Energy-efficiency rules expand program reviews

Full Title:
Fair Evaluation of Energy Efficiency Act

Summary#

The Fair Evaluation of Energy Efficiency Act would change how Nova Scotia evaluates energy-saving programs. It would require decision-makers to consider greenhouse gas pollution costs and savings from replacing fossil-fuel heating or other energy uses with electricity. It would also require a new review by the Nova Scotia Energy Board and a new or updated demand-side management agreement.

  • The definition of demand-side management (programs that reduce or shift energy use) would include the social cost of greenhouse gas emissions.
  • Evaluations would consider total household energy costs, not only electricity costs.
  • Strategic electrification programs could qualify when they replace fossil-fuel energy use and lower total household energy costs.
  • The Energy Board would have to hold a new proceeding within 18 months after the bill starts.
  • Nova Scotia Power and the relevant electricity franchise holder would have to create or update their demand-side management agreement within the same 18-month period.
  • The bill is at first reading. It has not become law.

What it means for you#

  • Households: Energy-efficiency programs could be assessed based on combined electricity and non-electricity costs, such as the cost of replacing fossil-fuel energy use with electricity. The bill does not guarantee that any particular program, rebate, or rate will be created.
  • Electricity customers: Nova Scotia Power’s demand-side management plans could change after the Energy Board’s proceeding and the updated agreement.
  • People using fossil fuels for heating or other energy needs: Programs that support switching to electricity could receive more favourable consideration if they reduce total household energy costs.
  • Nova Scotia Power and the franchise holder: They would have to negotiate a new agreement or revise an existing one to reflect the new definition.
  • Energy Board: The Board would have to reassess cost-effective demand-side management rather than relying only on earlier proceedings.
  • Timing: The bill sets an 18-month deadline after it comes into force. It does not set a date for the bill to become law.

Expenses#

The bill may create administrative and review costs, but no estimate is available.

  • The Energy Board would need to conduct a new proceeding.
  • Nova Scotia Power and the franchise holder would need to prepare or revise an agreement.
  • Energy-efficiency or electrification programs approved after the review could require spending by utilities, customers, or governments.
  • The bill does not set a new tax, fee, fine, rebate, or funding amount.
  • It is unclear whether the changes would increase or reduce electricity rates, household energy costs, or public spending.
  • No publicly available information identifies the total cost of implementing the bill.

Proponents' View#

  • The bill appears intended to make energy-efficiency decisions reflect the full cost of energy use, rather than looking only at electricity costs.
  • Including the social cost of greenhouse gas emissions could give greater weight to programs that reduce climate pollution.
  • Considering total household energy costs could help identify projects that cost more on the electricity bill but save money by reducing the use of fossil fuels.
  • A new Energy Board proceeding could update demand-side management decisions using the bill’s broader definition.
  • Strategic electrification could be seen as a way to reduce fossil-fuel use while lowering overall household energy costs, where those savings occur.

Opponents' View#

  • One concern is that the bill could increase spending on energy-efficiency or electrification programs, although the bill does not provide a cost estimate.
  • It is unclear how the social cost of greenhouse gas emissions would affect the ranking and approval of specific programs.
  • The bill relies on the federal government’s calculation of that social cost. Changes to that calculation could affect future decisions.
  • The bill does not identify which electrification programs would qualify or how savings in non-electric energy costs would be measured.
  • A new proceeding and agreement could take administrative time and may lead to changes in utility plans or customer costs.
  • The bill does not guarantee that households will see lower total energy costs. Actual results would depend on the programs approved and their implementation.