Solar Cities Data Analysis Report1

ENERGY FLAGSHIP
www.csiro.au
Solar Cities Data

Analysis Report
Authors: Saad Sayeef, Samuel West, Stephen Lindsay, Brad Sparkes, Kate Cavanagh
10 July 2013
Department of Industry
Director of Solar Cities Program – Mr. Malcolm Thorp
This page left intentionally blank.
Solar Cities Data
Analysis Report
Saad Sayeef, Samuel West, Stephen Lindsay, Brad Sparkes, Kate Cavanagh
10 July 2013
Department of Industry
Director of Solar Cities Program – Mr. Malcolm Thorp
Preface
This Solar Cities Data Analysis Report has been prepared by the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation
(CSIRO) in collaboration with the Australian Government Department of Industry (the Department). The report contains the
final analysis of data collected by each of the seven Solar Cities (the Cities) throughout the course of their programs.
Qualitative information about the Cities’ programs was obtained from documents made available from the Department
directly, and from reports authored by the Cities. This information was used to provide background and context to the
following analytical results.
The analysis presented in this document was conducted using a combination of the Solar Cities database provided to CSIRO
by the Department on 30 November 2012, and supplementary data provided by the Solar Cities directly to CSIRO between
December 2012 and March 2013.0
The report has been produced to give stakeholders the opportunity to gain a joint understanding of the effectiveness of the
various interventions performed by the Cities in residential premises. It is intended that the findings will inform future policy
and the planning and execution of similar programs.
A final copy of the data used for analysis will be made available to interested parties. This report will also provide
information on its use and limitations.
Copyright and Disclaimer
© 2013 CSIRO To the extent permitted by law, all rights are reserved and no part of this publication covered by copyright
may be reproduced or copied in any form or by any means except with the written permission of CSIRO.
Important Disclaimer
CSIRO advises that the information contained in this publication comprises general statements based on scientific research.
The reader is advised and needs to be aware that such information may be incomplete or unable to be used in any specific
situation. No reliance or actions must therefore be made on that information without seeking prior expert professional,
scientific and technical advice. To the extent permitted by law, CSIRO (including its employees and consultants) excludes all
liability to any person for any consequences, including but not limited to all losses, damages, costs, expenses and any other
compensation, arising directly or indirectly from using this publication (in part or in whole) and any information or material
contained in it.
2 Solar Cities Data Analysis Report

Acknowledgments
This work is supported by the CSIRO Energy Flagship. The authors would like to thank Malcolm Thorp, Lachlan Eddy and
Carmel McGinley from the Department of Industry for their support and contributions to the project.
The authors would like to acknowledge the Solar Cities consortia for providing the trial data and assisting in understanding
the implementation of their programs:
• Adelaide Solar City
• Alice Solar City
• Blacktown Solar City
• Central Victoria Solar City
• Moreland Solar City
• Perth Solar City
• Townsville Solar City.
3
Contents
Preface. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Acknowledgments. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Glossary of terms. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Executive summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Abbreviations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
1 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
1.1 Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
1.2 Solar Cities interventions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
1.3 Solar Cities data. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
1.4 CSIRO activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
1.5 Report outline. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
2 Solar Cities overview. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

2.1 Adelaide. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
2.2 Alice Springs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
2.3 Blacktown . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
2.4 Central Victoria. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
2.5 Moreland. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
2.6 Perth. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
2.7 Townsville. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
3 Intervention overview. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
3.1 Australian and state government initiatives. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
3.2 Home energy audits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
3.3 Solar hot water . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
3.4 Cost-reflective pricing. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
3.5 In-home display. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72
3.6 Photovoltaic installation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
3.7 Direct load control. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84
3.8 Retrofit. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
4 Data preparation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96
4.1 Creation of database for final analysis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96
4.2 Summary of actions required to finalise dataset. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96
4.3 Limitations of final dataset. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97
4.4 Confidence around data. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103
5 Data summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104

5.1 Statistical filtering. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104
5.2 Site count summaries. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104
5.3 Baselines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106

6 Data analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121
6.1 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121
6.2 Dataset preparation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121
6.3 Types of analysis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122
6.4 Intervention analysis results. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124
7 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 185
7.1 Key results. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 186
7.2 Future work. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 186
7.3 Program recommendations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 186
8 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 188
A. Appendix: Modelling methodology. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 190
A.1 Objectives of analysis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 190
A.2 Assumptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 190
B. Appendix: Blacktown critical peak pricing. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 207

B.1 Seasonal consumption – control vs. participant. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 207
B.2 Event day consumption – control vs. participant. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 209
5
Figures
Figure 1-1: The seven Solar Cities across Australia. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Figure 1-2: Solar Cities data collection overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Figure 3-1: Visual timelines of Solar Cities’ programs, trial deployment and government initiatives regarding the
home energy audit (HEA) intervention . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
solar hot water intervention. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
Figure 3-3: Visual timelines of Solar Cities’ programs and trial deployment regarding cost-reflective pricing
interventions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
Figure 3-4: Direct irradiance measurements for CSIRO Newcastle solar field . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
Figure 3-5: Blacktown photovoltaic (PV) generation (light blue) vs. consumption (dark blue). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
photovoltaic interventions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
Figure 3-7: Visual timelines of Solar Cities’ programs and trial deployment regarding the direct load control (DLC)
interventions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85
retrofit interventions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91
Figure 4-1: Alice Springs NEM12 density – selected sites. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100
Figure 4-2: Blacktown NEM12 density – selected sites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101
Figure 4-3: Central Victoria NEM12 density – selected sites. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101
Figure 4-4: Perth NEM12 density – selected sites. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102
Figure 4-5: Townsville NEM12 density – selected sites. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102
Figure 5-1: Average, minimum and maximum monthly air temperatures, averaged per calendar month. . . . . . . . . . 106
Figure 5-2: Average, minimum and maximum monthly air temperatures, per City. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107
Figure 5-3: Average daily electricity consumption per household for Australian states and territories (excluding
Tasmania). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108
Figure 5-4: Summer load profile by year and City. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109
Figure 5-5: Autumn load profile by year and City. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110
Figure 5-6: Winter load profile by year and City. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111
Figure 5-7: Spring load profile by year and City . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112
Figure 5-8: How to read the intervention and energy visualisation charts. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113
Figure 5-9: Adelaide Solar City data snapshot charts. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114
Figure 5-10: Alice Solar City data snapshot charts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115
Figure 5-11: Blacktown Solar City data snapshot charts. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116
Figure 5-12: Central Victoria Solar City data snapshot charts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117
Figure 5-13: Moreland Solar City data snapshot charts. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118
Figure 5-14: Perth Solar City data snapshot charts. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119
Figure 5-15: Townsville Solar City data snapshot charts. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120
Figure 6-1: Adelaide Solar City control site energy consumption (top) and site counts (bottom) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127
Figure 6-2: Alice Solar City control site energy consumption (top) and site counts (bottom). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128
Figure 6-3: Blacktown Solar City control site energy consumption (top) and site counts (bottom). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129
Figure 6-4: Central Victoria Solar City control site energy consumption (top) and site counts (bottom). . . . . . . . . . . . 130
Figure 6-5: Perth Solar City control site energy consumption (top) and site counts (bottom). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131
Figure 6-6: Townsville Solar City control site energy consumption (top) and site counts (bottom). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132

Figure 6-7: Whole intervention example Before–After Control–Impact (BACI) results chart. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133
Figure 6-8: Per-site example Before–After Control–Impact (BACI) results chart . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134
Figure 6-9: Adelaide home energy audit (HEA) short-term only Before–After Control–Impact (BACI) results . . . . . . . 137
Figure 6-10: Adelaide home energy audit (HEA) short vs. long-term Before–After Control–Impact (BACI) results . . . 138
Figure 6-11: Alice Solar City home energy audit (HEA) short-term only Before–After Control–Impact (BACI) results. 139
Figure 6-12: Alice Solar City home energy audit (HEA) short vs. long-term Before–After Control–Impact (BACI)
results. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 140
Figure 6-13: Blacktown home energy audit (HEA) short-term only Before–After Control–Impact (BACI) results. . . . . 141
Figure 6-14: Blacktown home energy audit (HEA) short vs. long-term Before–After Control–Impact (BACI) results. . 142
Figure 6-15: Central Victoria home energy audit (HEA) short-term only Before–After Control–Impact (BACI) results.143
Figure 6-16: Central Victoria home energy audit (HEA) short vs. long-term Before–After Control–Impact (BACI)
results. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144
Figure 6-17: Moreland home energy audit (HEA) before/after energy consumption. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145
Figure 6-18: Perth home energy audit (HEA) short-term only Before–After Control–Impact (BACI) results. . . . . . . . . 146
Figure 6-19: Perth home energy audit (HEA) short vs. long-term Before–After Control–Impact (BACI) results. . . . . . 147
Figure 6-20: Townsville home energy audit (HEA) short-term only Before–After Control–Impact (BACI) results. . . . . 148
Figure 6-21: Townsville home energy audit (HEA) short vs. long-term Before–After Control–Impact (BACI) results. . 149
Figure 6-22: Alice Springs solar hot water (SHW) short-term-only Before–After Control–Impact (BACI) results . . . . . 151
Figure 6-23: Alice Springs solar hot water (SHW) short vs. long-term Before–After Control–Impact (BACI) results. . . 152
Figure 6-24: Perth solar hot water (SHW) short-term-only Before–After Control–Impact (BACI) results . . . . . . . . . . . 153
Figure 6-25: Half-hourly generation and peak generation time versus photovoltaic (PV) panel orientation at each
Solar City . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155
Figure 6-26: Rated array capacity versus average daily generation at each Solar City. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 156
Figure 6-27: Alice Springs photovoltaic (PV) Before–After Control–Impact (BACI) charts. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158
Figure 6-28: Blacktown photovoltaic (PV) Before–After Control–Impact (BACI) charts. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 160
Figure 6-29: Central Victoria photovoltaic (PV) Before–After Control–Impact (BACI) charts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 162
Figure 6-30: Perth photovoltaic (PV) Before–After Control–Impact (BACI) charts. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 164
Figure 6-31: Townsville photovoltaic (PV) Before–After Control–Impact (BACI) chart. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 166
Figure 6-32: Alice Springs in-home display (IHD) Before–After Control–Impact (BACI) charts. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 169
Figure 6-33: Blacktown in-home display (IHD) Before–After Control–Impact (BACI) charts. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171
Figure 6-34: Perth in-home display (IHD) Before–After Control–Impact (BACI) charts. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 173
Figure 6-35: Townsville in-home display (IHD) Before–After Control–Impact (BACI) charts. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 175
Figure 6-36: Blacktown critical peak pricing spring consumption data – control vs participants. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 176
Figure 6-37: Blacktown critical peak pricing summer consumption data – control vs participants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 176
Figure 6-38: Blacktown critical peak pricing winter consumption data – control vs participants. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 177
Figure 6-39: Consumption change for different cost periods. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 178
Figure 6-40: Impact of critical peak pricing (CPP) on daily load profile. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 178
Figure 6-41: Blacktown direct load control profile – controls vs participants. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 179
Figure 6-42: Perth direct load control (DLC) participant consumption profile. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 180
Figure 6-43: Comparison of direct load control (DLC) event profiles with ‘Control’ days. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 180
Figure 6-44: Pre and post-time-of-use daily load profile – participants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 181
Figure 6-45: Pre and post-time-of-use daily load profile – controls . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 181
Figure 6-46: Blacktown insulation Before–After Control–Impact (BACI) charts. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 184
7
Tables
Table 1: Summary of results for Cities and interventions (excluding critical peak pricing and direct load control) . . . . 13
Table 2: Critical peak pricing (CPP) and direct load control (DLC) results. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Table 3: Residential trials conducted by the Solar Cities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Table 4: Responsibilities of Adelaide Solar City Consortium members. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Table 5: Interventions trialled by Adelaide Solar City. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
Table 6: Responsibilities of Alice Solar City Consortium members . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
Table 7: Residential interventions trialled by Alice Solar City . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
Table 8: Responsibilities of Blacktown Solar City Consortium members. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
Table 9: Interventions trialled by Blacktown Solar City . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
Table 10: Responsibilities of Central Victoria Solar City Consortium members. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
Table 11: Interventions trialled by Central Victoria Solar City. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
Table 12: Responsibilities of Moreland Solar City Consortium members. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
Table 13: Interventions trialled by Moreland Solar City. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
Table 14: Responsibilities of Perth Solar City Consortium members. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
Table 15: Interventions trialled by Perth Solar City. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
Table 16: Contributions of Townsville Solar City Consortium members. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
Table 17: Interventions trialled by Townsville Solar City . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
Table 18: Small-scale technology certificates (STCs) installation period and multipliers. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
Table 19: Overview of size and method of home energy audits conducted by each Solar City . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
Table 20: Summary of home energy audit trial conducted by Adelaide Solar City . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
Table 21: Summary of home energy audit trial conducted by Alice Solar City. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
Table 22: Price point trial of Blacktown Solar City’s home energy audit (HEA) program. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
Table 23: Summary of home energy audit trial conducted by Blacktown Solar City. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
Table 24: Summary of home energy audit trial conducted by Central Victoria Solar City. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
Table 25: Summary of home energy audit trial conducted by Moreland Solar City. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
Table 26: Summary of home energy audit trial conducted by Perth Solar City . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
Table 27: Summary of home energy audit trial conducted by Townsville Solar City. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
Table 28: Summary of solar hot water trial conducted by Adelaide Solar City. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
Table 29: Solar hot water systems offered under the Alice Solar City project . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
Table 30: Summary of solar hot water trial conducted by Alice Solar City. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
Table 31: Summary of solar hot water trial conducted by Blacktown Solar City . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
Table 32: Summary of solar hot water trial conducted by Central Victoria Solar City. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
Table 33: Summary of solar hot water trial conducted by Moreland Solar City. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
Table 34: Summary of solar hot water trial conducted by Perth Solar City . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
Table 35: Summary of solar hot water trial conducted by Townsville Solar City . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
Table 36: Time-of-use programs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
Table 37: Critical peak pricing programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
Table 38: Adelaide Solar City whole-year time-of-use tariff. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
Table 39: Adelaide Solar City seasonal time-of-use tariff. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
Table 40: Summary of Adelaide Solar City’s cost-reflective pricing trial. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66
Table 41: Alice Solar City cost-reflective tariff structure. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
Table 42: Summary of Alice Solar City’s cost-reflective tariff trial. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67

Table 43: Blacktown Solar City’s time-of-use tariff structure. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
Table 44: Summary of Blacktown Solar City’s time-of-use trial. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
Table 45: Perth Solar City’s time-of-use tariff structure. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
Table 46: Summary of Perth Solar City’s time-of-use trial . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
Table 47: Summary of Adelaide Solar City’s critical peak pricing trial. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
Table 48: Blacktown Solar City critical peak pricing events . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
Table 49: Summary of Blacktown Solar City’s critical peak pricing trial . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
Table 50: Summary of Townsville Solar City’s peak demand reduction trial. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72
Table 51: Summary of Alice Solar City’s 10:10/20:20 trial. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72
Table 52: Capabilities of in-home displays. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
Table 53: BP Solar photovoltaic offers. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78
Table 54: Summary of Adelaide Solar City’s residential solar photovoltaic trial. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79
Table 55: Alice Solar City photovoltaic systems. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
Table 56: Alice Solar City elevated buyback tariff details. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
Table 57: Summary of Alice Solar City’s residential solar photovoltaic trial. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
Table 58: Solar Home Offers by Blacktown Solar City. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
Table 59: Blacktown Solar City offers and programs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
Table 60: Summary of Blacktown Solar City’s residential solar photovoltaic trial . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
Table 61: Summary of Central Victoria Solar City’s residential solar photovoltaic trial. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
Table 62: Summary of Moreland Solar City’s residential solar photovoltaic trial. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
Table 63: Summary of Perth Solar City’s residential solar photovoltaic trial . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
Table 64: Summary of Townsville Solar City’s residential solar photovoltaic trial . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84
Table 65: Townsville control tariffs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84
Table 66: Summary of direct load control trials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86
Table 67: Summary of Blacktown Solar City’s residential direct load control trial. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
Table 68: Summary of Perth Solar City’s residential direct load control trial. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88
Table 69: Summary of Townsville Solar City’s residential direct load control trial. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
Table 70: Shading options for houses of different orientations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90
Table 71: Summary of retrofit trials. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92
Table 72: Summary of Adelaide Solar City’s ceiling insulation trial. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92
Table 73: Alice Solar City energy-efficiency measures and incentives. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93
Table 74: Summary of Alice Solar City insulation trial . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94
Table 75: Summary of Blacktown Solar City insulation trial. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94
Table 76: Summary of Central Victoria Solar City insulation trial . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95
Table 77: Summary of Moreland Solar City retrofit trial. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95
Table 78: Issues and actions taken for the Solar Cities data. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96
Table 79: Control group selection and data details. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97
Table 80: Residential site counts. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104
Table 81: Home energy audit site counts at each stage of data processing. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105
Table 82: Photovoltaic site counts at each stage of data processing. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105
Table 83: Solar hot water site counts at each stage of data processing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105
Table 84: Insulation site counts at each stage of data processing. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105
Table 85: In-home display site counts at each stage of data processing. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106
Table 86: Average daily household electricity consumption for each state, 2007–2011. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107
9
Table 87: Colour codes used in the intervention and energy visualisation charts. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113
Table 88: Energy consumed by air-conditioning systems and clothes dryers. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125
Table 89: Summary of Before–After Control–Impact (BACI) results for Cities and interventions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125
Table 90: Summary of home energy audit and photovoltaic modelling results. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126
Table 91: Summary of home energy audit results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 136
Table 92: Summary of solar hot water Before–After Control–Impact (BACI) results. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150
Table 93: Summary of photovoltaic Before–After Control–Impact (BACI) results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 154
Table 94: Summary of in-home display Before–After Control–Impact (BACI) results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167
Table 95: Summary of insulation Before–After Control–Impact (BACI) results. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 182
Table 96: Summary of results for Cities and interventions (excluding critical peak pricing and direct load control) . . 185
Table 97: Critical peak pricing (CPP) and direct load control (DLC) results. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 185
Table 98: Research questions future programs could consider. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 186

Glossary of terms
BACI (Before–After/Control–Impact): General approach for analysing the impact of an event. In the case of Solar Cities, it
describes the effect of an intervention on a participant’s electricity consumption behaviour.
Intervention: An activity that is intended to influence a participant’s electricity consumption behaviour.
Gross metering: Electricity generated at a site that is measured independently of electricity consumed.
NEM12: Data format for interchange of ‘interval’ (usually 30 minute) electricity consumption data.
NEM13: Data format for interchange of ‘accumulation’ (usually 60–100 days) electricity consumption data.
Net metering: Electricity consumed at a site combined with electricity generated into a single measurement.
Trial: The rollout of a particular intervention to a group of participants, conducted by each of the Solar Cities.
11
Executive summary
This report presents CSIRO’s analysis of the various residential trials conducted in the Federal Government’s Solar Cities program.
The Solar Cities Program was launched by the Prime Minister in June 2004. The seven-year program aimed to showcase
sustainable energy models that could assist communities across Australia, including households and businesses. The
program sought to:
• recommend ways of using energy more wisely
• test the benefits of a range of energy demand reduction and solar supply options
• examine barriers to the uptake of these services, and look at how such barriers could be overcome.
Since 2007, the Solar Cities consortia conducted trials of business models and energy solutions in seven locations: Adelaide,
Alice Springs, Blacktown, Central Victoria, Moreland, Perth and Townsville. Consortia members included energy retailers,
generators, distributors, government and not-for-profit organisations.
In June 2012, the Department of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency, now the Department of Industry (the Department),
engaged CSIRO to analyse the effectiveness of various energy efficiency initiatives. This analysis was based on data collected
during the Solar Cities program; the results of this are presented in this report.
Trials conducted for the Solar Cities programs included:

• assessing home energy use
• installing low-emissions technologies, such as solar photovoltaic (PV) and solar hot water units
• providing smart meters and in-home displays
• trialling direct load control of residential loads
• cost-reflective pricing options, including critical peak pricing and time-of-use tariffs to establish appropriate price signals
and reward energy efficiency
• retrofitting homes with insulation, energy-efficient appliances and products
• tailoring financing packages to encourage solar power generation
• providing tips and information on how to reduce energy bills.
The Solar Cities Program included the development of a database to collect relevant information during the trials. The data
collected during the program included household demographics, types of domestic appliances, characteristics of rooftop PV
systems, household energy and details of the interventions. The Solar Cities also monitored and evaluated other qualitative
and quantitative variables.
Findings
The aim of this report was to evaluate the impact of the Solar Cities’ trials on residential electricity consumption. To
investigate both short and long-term effects of the interventions conducted by the Cities, CSIRO analysed data from 90 and
365 days before and after the trial dates. There were limitations in the data provided to CSIRO for the analysis, for example,
poor matching of controls and a lack of sufficient pre-intervention energy data. As a result, caution should be exercised in
considering the reported results as being supportive (or not) of the effect of the conducted trials on participant behaviour.
As a result, CSIRO does not make any claim of statistical significance unless it is explicitly mentioned in the result. The data
and findings in this report should be interpreted as an observation of the behaviour of the participants over the life of the
trial, and not necessarily an account of a causal relationship between interventions and changes in participant behaviour.
Table 1 shows the average change in consumption for each City, for each trial, and the number of participant sites used to
calculate that average. The reported change is in kilowatt-hours (kWh) per day, with a negative value indicating a reduction
in household consumption and a positive value indicating an increase. Results were only included if adequate data was
available to conduct the analysis.

Table 1: Summary of results for Cities and interventions (excluding critical peak pricing and direct load control)
HEA SHW IHD PV INSULATION
CHANGE HEA CHANGE SHW CHANGE IHD CHANGE PV CHANGE INSULATION
DAYS (KWH/D) SITES (KWH/D) SITES (KWH/D) SITES (KWH/D) SITES (KWH/D) SITES
Adelaide 90 –0.9 147 – – – – – – – –

365 –0.2 114 – – – – – – – –
Alice 90 –1.9 813 –1.7 301 –3.8 313 +1.0 167 – –
Springs 365 +0.2 572 –1.6 213 –0.8 279 +1.7 144 – –
Blacktown 90 +0.9 1364 – – +4.1 368 –1.1 428 –1.6 119
365 –0.4 548 – – –0.4 321 –1.0 422 –3.0 128
Central 90 –0.1 1233 – – – – –3.3 225 – –
Victoria 365 –0.7 225 – – – – – – – –
Perth 90 –0.4 1393 –0.7 240 +0.2 211 – – – –
365 – – – – – – – – – –
Townsville 90 –1.9 556 – – –3.1 235 – – – –
365 –5.4 553 – – –1.8 202 – – – –
Note: HEA= home energy assessments; SHW= solar hot water units; IHD= in-home display; PV= photovoltaic, ‘+’= increase in daily household consumption, ‘–‘=
reduction in daily household consumption
Table 2 shows the results for trials in which the emphasis was on shifting demand, rather than reducing consumption. The
figure given is the percentage reduction in consumption during the critical peak pricing or direct load control event.
Table 2: Critical peak pricing (CPP) and direct load control (DLC) results
CPP CHANGE (%) DLC CHANGE (%)
Blacktown –40 –
Perth – –26
Throughout the course of CSIRO’s engagement with the Department, results were released by the Solar Cities themselves
concerning the progress and success of the various trials conducted. Differences in the results presented in this report to
those presented by the Cities themselves are most likely due to differences in the data used to conduct the analysis, the
approaches to filtering the data, and the statistical methods employed.
Recommendations
CSIRO acknowledges the difficulty in running trials of this scale with strict methodological rigour, and that the scope of the
Solar Cities program extended beyond the aspects discussed in this report. Our primary recommendation to better enable
assessment of interventions is to apply a more structured and rigorous approach to the design, conduct and data collection
of trials in future programs. This will allow a more detailed and thorough analysis, which in turn will allow the Department
to further capitalise on the efforts of the Program when producing policy recommendations.
13
Abbreviations
BACI Before–After Control–Impact
CFL compact fluorescent light bulb
CPP critical peak pricing
CRT cost-reflective tariff
CSIRO Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation
DLC direct load control
DRED demand response enabling device
GST Goods and services tax
HEA home energy audit
HEC home eco-consultation
IHD in-home display
kW kilowatt
kWh kilowatt-hour
LED light-emitting diode
LGA local government authority
MW megawatt
MWh megawatt-hour
NEM National Electricity Market
NSW New South Wales
PV Photovoltaic
PWC Power & Water Corporation
REC Renewable Energy Certificate
SA South Australia
SHW solar hot water
SMS short message service
STC Small-scale Technology Certificate

1 Introduction
1.1 Background
The Australian Solar Cities program was launched by the Prime Minister in June 2004. It aimed to showcase sustainable
energy models that assist whole communities, including consumers and businesses, in different locations across Australia,
and recommend ways to use energy more wisely. The program was designed to test the uptake barriers to, and the benefits
of, a range of energy demand reduction and solar supply options using a variety of business models and suppliers for their
delivery [1].
Solar Cities program objectives

The main aim of the Department of Industry’s (the Department’s) Solar Cities program was to trial different strategies to
increase the uptake of solar and energy-efficiency measures and technologies. The Solar Cities program has two objectives
[1], which are to:
• demonstrate the economic and environmental impacts of integrating cost-reflective pricing with the concentrated
uptake of solar, energy-efficiency and smart-metering technologies
• identify and implement options for addressing barriers to distributed solar generation, energy efficiency and electricity
demand management for grid-connected urban areas.
The program also aimed to strengthen the government’s ability to [1]:

• fast track research and Australian innovation
• advise households on how best to respond to potential energy price rises
• assist householders and businesses to generate additional cost savings through behaviour change
• establish the market conditions that will deliver new and cost-effective sustainable energy options.
1.1.1 Australia’s energy challenge: satisfying demand and peak load

In the past two decades, electricity demand has more than doubled [2]. Electricity generation is the single largest source
of greenhouse gas emissions in Australia, across all sectors [3]. Based on current energy usage trends, Australia’s energy
needs are forecast to grow, with the Australian Energy Resource Assessment [4] estimating that total energy production
will increase annually by 3.2 per cent to 2029/30. Along with a growing population, the increasing penetration of air-
conditioning systems and electrical appliances in homes and businesses is a key driver of this trend. Over the past decade,
electricity demand has become increasingly volatile, with growth in peak loads far outstripping average demand. In South
Australia, for example, the summer peak load (2600 MW) is almost double the average demand (1500 MW)[5]. This increase
in the demand and peak loads in Australia is one of the contributing factors to the rise in electricity prices and costs.
The Solar City projects provided an opportunity to evaluate methods of slowing, if not reversing, this growth trajectory in
specific locations, by encouraging the:
• uptake of distributed solar technologies
• adoption of energy-efficiency and load-management measures
• introduction of cost-reflective pricing to motivate consumers to better manage and value their electricity use.
Since 2007, the Department, working with competitively selected Solar Cities, has been trialling various business models and
energy solutions, the outcomes of which may be used to inform public policy. Energy efficiency and solar generation initiatives
were trialled in Adelaide, Alice Springs, Blacktown, Central Victoria, Moreland, Perth and Townsville (see Figure 1-1), with
consortia members including energy retailers, generators, distributors, government and not-for-profit organisations.
The seven Solar Cities have diverse cultural, climatic and lifestyle characteristics. This would suggest that the successful
elements of each of the trials will have the potential for replication around Australia.
15
NT
QLD
WA
SA
NSW
VIC
Figure 1-1: The seven Solar Cities across Australia
1.2 Solar Cities interventions

Over the duration of the Solar Cities program, the Cities have been conducting a variety of energy initiatives across both
residential and commercial sectors, including:
• home energy assessments/audits
• installing low-emissions technologies, such as solar photovoltaic (PV) and solar hot water units
• providing smart meters and in-home displays
• offering cost-reflective pricing to establish appropriate price signals and reward energy efficiency
• tailoring financing packages to encourage solar power generation
• providing tips and information on how to reduce energy bills.
A summary of the interventions trialled by each of the Solar Cities are listed in Table 3. The Solar Cities Program finished in
June 2013.
Table 3: Residential trials conducted by the Solar Cities

CENTRAL
ACTIVITY ADELAIDE ALICE SPRINGS BLACKTOWN VICTORIA MORELAND PERTH TOWNSVILLE
Home energy audits       

Photovoltaic       
Solar hot water       
Insulation    –  – –
Retrofit –  –   – –
Cost-reflective pricing
Direct load control – –  – –  
Time-of-use tariffs    – –  –
Critical peak pricing  –  – – – –
In-home displays       

Trials were conducted in residential and commercial buildings. Some Cities also commissioned large-scale ‘iconic’ renewable
energy installations, aiming to demonstrate the utilisation of the technologies and their benefits as sustainable alternative
energy sources. A brief description of these iconic installations is presented in Section 2. Analysis of data from commercial
sites and iconic installations is not covered in this report.
1.3 Solar Cities data

A central feature of the Solar Cities program is a database that holds the information collected by the seven Solar Cities
during the trials. The data include household demographics, types of domestic appliances, the characteristics of rooftop PV
systems, household energy, and details of the interventions that took place. An overview of the data collection process for
the Solar Cities program is shown in Figure 1-2 [1].
Data is collected
using various
methods
Energy audits Energy usage data
Surveys and trials from smart meters
Each Solar City stores its data in its

own database
Cities upload data to the Solar

Solar Cities’ Cities Data Warehouse
databases
Solar Cities Data Warehouse
Figure 1-2: Solar Cities data collection overview
1.4 CSIRO activities

In June 2012, the Department engaged CSIRO to:
• conduct analysis into the effectiveness of various energy-efficiency initiatives using data provided by the Department
• transform the dataset into a fit-for-purpose database suitable for further research and analysis.
• The CSIRO task focused on residential trials only. Limited discussion of iconic projects and commercial participant
interventions undertaken by the Solar Cities are included in Section 2.
The activities involved in conducting the data analysis for the Solar Cities project included:
• assessing the Solar Cities data provided by the Department and the Cities for its suitability for robust statistical analysis
• where possible, obtaining and incorporating additional data critical for conducting comprehensive analysis
• analysing Solar Cities trial data for households
• reporting on the results of the analysis of Solar Cities trial data provided by the Department and the Cities.
17
As part of these activities, to gain in-depth understanding of the Solar Cities Program and the data collected, CSIRO:
• conducted background research into the Solar Cities Program and the participating Cities
• attended a full-day forum with data managers from each City
• attended the 2012 annual review presentations for each of the Solar Cities (except Blacktown)
• with the Department, conducted a small survey that asked each of the Cities to evaluate participant and control sign-up
processes, data collection procedures and other factors that may influence the quantitative analysis
• communicated directly with the Cities themselves.
This report presents the analysis of the data provided by the Department and the Solar Cities, which contained
approximately 40,000 Solar Cities trial sites and an additional 40,000 control sites. The data provided details of the various
trials conducted, including lists of participants, trial dates, details of control groups, as well as crucial electricity consumption
data, which is required for any in-depth analysis.
1.5 Report outline

An outline and brief overview of each of the participating Solar Cities’ programs, including a summary of the program and its
participants, and the interventions conducted, is presented in Section 2 of this report.
Section 3 provides a description of the major interventions trialled in the Solar Cities project. It includes an overview of
each intervention as deployed by each City, and covers details such as method of deployment, number of participating
households, and start/end dates for each intervention.
Section 4 describes the process undertaken to prepare the data for analysis. It details how the data delivered to CSIRO by the
Department was assessed for its suitability for analysis, and how issues identified with the data were rectified. The section
concludes by outlining the limitations of the dataset and the impacts that this has on the subsequent analysis results.
Section 5 provides a summary of the data used for analysis and details how it was derived. It describes how filtering was
applied to the final dataset to eliminate abnormalities in the data that could potentially affect analysis results. It also
provides details of site (household) counts for the various interventions for each City. Lastly, the section provides a baseline
of basic weather and household energy consumption profiles for the seven Solar Cities.
One of the project’s key objectives was to quantify the change in residential energy consumption that resulted from the
various Solar Cities Program interventions. Section 6 provides details of the different types of analysis conducted, including
methodology and limitations, to determine the change in residential energy consumption as a result of the trialled
interventions. The corresponding analysis results for each intervention, City by City, are also presented in this section.
Section 7 provides an overview of the results and recommendations for future programs.

2 Solar Cities overview
This section outlines each of the Solar Cities’ programs, including a brief overview of the participants and the interventions.
A more detailed description of the interventions can be found in Section 3. The quantitative results from the detailed data
analysis are discussed in Section 6.
2.1 Adelaide
2.1.1 Overview
The Adelaide Solar City program was launched in October 2007. The Australian Government provided $15 million1 towards
the project and the consortium members provided an additional $43.3 million in cash and in-kind contributions.
Adelaide Solar City’s engagement objectives aimed to demonstrate the economic and environmental benefits, at both
personal and community levels, of adopting more sustainable energy offerings and changing the way energy is used.
To support the overall objectives of the Australian Government’s Solar Cities Program, the objectives of the Adelaide Solar
City Consortium [6] were to:
• demonstrate the economic and environmental benefits of implementing sustainable energy products and smart meter
technologies
• obtain comprehensive data on the impact of the products and technologies on consumer behaviour
• understand the barriers to take up of sustainable energy products in the residential and commercial sectors
• maintain ongoing consumer engagement with the program
• test new sustainable energy products that can be replicated on a national scale.
The Adelaide Solar City Consortium was led by Origin Energy, with members including BP Solar, Big Switch Projects,
ANZ Banking Group, Delfin Lend Lease, and Adelaide, Salisbury, Tea Tree Gully and Playford Councils. The activities of the
consortium members can be seen in Table 4.
Table 4: Responsibilities of Adelaide Solar City Consortium members

CONSORTIUM MEMBER RESPONSIBILITIES/ACTIVITIES
Origin Consortium lead

Demand management trial: cost-reflective pricing, in-home display, smart meter technology,
communications platform, energy use web portal
Iconic solar photovoltaic (PV) installations
Residential solar PV trial
Solar hot water and heat pump trial
Low income/new arrivals energy audits
Energy-efficiency packs
Greenpower
BP Solar Iconic solar PV installations
Commercial solar PV trial
Residential solar PV trial
Public housing solar PV trial
Big Switch Projects Business energy efficiency program
Home Energy Audit program
Ceiling insulation trial
ANZ Banking Group Financing of solar energy packages
Delfin Lend Lease Facilitation of solar PV sales at new housing estates
Adelaide, Salisbury, Tea Tree Iconic solar PV installations
Gully and Playford Councils Community engagement
1 Funding figure provided by the Department of Industry
19
The Adelaide Solar City program included a market trial of commercial and residential solar photovoltaic (PV) systems,
cost-reflective pricing, smart meter technology, energy-efficiency products, low-income energy assistance programs and
community engagement initiatives. Trials were conducted within an area of about 130,000 households from four council
areas in northern Adelaide, including Salisbury, Tea Tree Gully, Playford and Adelaide.
2.1.2 Interventions
Various interventions were trialled to meet the objectives of the Adelaide Solar City program. A list of these interventions,
along with the corresponding number of trial sites, approximate completion status (as at the end of August 2012) and the
period of the roll-out, is shown in Table 5.
Table 5: Interventions trialled by Adelaide Solar City

NUMBER OF
SITES THAT
NUMBER NUMBER OF SITES PARTICIPATED BUT NUMBER OF SITES
INTERVENTION OF TARGET SIGNED UP TO DID NOT COMPLETE THAT COMPLETED
NAME SITES INTERVENTION INTERVENTION INTERVENTION START OF ROLL-OUT END OF ROLL-OUT
Home energy 879 879 0 879 Dec 2007 Jun 2010

audit
Photovoltaic 940 500 0 500 Dec 2007 Jun 2012
Solar hot water 170 7a 0 7b Jul 2011 May 2013
Critical peak 1,775 1,725 663 1,062c Apr 2008 May 2011
pricing
Time-of-use 725 186 70 116d Apr 2008 May 2011
tariff
In-home display 550 506 199 307e Mar 2009 Jun 2012
Web portal 3,246 2,633 0 2,633 Apr 2008 Jun 2012
Insulation 101 101 0 101 Jan 2008 Jun 2009
Home energy 450 211 0 211 Oct 2011 Jun 2013
assistance
program
Notes:
a
Housing SA sites where data is not available
b
As at Feb 2013, four solar hot water systems were still to be installed with Housing SA
c
Critical peak pricing participants as at 18 Feb 2013
d
Time-of-use participants as at 18 Feb 2013
e
Active in-home displays as at 18 Feb 2013
2.1.3 City intervention overview
2.1.3.1 Home energy audit

Each 90-minute home energy audit (HEA) in Adelaide Solar City was conducted by three assessors. Compact fluorescent
light bulbs (CFLs) and AAA-rated showerheads were installed during the audit for those residents who wanted the devices
and where the devices were able to be installed. In total, 879 HEAs were conducted. Detailed energy audit reports, including
recommendations on how to save energy and reduce household energy costs, were provided to trial participants.
2.1.3.2 Photovoltaic
The residential solar PV offer was promoted primarily through print media and direct mail marketing campaigns. The solar
PV offer was separate from the provision of HEAs. Several solar PV packages, each with different offerings, were made
available to households. In total, 500 solar PV systems have been installed on residential rooftops as part of the Adelaide
Solar City project.
2.1.3.3 Retrofit
The Adelaide Solar City program offered a ceiling insulation package. Big Switch Projects conducted the ceiling insulation
trial in the Adelaide Solar City project.

The ceiling insulation offer was promoted primarily through advertising in local newspapers, council channels and
community events. The ceiling insulation package included a discount on the costs of installing insulation. This offer was
completed in June 2009, with a total of 101 participants.
2.1.3.4 Solar hot water

Participants were primarily recruited through a web-based marketing campaign. Adelaide Solar City reported that the
high upfront cost of solar hot water (SHW) systems was identified as a significant barrier for purchase in the absence of
government subsidies. Because of low uptake, active campaign activities ceased in April 2012.
2.1.3.5 Time-of-use tariff

Two different time-of-use tariffs were trialled as part of the Adelaide Solar City program. Both were known as the ‘Smart
Time of Use’ plans with peak and off-peak tariffs. One of these plans had a peak tariff that applied only during the summer
months, from 1 January till 31 March, and another peak tariff that applied for the rest of the year. The second plan had
a peak tariff that applied during the whole year. Rates were lowest during off-peak periods (from 9.00 pm to 7.00 am on
weekdays and the whole weekend). Higher rates were charged for electricity consumption between 7.00 am and 9.00 pm on
weekdays. Details of the tariffs in these plans can be seen in Section 3.4.3.1. At the end of the trial in May 2011 [7], a total of
357 households had participated in the time-of-use pricing trials.
2.1.3.6 Critical peak pricing

Two different critical peak pricing (CPP) plans were offered to trial participants under the ‘Dynamic Saver’ pricing plans.
Participants were notified of CPP events 24 hours beforehand via telephone calls, short message service (SMS), e-mail and/
or in-home displays. A maximum of ten CPP events were allowed to be called between 1 December and 31 March each
year. It was expected that these events would occur when the temperature was 30 °C or higher; however, some events were
called at lower temperatures to test participants’ responses.
Peak pricing events were limited to:

• occur only between 2.00 pm and 8.00 pm on weekdays (excluding public holidays) and to
• not run for more than two consecutive days.
Nine critical peak events were called in the 2011/2012 summer period. Three or four CPP events were also called between
1 December and 31 March in each of the three previous years.
In total, 1600 participants took part in Adelaide Solar City’s CPP trial (as at the end of the trial in May 2011) [7].
2.1.3.7 In-home display/web portal access

Participants in the CPP, solar PV and SHW trials were able to view their half-hourly energy usage, greenhouse gas emissions
and solar generation (for those with a solar PV system) data via a web portal. Data was available for viewing on the web
portal 18 hours after collection.
In addition, 500 participants in the CPP and solar PV trials received an in-home display providing them with real-time energy
use information. Sites where a satellite meter had been installed were also able to view solar generation data.
2.1.3.8 Home Energy Assistance Program

The currently ongoing Home Energy Assistance Program targets 450 households on low incomes – in particular, new
arrivals to Australia – with free help to manage their electricity bills. The initiative includes an in-home assessment to
help participants understand their energy consumption and power bills, and identify opportunities for using less energy.
Participants also receive energy saving devices to use in the home.
About 211 participants have taken part in the program, as at February 2013.
21
2.1.4 Control groups
Adelaide Solar City has a control group of 266 households located within its four participating council areas. The control
group was recruited through an outbound telemarketing campaign, direct mail and local press advertising. Incentives of
between $100 and $200 were provided to these participants, who were required to be existing Origin Energy customers. Smart
meters were installed at all participant sites. The control group participants were likely to be aware of the Solar Cities Program.
2.1.5 Iconic Projects

Adelaide Solar City, in partnership with private businesses, local government and the Australian Government, carried out
seven solar PV projects to showcase the benefits of generating renewable energy with solar energy technologies. Four of
these are described briefly below.
• Adelaide Central Bus Station Solar Project

–– A 50-kilowatt (kW) solar PV system was installed by BP Solar at the Adelaide Central Bus Station in March 2008.
–– Adelaide Solar City reported that the system generates enough solar energy to power Adelaide City Council’s ‘Tindo’ bus.
• Rundle Lantern Solar Project
–– A 50-kW solar PV system was installed by BP Solar on the rooftop of the U-Park building, in partnership with the
Adelaide City Council.
–– The installation contains 288 panels, which generate the energy needed to power the public art display.
• Adelaide Central Market
–– BP Solar, in partnership with Adelaide City Council, installed 288 panels on the market’s rooftop to contribute to
powering lighting, air conditioning and other appliances used throughout the market.
• Adelaide Railway Station
–– A 21.6-kW solar PV system was installed at the railway station to help meet its energy demand.
–– A display screen located in the concourse area of the station allows members of the public to see how much solar
electricity has been generated at any given time.
2.1.6 Commercial trials

Adelaide Solar City consortium member Big Switch Projects developed an energy-efficiency program to engage with the
business community. The Business Energy Efficiency Program provided an audit of business premises aimed at identifying
energy-efficiency opportunities. The program also provided assistance to building owners/major tenants to implement these
opportunities. Nineteen of these programs were undertaken, including with Adelaide Town Hall.
2.2 Alice Springs
2.2.1 Overview
Alice Solar City is a $37-million project launched in March 2008. The Australian Government provided $12.3 million towards
the Alice Solar City project: $4 million from the Solar Cities program funds2 and $8.3 million from the Renewable Remote
Power Generation Program funds.
The project was designed to explore how solar power, energy-efficient technologies and new approaches to electricity supply
and pricing could encourage residents of Alice Springs to become energy efficient and develop a sustainable energy future.
The goal of the Alice Solar City [8] was to bring about behaviour change among Alice Springs businesses, community groups
and residents to:
• shift power generation from non-renewable sources to solar
• reduce CO2 emissions from power generation
• shift electricity loads from peak to off-peak times.
The Alice Solar City Consortium is led by Alice Springs Town Council and supported by the Northern Territory Government,
Power and Water Corporation (PWC), the Arid Lands Environmental Centre, Tangentyere Council and the Northern Territory
Chamber of Commerce and Industry. The activities of the consortium members can be seen in Table 6.

Table 6: Responsibilities of Alice Solar City Consortium members
Alice Springs Town Council Residential photovoltaic (PV) trial

Solar hot water
Smart metering
Community engagement
Residential energy efficiency
Business PV trial
Business energy efficiency
Iconic solar PV installation
Northern Territory government Public sector energy efficiency
Power and Water Corporation Residential PV trial
Solar hot water
Smart metering
Iconic solar PV installation
Tangentyere Council Residential energy efficiency
The mean maximum temperature for Alice Springs is generally high for most of the year [8], while its diurnal range is
also high, and winter overnight temperatures are low. Annual temperature profiles for Alice Springs can be found in
Section 5.3.1. This may increase the need for air conditioning and heating, and lead to potentially higher rates of appliance
ownership and household energy usage than in the other Solar Cities.
The residential component of the Alice Solar City project primarily focused on the following three areas:
• uptake of solar technologies, i.e. SHW and rooftop solar PV panels
• implementation of household energy efficiency measures
• load reduction and time of use management through cost-reflective pricing.
Alice Springs’ electricity network is a local ‘minigrid’ that is not connected to the national electricity market. The electricity
in Alice Springs is provided by PWC.
2.2.2 Interventions
Various interventions were trialled to meet the objectives of the Alice Solar City program. A list of these interventions, along
with the corresponding number of trial sites and the period of the roll-out, is shown in Table 7.
Table 7: Residential interventions trialled by Alice Solar City

NUMBER OF SITES THAT
NUMBER OF SITES PARTICIPATED BUT NUMBER OF SITES
NUMBER OF SIGNED UP TO DID NOT COMPLETE THAT COMPLETED START OF END OF
INTERVENTION NAME TARGET SITES a INTERVENTIONa INTERVENTIONa INTERVENTION a ROLL-OUT ROLL-OUT a
Home energy audit a 2,250 2,610 145 2,465 Mar 2008 Jun 2013
Photovoltaic 277 b 300 23 277 Apr 2008 Jul 2010
(530 kWp) (532.5 kWp)
Solar hot water a 900 1,273 450 823 Apr 2008 Dec 2012
Time-of-use tariff 350 479 d
101 380 Oct 2008 May 2011
In-home display 350 380 44e 336 Jan 2010 May 2011
10:10/20:20 a,c 450 463 – 463 Mar 2008 Mar 2013
Notes:
a
Data as of 31 August 2012. A number of interventions were ongoing past 31 August 2012.
b
Number of target sites relates to reaching the target peak kW installed PV (kWp), because three different-capacity systems available
c
No vouchers issued initially – only recorded as voucher when successful claim made
d
Recommended at audit after discussion with customer
e
Some originally on time-of-use tariff may have terminated as customers moved out or left town, moved to PV incentive or did not want the in-home display
23

A mandatory HEA was required for any household signing on as a participant in the Alice Solar City program. The single
assessor, 90-minute audit involved a walk through the participant’s household to evaluate energy usage and potential ways
to reduce energy consumption.
To understand the household’s energy usage, the assessor looked at the physical aspects of the house and asked questions
about appliance use and lifestyle. The household’s historical energy consumption for up to 18 months prior to sign-up
(obtained from PWC) was summarised and discussed at the audit. A personalised energy-saving report was printed on the
spot for the residents’ reference.
Alice Solar City also posted an incentive voucher for each ‘high priority’ energy-efficiency measure recommended as part
of the audit. The incentive voucher was valued at 35 per cent of the GST-inclusive capital cost, up to a maximum incentive
amount for each measure. The incentive’s cap was determined based on the perceived average market price. The exception
was the solar PV system incentive, which was set at 50 per cent of the package cost.
Solar PV trial participants were recruited through an expression of interest process before Alice Solar City was launched,
along with post-launch advertising and media coverage. Solar PV systems were also recommended as part of the HEAs
where appropriate. Solar PV trial participants were also recruited through other forms of advertising and media coverage. A
total of 277 residential rooftop solar PV systems were installed with funding support from the Alice Solar City program. All
Alice Solar City funded solar PV participants had a smart meter installed, moved onto a time-of-use tariff and received an
elevated buy-back rate for PV-generated electricity.

Participants for the SHW trial were recruited through the HEA process. Other customers were able to contact the Alice Solar
City office at a later date and request a voucher to purchase a SHW unit. The Alice Solar City SHW system vouchers offered a
35 per cent incentive, up to $2000, towards the cost of installing a 300-litre, two-panel SHW system with electric boost, or
up to $2100 off the cost of installing a SHW with gas boost. Other rebate amounts applied to other system sizes and types.
Vouchers for discounts of 35 per cent, up to a maximum of $1000, were also offered towards the cost of installing a heat
pump hot water system (from late 2010).

A cost-reflective pricing trial was conducted as part of the Alice Solar City project. Details of the residential cost-reflective
tariffs (CRTs) in Alice Springs can be seen in Section 3.4.3.2. An online calculator was developed to help residents assess their
level of benefit from the CRTs. Most of the CRT trial participants were recruited through discussions with the assessor during
home energy assessments.
2.2.3.5 10:10/20:20 incentive

The 10:10/20:20 incentive was introduced to reward residents who reduced their energy use with discounts on electricity
bills. If a household reduced its electricity consumption by 10 per cent or more compared with the consumption for the
same billing period of the previous year, Alice Solar City credited their next bill by 10 per cent, i.e. a 10 per cent discount on
their electricity bill. Similarly, if the electricity consumption of the household reduced by 20 per cent or more, a 20 per cent
credit was applied. The customer was required to initiate this incentive by presenting a bill for assessment, with the
intention of encouraging customers to better understand and interpret their electricity bills.
2.2.3.6 In-home display

Householders participating in Alice Solar City’s cost-reflective pricing trial received an in-home display (IHD). PWC deployed
the IHD units after the installation of smart meters. Customers with Alice Solar City’s subsidised PV systems also received
IHDs, which were installed by the same contractor who installed the PV system. The IHDs communicate with smart meters
and display a graph of current power consumption, CO2 emissions and historical consumption data.

2.2.3.7 Retrofit
Financial incentives were offered to households of Alice Solar City to undertake a range of energy efficiency measures.
A personalised HEA report, which was provided to households following a home energy assessment, included
recommendations for the implementation of various energy efficiency measures, some of which were incentivised
and some behavioural. If one or more incentivised measures were agreed and recommended at the energy audit, the
household received an energy efficiency voucher. The voucher provided either a capped or 35 per cent discount towards
the implementation of the energy efficiency measures. This included incentives of 35 per cent of the cost, up to a maximum
value of $750, for standard bulk insulation (batts), and up to $1,500 for the installation of loose fibre/foam insulation.

Alice Solar City had two control groups: formal and informal.
The formal control group of 166 participants had smart meters installed to provide an indication of peak/off-peak
distribution for households operating ‘normally’, i.e. with minimal Alice Solar City interventions. Recruitment did not
start until 18 months after the program commenced. About 60 of the control group households were recruited through
advertising, and the remainder through soliciting Alice Solar City customers who had not participated further after initial
registration. Therefore, a mixed group of people were aware of the Alice Solar City program, because they were briefed
specifically on the purpose and expectations of the control group. The formal control group was a ‘baseline’ for peak/off‑peak
distribution, because no other source for such information was available in Alice Springs.
The informal control group consisted of all non-Alice Solar City customers (number unknown), for whom PWC supplied Alice
Solar City with de-identified quarterly electricity consumption data. One problem with these control group participants was
the difficulty in readily differentiating between residential and commercial sites.
2.2.5 Iconic Projects

Alice Solar City supported and encouraged the development of several ‘iconic’ projects in and around Alice Springs, aiming
to make Alice Springs a national and international showcase for sustainable living and the use of renewable energy. The
iconic projects of Alice Solar City showcase large-scale renewable technologies, and include solar PV concentrator and solar
thermal technologies. A selection of these projects is described below.
• Crowne Plaza Hotel PV installation

–– The hotel installed more than 1,300 solar PV modules as part of the 305-kilowatt (kW) PV system.
–– This installation was the first iconic project completed under the Alice Solar City project and was commissioned in early 2009.
• Alice Springs Airport
–– Twenty-eight concentrating PV tracking arrays were constructed on land to the north west of the Alice Springs Airport,
feeding electricity into the Alice Springs Airport.
–– Alice Solar City expects that this project, which officially opened on 4 November 2010, will meet approximately
28 per cent of the airport’s electricity needs.
• Uterne Solar Power Station
–– A one megawatt (MW) solar power station was built in Alice Springs. It was developed in partnership between
SunPower Corporation and PWC, and was officially launched on 28 July 2011.
–– The plant consists of 3,048 SunPower mono-crystalline panels across 254 tracking arrays.
• Alice Springs Aquatic and Leisure Centre
–– 275 Helicol solar panels were installed on the roof of the aquatic and leisure centre to heat four of its pools.
–– Alice Solar City believes that this installation will meet, on average, 40 per cent of the heating requirement for the
indoor pools.
25
Alice Solar City provided an advisory service to help the commercial sector in Alice Springs be more energy efficient, and
reduce costs and greenhouse gas emissions. Alice Solar City offered incentives on a range of energy efficiency measures,
which were broken down into two tiers: small and large businesses.
For small businesses, the Commercial Energy Survey (or management consultation) focused on identifying energy efficiency
opportunities for business premises. A range of standard energy efficiency incentives were then recommended and
discussed with the business owner. These included installing insulation, upgrading lighting, shading or tinting windows,
improving air conditioning and refrigeration systems, and installing SHW systems. An Alice Solar City rebate offer was issued
for the recommended measures for up to 35 per cent of costs, with a total incentive cap of $10,000 per customer. The
customer then arranged for installation of the recommended measures (using Alice Solar City registered suppliers, or other
suitable local businesses, where practical). The customer was then required to complete a rebate claim form and present
this, along with a copy of the supplier’s invoice, to Alice Solar City to claim the incentive payment.
A large business was defined as one that consumed more than 160 MWh of energy per annum at their main premises.
For these organisations, the Commercial Energy Survey focused on identifying the organisation’s major areas of energy
consumption, and looking at energy management and reporting practices. The organisations were then encouraged, where
appropriate, to engage a professional energy auditor to conduct a detailed energy audit. This type of audit incorporated
expert knowledge of larger-scale plant equipment, and provided an analysis of the cost and payback period of identified
energy efficiency opportunities. A list of Registered Energy Auditors was maintained by Alice Solar City, and an incentive of
50 per cent of the cost of engaging one of these auditors, up to a cap of $8,500, was provided.
Businesses were given the option to move to a cost-reflective pricing structure, which involved having their electricity
meters replaced with a Smart Meter, and moving to a peak and off-peak pricing structure.
All participating commercial customers were also eligible to apply for a subsidy of up to 50 per cent of the cost of a
‘grid‑connected’ PV power system to be installed on their premises. Alice Solar City provided a free 30-minute ‘solar check‑up’
at their premises, which involved an on-site inspection to identify the potential for solar power for the organisation.
As at December 2012, 226 businesses had registered for the Alice Solar City commercial program.
2.3 Blacktown
2.3.1 Overview
The Blacktown Solar City program is a $37-million3 project, with $14.9 million4 provided by the Australian Government. It
was launched in July 2007.
The goal of the Blacktown Solar City project was to give residents and businesses within the Blacktown local government
area (LGA) the resources they need to use energy more wisely, and to reduce energy consumption and associated emissions.
To support the overall objectives of the Australian Government’s Solar Cities program, the objectives of the Blacktown Solar
City program, as provided by Blacktown Solar City, were to:
• demonstrate the environmental and economic effects of combining cost-reflective pricing with the widespread use of
solar technology, energy efficiency and smart meters
• find out what barriers exist to the use of energy efficiency, electricity demand management and solar technology among
businesses and householders, and test ways to deal with these barriers.
The Blacktown Solar City consortium was led by BP Solar, with members including Endeavour Energy (formerly known as
Integral Energy), Blacktown City Council, ANZ Banking Group Big Switch Projects and Landcom Development Corporation. A
breakdown of the responsibilities for each consortium member is shown in Table 8 following.
3 Information was provided by the Department of Industry


Table 8: Responsibilities of Blacktown Solar City Consortium members
BP Solar Consortium lead

Commercial photovoltaics
Residential retrofit
Department of Housing retrofit
Residential new-build
Residential refinance
Discount voucher booklet
Endeavour Energy Residential energy consultation
Energy efficiency packs
Standby power reporting
Air-conditioning cycling
Pool pump control
Time-of-use pricing trial
Critical peak pricing trial
Blacktown City Council Promote sustainable living to the community
Energy efficiency packs
Big Switch Projects Residential insulation retrofit
Landcom Residential new-build – solar home packages to new homes
ANZ Bank Residential refinance
Blacktown City is an LGA comprising 47 suburbs in western Sydney. As at 30 June 2011, it had an estimated population of
313,000. Any resident or business in the local LGA was able to participate in the Blacktown Solar City program.
2.3.2 Interventions
Various interventions were trialled to meet the objectives of the Blacktown Solar City program. A list of these interventions,
along with the corresponding number of trial sites and the period of the roll-out, is shown in Table 9. The table also contains
details from a program, separate from Blacktown Solar City, called the Western Sydney Pricing Trial.
Table 9: Interventions trialled by Blacktown Solar City
NO. OF SITES THAT

