In such cases, the SBC represents almost 1/10 of a customer’s overall bill not an insignificant amount, and an easily identifiable line-item at the bottom of a customer’s bill.Ĭonsequently, in spite of the net benefits provided by the SBC-funded programs, some large energy users have pushed legislatures and utility regulators for the ability to opt-out of energy efficiency programs and the associated SBC collection mechanism. Yet, despite its history of successfully supporting energy efficiency programs, the SBC is a point of contention for some stakeholders who see only a line-item on their bill, rather than understanding the benefits derived from that investment.Īlthough the SBC charge is less than 1/20 of the average customer’s total bill, that ratio can be much higher for large end-users who pay as little as $0.06/kWh for their overall electric service. Such programs have helped New York consistently score near the top of ACEEE’s State Scorecard, due in part to the stability associated with its SBC-funding. The cost of the program is socialized across ratepayers on a volumetric basis of approximately $0.006/kWh, when most ratepayers pay between $0.15/kWh and $0.18/kWh for their electricity.
#Consolidated edison 5 year plan driver#
When combined with the PSC’s recent guidance regarding use of outcome-based utility Earnings Adjustment Mechanisms (EAMs), this creates the opportunity for an extensive expansion of energy efficiency programs in the state an expansion currently under consideration by the state’s Clean Energy Advisory Council.įor background and details on the opportunity for program scale-up in New York, read on…Įnergy Efficiency Funding in New York StateĮstablished within a 1996 order of the Public Service Commission, the System Benefit Charge (SBC) has been a major driver of New York’s successful energy efficiency programs, using the primary beneficiaries of energy efficiency programs - the ratepayers - as a stable source of funding.
This language foreshadows what could be a broader move on behalf of the Public Service Commission (PSC) to include energy efficiency within a utility’s rates - on par with treatment of other energy resources - rather than fund it via a line item surcharge on a customer’s bill. “Electric rates are designed for the Company to recover the costs of the Energy Efficiency Program, system peak reduction program and the equipment portion of the EV Program over ten (10) years, including the overall pre-tax rate of return on such costs.” Tucked away at the bottom of page 81 in Con Edison’s recent 120 page settlement agreement lies a sentence that will likely alter the course of energy efficiency programs in the state: