOR'S VETO
AB 2581 (Bradford)
As Amended August 19, 2014
2/3 vote
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|ASSEMBLY: |79-0 |(May 29, 2014) |SENATE: |29-5 |(August 26, |
| | | | | |2014) |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|ASSEMBLY: |79-0 |(August 27, | | | |
| | |2014) | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Original Committee Reference: U. & C.
SUMMARY : Makes various changes in statutes related to the
California Energy Commission's (CEC) adoption and use of
appliance and building standards. Specifically, this bill :
1)Allows a manufacturer to use electronic labeling, as
appropriate, to meet CEC labeling requirements.
2)Requires the CEC to consider the most current data available
when adopting appliance standards.
3)Allows the CEC to consider or recognize voluntary agreements
in lieu of regulation to promote water and energy efficient
appliances.
4)Requires the CEC to consider adopting a process that allows
inconsistent or duplicative standards to be repealed.
5)Requires CEC to perform preliminary software tests using
examples of common residential and non-residential buildings
before approving a public domain computer program to estimate
energy consumption. Requires CEC to make the results publicly
available.
AB 2581
Page B
6)Requires CEC to ensure its computer program that estimates
energy consumption is publicly available at least six months
before the effective date of adopted or updated standards.
7)Requires CEC to routinely adjust the software to improve
modeling accuracy for use with estimating energy use of
single-family residential dwellings and multi-family
residential dwellings.
The Senate amendments:
1)Allow a manufacturer to use electronic labeling, as
appropriate, to meet CEC labeling requirements.
2)Require the CEC to consider current data when adopting
appliance standards. The Assembly version of this bill
required the CEC to rely on current data.
3)Allow the CEC to consider or recognize voluntary agreements in
lieu of regulation to promote water and energy efficient
appliances. The Assembly version of this bill authorized the
use of voluntary agreements.
4)Requires the CEC to consider adopting a process that allows
inconsistent or duplicative standards to be repealed. The
Assembly version of this bill allowed the CEC to repeal
inconsistent or duplicative standards.
FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Senate Appropriations
Committee:
1)One-time costs of $150,000 then ongoing costs of $75,000 from
the Energy Resources Programs Account (General) to allow
electronic labeling.
2)Ongoing costs of approximately $1 million for staff and
contracts from the Energy Resources Programs Account (General)
to continuously improve modeling accuracy of energy assessment
tools.
COMMENTS :
AB 2581
Page C
1)Purpose. According to the author, the tools approved by CEC
to estimate energy usage are not accurate and consistently
overestimate energy usage. This bill requires CEC to
routinely adjust public domain software that estimates energy
usage and disclose any potential differences between the model
and actual energy use patterns. The author also asserts that
when standards are adopted or updated, CEC software is not
always fully tested and ready to go. This bill requires
testing and approval to be completed six months before
standards go into effect.
Related to appliance standards, reports claim the CEC
sometimes uses outdated data when adopting appliance
standards, and furthermore, the CEC cannot repeal inconsistent
or duplicative standards. This bill ensures the most current
data is considered when enacting energy efficiency standards
for appliances and requires the CEC to consider adopting a
process that allows for the repeal of inconsistent or
duplicative standards. Moreover, the bill allows a
manufacturer to use electronic labeling to meet CEC labeling
requirements and also allows the CEC to consider or recognize
voluntary agreements in lieu of regulation to promote water
and energy efficient appliances.
2)Energy assessments and ratings. An energy assessment examines
energy saving opportunities in a particular building, in order
to define potential upgrades. This process typically uses
modeling software. Ratings are used to compare the energy
efficiency of one building to others based on standard
assumptions of occupant behavior. Both anecdotal evidence and
controlled studies have raised concerns about the accuracy of
energy assessments.<1> A recent report found that modeling
software consistently overestimated the energy use of each
home:<2>
a) Mean modeled total annual use was 40% greater than
-------------------------
<1> National Renewable Energy Laboratory. Assessing and
Improving the Accuracy of Energy Analysis for Residential
Buildings.
<2> 2010-2012 PG&E and SCE Whole House Retrofit Program Process
Evaluation Study.
AB 2581
Page D
billed use.
b) Mean modeled annual kilowatts use was 56% to 68%
greater than billed use.
c) Mean modeled annual gas use was 39% to 43% greater
than billed use.
The same study found that estimates prepared by the different
assessment tools yielded results that were significantly
different from each other and overestimated energy use.
The CEC agrees that "simulation results should be calibrated
to actual energy usage to help homeowners understand how their
investment will likely affect their energy use if their
occupant behavior remains the same after improvements are
installed."
Furthermore, when building energy efficiency standards are
adopted or updated, CEC compliance tools are not always fully
tested and ready to go. This bill requires testing and
approval to be completed six months before standards go into
effect.
3)Appliance standards. California is a leader in energy
efficiency regulations, setting standards for various
appliances years before the United States Department of
Energy. Since 1976, California law has required that certain
appliances meet efficiency standards; therefore each appliance
must be tested and certified to the State before it can be
sold.
Various studies have found that the CEC has based analyses
related to appliance standards on outdated data. One report
argues that the CEC's 2011 analysis of battery chargers and
self-contained lighting controls was based on outdated data
which overstated product savings and understated the
AB 2581
Page E
incremental costs of compliance.<3> Another claimed that
analyses regarding consumer electronics (such as TVs, compact
audio products, DVD players, and more) utilized "outdated
power draw values to develop an energy-consumption baseline
that, in many cases, does not appear to reflect the
performance of typical new devices."<4>
GOVERNOR'S VETO MESSAGE :
"The bill would add specific considerations which are already
part of the way the Energy Commission adopts appliance
efficiency standards. The bill does not add any additional
authority to the Commission.
"I am directing the Commission to continue to work with all
stakeholders involved in the appliance efficiency standards and
consider all data submitted to the record, relevant market
developments and appropriate labeling options."
Analysis Prepared by : Brandon Gaytan / U. & C. / (916)
319-2083
FN: 0005629
---------------------------
<3> Wazzan and Eash. 2011. A Critique of the Regulations on
Battery Charging Systems Proposed by the California Energy
Commission.
<4> TIAX. Assessment of Analyses Performed for the California
Energy Efficiency Regulations for Consumer Electronics Products.