PARTICIPATED
NO. OF BUT DID NOT NO. OF SITES
TARGET NO. OF SITES SIGNED COMPLETE THAT COMPLETED START OF END OF
INTERVENTION NAME SITES UP TO INTERVENTION INTERVENTION INTERVENTION ROLL-OUT ROLL-OUT
Home Energy Audit

WSPT 5,000 5,953 0 5,953 Jun 2004 May 2006
BSC (EE) 2,500 2,574 0 2,574 May 2006 Jul 2009
Big Switch Project 139 0 139 Aug 2007 Aug 2009
BP Solar 567 0 567 May 2007 Apr 2011
Insulation 200 139 0 139 Aug 2007 Aug 2009
Photovoltaic – 1,249 0 510 May 2007 May 2011
Solar hot water – 82 0 82 Jan 2009 Oct 2009
Direct load control 1,400

Air conditioning – 1,487 76 519 Oct 2007 Jan 2009
Pool pump 835 15 615 Oct 2007 Dec 2008
27
NO. OF SITES THAT
PARTICIPATED
NO. OF BUT DID NOT NO. OF SITES
TARGET NO. OF SITES SIGNED COMPLETE THAT COMPLETED START OF END OF
INTERVENTION NAME SITES UP TO INTERVENTION INTERVENTION INTERVENTION ROLL-OUT ROLL-OUT
Time-of-use tariff
WSPT 400 312 67 215 Aug 2006 Jan 2008
BSC 400 413 46 259 Oct 2008 Oct 2008
Critical peak pricing

WSPT 800 768 231 448 Aug 2006 Aug 2008
BSC (Light) 400 252 45 133 Dec 2007 Aug 2008
BSC (Medium) 400 350 83 170 Oct 2007 Jan 2009
In-home display
BSC 400 431 0 431 Oct 2007 Jan 2009
WSPT 400 336 0 336 Aug 2006 Mar 2007
BP Solar (PV) 301 37 264 Oct 2010 May 2012
Note: BSC = Blacktown Solar City; EE = energy efficiency; PV = photovoltaic; WSPT=Western Sydney Pricing Trial

More than 3,500 residential energy efficiency consultations were undertaken as part of the Blacktown Solar City project,
providing participant households with an energy assessment and installation of energy-efficient light bulbs. Four hundred
and fifty HEAs were offered at a variety of prices in the first quarter of 2009 for the price point trial of HEAs.
Participants for the HEA trial were recruited via several methods, including door knocking, cold telephone calls, brochure
mail-out and follow-up calls, and promotions at events such as the Blacktown Festival.
HEAs were not performed directly by any of the consortium members: the job was contracted out to external parties. Each
HEA took between 60 and 90 minutes.
A range of solar PV and SHW packages were offered to residents under a ‘Solar Home Offer’ product range as part of the
Blacktown Solar City project. The offers comprised solar PV systems from 1–1.65 kW, with a range of financing options, and
were targeted at various types of participants, including residents who were building new homes in The Ponds development
in north-western Sydney.
Participants for the PV trial were recruited using several methods, including mail offers sent to customers in the localities of
the project, through the project website, various project events, phone calls, and via Blacktown City Council staff.
2.3.3.3 Retrofit
The Blacktown Solar City project trialled a ceiling insulation offer, which was conducted by Big Switch Projects. One
hundred and thirty-nine households participated in the discounted ceiling insulation offer. Intensive monitoring of energy
and temperature data for the same household before and after installation of insulation was planned for 50 selected
households.

Eighty-two households installed a SHW system as part of the Blacktown Solar City program. The SHW offer was promoted
and advertised together with the solar PV offers, using the same marketing channels and eligibility requirements. ANZ
provided finance options for the purchase of solar PV and SHW systems in the Blacktown Solar City project. Under
Blacktown Solar City’s Department of Housing Retrofit program, SHW systems were installed to replace electric hot water
systems to reduce the energy bills of tenants in Department of Housing premises.

2.3.3.5 Direct load control
The direct load control (DLC) trial gave energy providers direct access to air conditioner and pool pump switches to control
energy consumption during periods of peak electricity demand. Only air-conditioning units that were under seven years old
were used for the trial. Participants were notified of DLC events at least the day before via SMS, e-mail or IHDs. Participating
air-conditioning units were turned off for 20 minutes every hour during times of peak demand, resulting in a duty cycle
of 33 per cent for the hours between 1:00 pm and 8:00 pm. Indirect load control was implemented with pool pumps by
reprogramming the timers to turn on at certain times of the day.
Participants for the DLC trial were recruited via HEAs, direct mail-outs, telemarketing, shopping centre advertising and
door‑to-door knocking.

Blacktown conducted a seasonal time-of-use trial for the Solar Cities project. One of the aims of this trial was to provide
participants with a better reflection of the true cost of electricity by the introduction of differentiated tariffs.
Participants for the time-of-use pricing trial were recruited via HEAs, direct mail-outs, telemarketing and door knocking.
Details of the tariff structure used by the Blacktown Solar City project can be found in Section 3.4.3.3.

Participants for Blacktown Solar City’s CPP trial (also known as the dynamic peak pricing trial) were notified of a CPP event the day
before, if the forecast temperature was either below 10 °C or above 35 °C. These correspond to high-demand days. The higher
forecast temperature of 35 °C was later dropped to 30 °C. Notification of CPP events was by SMS, e-mail or IHD (if participants
had one) and participants could choose their preferred method. No more than seven CPP events were called each year.
Participants for the CPP trial were recruited via HEAs, direct mail-outs, telemarketing and door knocking.

BP Solar provided IHDs, which were installed and paired on-site by a technician. The IHDs were part of the solar PV offers.
All participants of the PV trial received an IHD, which was included in the total price. The PV installers programmed and
demonstrated the operation of the IHD to each customer.

Blacktown Solar City had two control groups: formal and informal. The formal control group was made up of participants
within the Blacktown Solar City and Western Sydney Pricing Trial who did not undertake any interventions, and the sites
within this group have a wider geographical spread than the informal control group. Demographic data were obtained from
the formal control group households.
The informal control group consisted of households from non-participant sites. De-identified utility data were obtained by
Blacktown Solar City from these sites, all of which are within five kilometres of each other. No demographic data (except
postcode information) were collected from the informal control group households.
2.3.5 Iconic projects

The trials undertaken by Blacktown Solar City relating to commercial PV trials included commercial sites that were classified
as iconic sites. These included:
• 28.8 kW of solar electricity installed at Mount Druitt Community Hub
• 50 kW of solar electricity installed at the Blacktown Council Depot
• 50 kW of solar electricity installed at Veolia Environmental Services
• 100 kW of solar electricity installed at Cadbury Schweppes
• 110 kW of solar electricity installed at Coca Cola Amatil.
29
BP Solar, in conjunction with the Blacktown Solar City Consortium members, provided a range of PV and energy efficiency
packages to the commercial organisations within the Blacktown LGA under Blacktown Solar City’s Commercial PV and
Business Energy Efficiency elements.
Solar PV systems totalling 338.8 kW were installed at five commercial locations throughout Blacktown, listed as iconic projects.
One of the main focuses of Big Switch Projects was to identify and deliver projects that improved the financial and
environmental performance of large commercial buildings and tenancies. The Blacktown Solar City Business Energy
Efficiency Program, launched in February 2008, used a combination of marketing and direct sales to engage with 23
businesses on energy efficiency and carbon reduction opportunities. This program provided support to businesses in
identifying energy efficiency opportunities, followed by an action plan for implementation and, in the last year of the
scheme, the offer of project facilitation.
2.4 Central Victoria
2.4.1 Overview
The Central Victoria Solar City project commenced in early 2009 and was funded by the Australian Government’s Solar Cities
program ($15 million5), the Victorian state government’s Sustainability Victoria and Sustainability Fund ($3.5 million), and
the Central Victoria Solar City Consortium ($23.7 million of cash and in-kind support) [9].
Key research areas that the Central Victoria Solar City program aims to understand and address include:
• the influence of technological, behavioural, social and economic factors on energy consumption
• the influence these factors have on household adoption of solar energy technologies
• the influence of demographic, geographic and attitudinal characteristics on the use of Central Victoria Solar City
packages and energy demand
• determination of the combination of measures that will provide the most cost-effective and lowest CO2-emitting energy
consumption.
The Central Victoria Solar City trial was led by Sustainable Regional Australia and supported by a consortium of industry
and community organisations including Origin, Powercor, Bendigo Bank, the Central Victorian Greenhouse Alliance and
Sustainable Regional Australia. A breakdown of the responsibilities for each consortium member is shown in Table 10.
Table 10: Responsibilities of Central Victoria Solar City Consortium members

Sustainable Regional Australia Program management

Manage day-to-day delivery of the Central Victoria Solar City project
Home energy assessments
Powercor Installation of smart meters for residential participants
Provision of smart meters for control group participants
Strategic guidance and input into the delivery of each of Central Victoria Solar City’s
offers, in particular solar photovoltaic (PV) and the provision of in-home displays
Bendigo and Adelaide Bank Intellectual property and access to financial products
Origin Provide 1.5 kW solar PV systems to the residential market
Lead the design and construction of two solar parks in Bendigo and Ballarat
Operational support and strategic guidance
Central Victorian Greenhouse Alliance Initiated the Central Victoria Solar City project
Support Central Victoria Solar City by providing input from member Councils and strategic
guidance

The region in which the Central Victoria Solar City project operated accounts for nine per cent of Victoria’s population,
and covers 14 municipalities. The intervention and control group households were recruited from 14 LGAs. The Australian
Bureau of Statistics estimates the Central Victoria region contains 140,073 occupied households.
The residential trial of the Central Victoria Solar City program was conducted over 2010 and 2011 and includes 2,750
intervention households. The Central Victoria Solar City consortium engaged the University of Ballarat to provide an
independent evaluation of the residential trial for their annual reports.
2.4.2 Interventions
Various interventions were trialled to meet the objectives of the Central Victoria Solar City program. The most common
interventions undertaken by the research participants were HEAs, household solar PV installation, IHD installation and the
retrofit rebate package. A smaller proportion of research participants installed a SHW system as part of the program. A list
of these interventions, along with the corresponding number of trial sites, approximate completion status (as at the end of
August 2012) and the period of the roll-out is shown in Table 11.
Table 11: Interventions trialled by Central Victoria Solar City

INTERVENTION NAME NUMBER OF TRIAL SITES COMPLETION STATUS (%) START OF ROLL-OUT END OF ROLL-OUT
Home energy audit 2,750 100 Aug 2010 Dec 2011

Photovoltaic 521 100 Aug 2010 Dec 2011
Solar hot water 65 100 Aug 2010 Dec 2011
In-home display 524 100 Aug 2011 Aug 2012
Retrofitting 351 100 Aug 2010 Dec 2011

In 2011 Sustainable Regional Australia employed a team of home energy assessors across the region. Central Victoria Solar
City’s Home Energy Assessment Team included an assessor for 11 of the 14 municipalities. Assessors from neighbouring
shires provided assessments to some of the more remote communities in the region, including those within the Loddon,
Buloke and Pyrenees Shires. The team delivered free-of-charge HEAs to 2,750 households in less than 12 months.
The primary goal of the HEAs offered to households was to inform the participants about how to reduce their energy use
through changes in behaviour and household infrastructure.
The 90-minute, single assessor HEA involved a combination of kitchen-table conversations, energy bill analysis, household
walk-throughs, and consideration of one or more energy efficiency and renewable energy product and service packages.
During the HEA, assessors provided each participant with recommendations designed to reduce their household energy
consumption. The recommendations were customised for each participant depending on their household characteristics. In
addition to no-cost strategies, HEA recommendations ranged from relatively simple and inexpensive actions (e.g. changing
light bulbs) to actions likely to incur high levels of expenditure (e.g. double-glazing of windows). At the end of the 90 minutes,
customers signed the participation agreement and together with the assessor answered the final research booklet questions.
Households that formally committed to the program were offered the opportunity to join the program’s other energy-saving
interventions: retrofit rebate, SHW, solar PV or IHDs. The HEA provided an avenue to up-sell and cross-sell the interventions
offered under the program.
2.4.3.2 Retrofit
Participants who chose to join the retrofit rebate package were able to select from a range of treatments and had up to six
months to install applicable energy-saving products. Participants spending more than $2,000 on retrofit items were eligible
to claim $500 cash back as part of the program, as well as a $250 performance bonus at the end of the trial. Participants
were required to complete all relevant surveys to receive the performance bonus at the end of the trial, regardless of
whether their energy consumption reduced.
31
A total of 351 households participated in the retrofit rebate package. These households undertook 656 actions based on
recommendations received from their Home Energy Assessor. Actions included installing and/or replacing appliances,
curtains and pelmets, external shading, heating and cooling equipment, double-glazing of windows and insulation.
HEA participants were offered the opportunity to purchase a 1.5 kW solar PV system from Origin. The offer included
10 per cent off Origin’s retail price, waiving the Powercor service truck visit fee and any additional inverter inspection
project fees, and a $250 performance bonus at the end of the trial. Participants were required to complete all relevant
surveys to receive the performance bonus at the end of the trial. Five hundred and twenty-one participants signed up to the
project’s solar PV offer.
Changes in the prices of household solar PV systems during the trial were reflective of changes in government subsidies. The
‘5 times’ Renewable Energy Certificate (REC) multiplier for 1.5 kW systems was introduced by the Victorian Government to
expedite the take-up of residential PV systems. By increasing the subsidy offered through RECs, the average price of 1.5 kW
systems fell from around $5,000 in 2010 to approximately $2,700 in 2011 [9]. When the REC multiplier was reduced in 2011,
system prices were affected.

Central Victoria Solar City supported 65 households in purchasing a SHW system of their choice. The trial required
households to seek out a suitable unit and arrange installation. As part of the project’s SHW offer, participants were offered
$500 cash back for purchasing and installing a SHW system of their choice, made up of $250 bonus from the project office
on receipt of purchase and installation receipts, and a $250 performance bonus at the end of the trial. Participants were
required to complete all relevant surveys to receive the performance bonus at the end of the trial.
The original offer, presenting a choice of three Origin SHW products, was revised as part of the Central Victoria Solar City
program in 2010. Central Victoria Solar City decided to open up the supply and installation of the SHW product to all
providers across the region, to allow for timely post-installation follow-up. The other reason for the change was that some
participants wanted to purchase evacuated solar tube systems, which were unavailable through Origin. As a result of the
re‑designed offers, participants were able to choose their own systems.

IHD units were deployed by Central Victoria Solar City to trial demand management solutions. The objectives of Central
Victoria Solar City’s IHD trial were to:
• test the customer response to the IHD as a single method of providing participants with access to near real-time
electricity consumption information
• understand customer response via impact on electricity consumption
• identify how different IHD settings may impact upon household electricity usage
• test IHD technology and its impact on residential electricity usage.
Participants were offered IHDs as part of their HEA. This product became available during the second half of the HEA offer
and was recommended if customers met pre-qualifications.
The IHD trial targeted 800 households and was to be concentrated in the Ballarat, Bendigo and Newstead areas. Out of the
target group, 524 households indicated a commitment to the IHD trial. The roll out of IHDs commenced in August 2011
and as at the end of August 2012, 524 units had been installed. A fraction of all the IHDs installed were paired with the
installation of solar PV systems.

Control group participants for the Central Victoria Solar City program were recruited by the University of Ballarat over the
first three quarters of 2010, using a short environmental values telephone survey with randomly selected households in the
Central Victoria region. During the recruitment process, 4,954 households completed the first survey, with 2,894 agreeing
to receive further information about joining the Central Victoria Solar City evaluation’s control group. After the information
packages were distributed, a quarter of recipients elected to join the project, resulting in a control group of 717 households.
Participants were therefore aware that they were taking part in the program as a member of the control group.
As part of the follow-up surveys, specific questions were asked about participants’ awareness of program elements and
perceived influence on energy consumption, to measure contamination. Early findings reported by the Central Victoria Solar
City indicate that this exposure has generally been limited to communication with Central Victoria Solar City as part of their
involvement as a control group participant. Control group households received a sign-on bonus of $300 for completing the
relevant surveys. A further incentive of $250 for fulfilling survey requirements throughout the program was also offered and
proved to be a useful inducement for attracting control group participants.

Two 300-kW solar parks in Bendigo and Ballarat were designed by Central Victoria Solar City to test the business model and
technology needed to support the facilitation of community ownership of small-scale solar power stations. The electricity
generated by the two solar parks has been sold to Origin under a power purchase agreement that offers Sustainable
Regional Australia a fixed price for every kilowatt hour of generated electricity. The solar parks were developed as research
sites with the aim of educating the community about the benefits of generating energy from renewable sources and to trial
the technology used at both parks. Sustainable Regional Australia and the Central Victoria Solar City consortium intend to
transfer the asset to the community at the end of the trial. The Bendigo solar park uses a lead-acid battery storage system to
store excess generated energy.

Central Victoria Solar City’s small-to-medium enterprise trial aimed to identify the most effective approach to help
businesses reduce their energy use. As part of the trial, Central Victoria Solar City offered business energy assessments to
small businesses priced from $275 until the end of 2012.
The assessments included a 90-minute on-site visit from a Central Victoria Solar City business energy assessor, analysis of 12
months’ worth of electricity and gas consumption, and observations on the efficiency of the building envelope, appliances,
lighting, heating, cooling and ventilation systems. Observations were then documented in an assessment workbook, which
illustrated the cost/benefit of implementing changes recommended by the assessor. The workbook also included a simple action
plan. Central Victoria Solar City expects a total of 270 business energy assessments will be completed by the end of the trial.
2.5 Moreland
2.5.1 Overview
The Moreland Solar City project was launched in June 2008. The Australian Government provided $4.9 million6 towards the
project. Consortium members contributed additional funding of $10.2 million (cash and in-kind).
The Moreland Solar Cities project focussed on using community engagement to help local homes, businesses and council become
more sustainable through a range of greenhouse gas emission reduction activities at both individual and collective level.
The Moreland Solar City project was led by Moreland Energy Foundation Limited in partnership with the Moreland City
Council, Sustainable Victoria and the Brotherhood of St Laurence, along with a range of other community groups. A
breakdown of the responsibilities for each consortium member is shown in Table 12.
6 Funding figure obtained from the Department of Industry
33
Table 12: Responsibilities of Moreland Solar City Consortium members
Moreland Energy Foundation Limited Program management

Residential energy efficiency
Urban development
Co-generation
Brotherhood of St Laurence Residential energy efficiency
Moreland City Council Urban development
Co-generation
Moreland Solar City is based in the City of Moreland, in the inner northern suburbs of Melbourne, Australia. Its four key
project streams are described briefly below.
• Zero Carbon Moreland

–– Moreland Energy Foundation Limited aimed to help 5,000 households, 500 businesses and 50 community
organisations in Moreland to reduce carbon emissions, contributing to Moreland City Council’s aim of achieving zero
net community carbon emissions by 2020.
• Warm Home Cool Home (also known as Concession Assist)
–– Moreland Energy Foundation Limited, in partnership with the Brotherhood of St Laurence, set up a community
enterprise to deliver energy-efficiency services, including 1,000 energy efficiency audits and retrofits for low-income
households.
• The Coburg Initiative
–– This aimed to assist in the redevelopment of central Coburg. Projects included integrating sustainable urban design
and distributed power generation.
• Moreland Energy Services
–– developed a Carbon Management Strategy and an offsets policy
–– established a revolving energy fund to reinvest energy savings into council and community projects to achieve council’s
goal of zero net corporate emissions by 2012.
2.5.2 Interventions
Various interventions were trialled to meet the objectives of the Moreland Solar City program. A list of these interventions,
along with the corresponding number of trial sites, approximate completion status (as at the end of August 2012) and the
period of the roll-out is shown in Table 13.
Table 13: Interventions trialled by Moreland Solar City

INTERVENTION NAME NUMBER OF TRIAL SITES COMPLETION STATUS (%) START OF ROLL-OUT END OF ROLL-OUT
Home energy audit 1,500 100 Jun 2009 Jun 2012

Photovoltaic 72 100 May 2011 May 2012
Insulation 9 100 Oct 2009 Jun 2010
Solar hot water 119 100 May 2011 May 2012
In-home display 199 – Mar 2012 Nov 2012
Draught sealing 134 100 Jul 2010 Jul 2011
Window coverings 60 100 May 2011 May 2011


Participants for Moreland Solar City’s HEA trial were recruited through general advertising and targeted promotions. General
advertising sources were local newspapers, SBS Radio, community radio and on-tram advertising. Targeted promotions
included council mail-outs and community organisation referrals (e.g. Merri Community Health Service).
Two-person, 90-minute audits were carried out in person for participants of the low-income program (Warm Home Cool
Home/Concession Assist). An additional 500 self-audits were undertaken for the Zero Carbon Moreland general household
program. Measures applied during the HEAs included sealing draughts, replacing light bulbs and shower heads, and
installing pedestal fans and power boards.
Participants for the PV trial were recruited through mainstream media channels, council publications and via existing
participants of Zero Carbon Moreland. The trial was delivered in the style of a community bulk buy. Residents purchased
systems from a recommended supplier who underwent rigorous technical and customer service checks by Moreland Energy
Foundation Limited. Due to strong sales figures, the supplier was able to offer discount to residents however no additional
financial assistance was provided. The photovoltaic rollout was designed to take advantage of the RECs and feed-in-tariffs.
The fluctuations and eventual closure of these support structures impacted heavily on the take-up of photovoltaic systems
by residents.
2.5.3.3 Retrofit
Participants for the retrofit trial were recruited using the same methods as those for the HEA participants.
Retrofits were implemented during the HEA visits. The HEA included the assessor speaking to the householder about
retrofitting options and behavioural actions and retrofitting the home with agreed products (with the householder’s
permission). Products retrofitted to homes included portable fans, replacement light bulbs and shower heads, ceiling
insulation top ups, external blinds and standby power controllers. Concession Assist provided these retrofits at no cost to
Moreland Solar City low-income households.

Participants for the solar hot water trial were recruited through mainstream media channels, council publications and
via existing participants of Zero Carbon Moreland. The trial was delivered in the style of a community bulk buy. Residents
purchased systems from a recommended supplier who underwent rigorous technical and customer service checks by
Moreland Energy Foundation Limited.

IHDs were part of the targeted program for ‘The Nicholson’ residential apartment development, integrated with the
implementation of an embedded network. It is understood that IHDs were not deployed, but a web portal was developed
and implemented, through which residents could access their energy consumption information.

Moreland Solar City did not have a control group.

As part of the Moreland Solar City initiative, a 7.2 kW (40 panels x 0.18 kW) solar PV system was installed on Moreland City
Council’s Coburg Civic Centre. Moreland Solar City carried out an energy makeover of the Fawkner Leisure Centre, which is
a facility providing swimming, childcare and community health services to residents in the northern suburbs of Moreland.
A 75-kW cogeneration plant and associated infrastructure was also installed at the site. The energy makeover also included
pool hall air handling improvements, pool covers, insulation, draught sealing, pool hall skylights, solar hot water, lighting
retrofits and optimisation of building controls.
35
A range of different recruitment and service delivery models were trialled under the Zero Carbon Moreland Business
program. Two hundred and forty participants were recruited, made up of 169 businesses and 71 community organisations.
Community organisations were very keen to participate, but recruiting businesses proved to be a challenge. Moreland Solar
City delivered more than 110 opportunity assessments (sustainability audits with action plans) and recommended more
than 500 actions to small and medium enterprises across Moreland.
2.6 Perth
2.6.1 Overview
The Perth Solar City program was launched in November 2009, with funding of $13.9 million7 from the Australian
Government’s Solar Cities program and a further $33.3 million of cash and in-kind contributions from the Perth Solar City
Consortium [10].
To support the overall objectives of the Australian Government’s Solar Cities program, Perth Solar City [10] aimed to:
• identify and understand barriers to the uptake of energy efficiency and renewable energy in the residential sector of
Perth’s Eastern Region
• test new energy efficiency technologies and undertake trials
• inform future government policy
• bring together industry, business, government and the community to change the way that energy is produced, used
and saved.
The Perth Solar City program is led by Western Power and supported by the Botanic Gardens & Parks Authority, the Eastern
Metropolitan Regional Council, Mojarra, Prospero Productions, Solahart, SunPower and Synergy. A breakdown of the
responsibilities for each consortium member is shown in Table 14.
Table 14: Responsibilities of Perth Solar City Consortium members

Western Power Program management

Smart grid trial
Air-conditioner trial
Photovoltaic (PV) saturation trial
School energy competition – ‘Bring it Down’
Botanic Gardens & Parks Authority Kings Park Education Building installations (one of five Perth Solar City’s iconic installations)
Eastern Metropolitan Regional Behaviour change via the Department of Transport’s Living Smart program
Council Demonstration projects at 15 local government authority sites
Sustainable Communities Competition
Mojarra Home Eco-Consultations (Home Energy audits/assessments)
Prospero Productions School-based ‘Eco Superstar’ documentary
Solahart Residential solar hot water systems
SunPower Residential solar PV systems
Iconic PV installations at the Central Institute of Technology, Midland Foundry and Perth Zoo
Synergy In-home displays
Recruitment of participants for:
• air conditioner trial
• time-of-use tariff trial
Iconic PV installation at Perth Arena
Activities associated with the Perth Solar City program were undertaken in Perth’s eastern region. This region stretches from
the edge of the Perth central business district, along the Swan River, to the Swan Valley, and up to the Perth Hills. There

are approximately 300,000 residents from diverse cultural backgrounds in this region. The Eastern Metropolitan Regional
Council’s six member Councils include the Town of Bassendean, City of Bayswater, City of Belmont, Shire of Kalamunda,
Shire of Mundaring and City of Swan.
2.6.2 Interventions
Various interventions were trialled to meet the objectives of the Perth Solar City program. A list of these, along with the
corresponding number of trial sites (as at the time the report was written) and the period of the roll-out is shown in Table 15.
Table 15: Interventions trialled by Perth Solar City

INTERVENTION NAME TARGET SITES INTERVENTION INTERVENTION INTERVENTION ROLL-OUT ROLL-OUT
Home energy audit 3500 3517 0 3517 Dec 2009 Jun 2012
Photovoltaic 825 673 0 673 Nov 2009 Oct 2012
Solar hot water 1200 1157 0 1157 Jan 2010 Oct 2012
Direct load control 375 380 0 380 Jan 2011 Mar 2012
Time-of-use tariff 1000 746 121a 625 Sep 2010 Sep 2012
(PowerShift) (still on tariff)
In-home display 2200 2251 1016 (unpaired) 1235 (paired) Feb 2011 Jun 2012
Living Smart 6000 6342 1507b 4835 May 2010 May 2011
(eco-coaching)
a
For PowerShift, the 121 households that have opted out to date are likely to have done so for various reasons, including moving out.
These participants are still considered ‘full’ participants under the trial.
b
Represents sites that ordered information from Living Smart, but did not continue into eco-coaching.

The HEA trial of the Perth Solar City program is known as Home Eco-Consultation (HEC). The HEC was designed to help
participants understand their energy consumption by providing them with information about what contributed to their
household energy usage.
Perth Solar City program’s HEC was delivered free to households, with the aim of helping participants to [10]:
• benchmark their energy and water consumption based on the National Australian Building Environmental Rating Scheme
• understand which appliances in their home are the most energy-efficient
• understand how the residents’ usage of these appliances affects their energy usage
• use the findings to determine the best value-for-money behavioural and structural changes that could be implemented
to reduce energy consumption, save money and decrease greenhouse gas emissions.
Perth Solar City program’s HEC consisted of:

• two assessors present for each consultation/audit
• a 90-minute consultation
• reports consolidating the findings of the HEC mailed to participants within three weeks of the consultation being
completed.
The HEC was also used as an opportunity to educate participants about the broader Solar Cities program, including
participation in other products, services and technical trials.
Mojarra, a Perth Solar City Consortium member, was responsible for the administration and delivery of the HEC to eligible
households in Perth’s eastern region. Mojarra’s referrals came from the program call centre, the Living Smart program,
collaboration with other Consortium members and through Mojarra’s own recruitment campaigns. The majority of the
referrals for the HEC, a total of 2,088, came from the Living Smart program (discussed in Section ‎2.6.3.7). Mojarra also
recruited participants through telemarketing, by sending an introductory letter to a potential participant and following up
with a phone call to solicit participation.
37
Perth Solar City provided a minimum $1,260 discount on SunPower residential solar PV systems to households in Perth’s
eastern region. The discount was made available through selected SunPower dealers in the region, and is in addition to
other rebates such as RECs and the Western Australian residential net feed-in tariff.
SunPower dealers received Perth Solar City referrals from the Living Smart program, through enquiries to the Perth Solar
City call centre, and directly from the public. SunPower’s primary objective was to install a total of 825 residential solar PV
system systems at a minimum size of 1.05 kW per system.
Perth Solar City observed a sharp decline in the sales of solar PV systems after 1 July 2011. This correlated with the
reduction in RECs, as well as the end of the residential net feed-in tariff.

A $1,100 discount (including GST) on family-sized Solahart SHW systems was provided by the Perth Solar City program and
Solahart to residents in Perth’s eastern region. The Perth Solar City discount was available through selected Solahart dealers
in the region and covered both gas and electrically boosted SHW systems. The discount was provided in addition to other
state and Australian Government rebates.
Solahart dealers received Perth Solar City referrals from the Living Smart program, enquiries through the Perth Solar City
call centre, and directly from the public. Solahart’s main objective was to use the Perth Solar City discount to sell and install
1,200 family-sized SHW systems in households in the Perth Solar City target area [10].

Perth Solar City trialled DLC of domestic air conditioners over the summer seasons of 2010/2011 and 2011/2012. The trial
aimed to research the technical feasibility and cost-effectiveness of DLC as a demand-side management tool for reducing
electricity consumption at times of peak demand.
Perth Solar City’s DLC trial used custom-designed demand response enabling devices (DREDs) installed in the air
conditioners of participants. Demand response signals were initiated by Western Power and sent to smart meters in trial
participants’ households. The DREDs received these signals from the smart meters via the home-area network, which
allowed the operation of the air conditioner’s compressors to be controlled.
Synergy, the only electricity retailer in the Western Australian South-West Interconnected System residential sector (for
electricity users below 50 MWh/annum), was responsible for engaging and recruiting participants for the air conditioner
trial. The air conditioner trial was offered to all households which had previously received a smart meter. The financial
incentive offered to each trial participant was a $100 electricity bill credit for the first year and a $200 electricity bill credit
for the second year.
The key objectives of the air conditioner trial were [10] to:
• test and prove the operation of the end-to-end DLC technology
• measure the demand reduction achieved through the use of DLC
• determine the potential of using DLC to defer costly network investment
• understand overall participant response as well as the most effective means of engaging and recruiting participants for
such trials.
Invitations, in the form of expression of interest letters, were sent to 6,600 smart meter households. Seven hundred and
eighty-eight expressions of interest were received, of which 625 were considered suitable for further assessment. DREDs
were not installed in all of these households because of various technical and engagement reasons [10]. The total number of
participants for Perth Solar City’s DLC trial was 380.
Ten air conditioner trial events were run between January and March 2011. Air-conditioners were cycled either in alignment
with other participants’ air conditioners (synchronised on and off times) or randomly across the time period. These ten
events lasted between one and four hours. DLC events in the second year of the trial were called on days with a forecast
maximum above 35 °C. Perth Solar City reported that a number of DLC event notification methods were tested, including
the ‘no notification’ method.

PowerShift was a voluntary three-part time-of-use tariff developed by Synergy for Perth Solar City. It aimed to align
electricity consumption blocks more closely with time-based costs of generation. The PowerShift tariff structure is shown in
Section 3.4.3.4.
Synergy was responsible for engaging and recruiting participants to PowerShift. Participant households had to have
an interval meter, which could either be a smart meter installed as part of the Perth Solar City program, or an existing
reprogrammable electronic meter.
Synergy originally proposed a target of 5,000 PowerShift participants within the Perth Solar City target area. However, the
target was reviewed during 2010/11 and subsequently reduced to 1,000 participants [10].
Before starting the recruitment campaign for PowerShift, Synergy developed an interactive web-based calculator to help
households evaluate the appropriateness of the product. The PowerShift calculator enabled customers to see how much
money they could save each year by shifting various percentages of their consumption to off-peak periods.

Households in Western Australia currently receive an electricity bill approximately every 60 days [10]. As part of Perth Solar
City’s IHD trial, householders were provided with portable IHDs that showed their real-time electricity consumption, both
in energy units (kilowatt-hour, kWh) and cost ($), through wireless communication with the smart meter. This information
enabled householders to monitor and understand their electricity use, which might in turn have affected their electricity
consumption behaviour. Synergy was responsible for procuring and deploying IHDs, and recruiting trial participants.
Synergy’s target was to recruit 2,200 smart meter households for the IHD trial.
Two generations of the IHD (from Canadian manufacturer Energy Aware) were developed for the Perth Solar City IHD trial.
The standard first generation IHD shows [10]:
• electrical consumption information in both energy and dollars
• historical electricity consumption based on a user-defined time range
• time-based tariff consumption blocks via a coloured light display
• current tariff rate in dollars per unit.
The second-generation IHD can also show the household’s net generation, as when a solar PV system is installed in the home.
Synergy’s main recruitment method was to package the IHD and mail it to more than 1,500 smart meter households
(including 345 households with a solar PV system). These households were pre-selected by Synergy without the
householders specifically opting in to the trial. The remainder of the IHD units were deployed to households that specifically
opted in to the trial.
2.6.3.7 Living Smart

Perth Solar City’s Living Smart program was developed by Western Australian Department of Transport (in partnership with
the Eastern Metropolitan Regional Council). The aim of this program was to enable participating households to reduce their
demand for energy, water, waste services and car-based travel [11]. The objectives of this program were to [11]:
• act as a mechanism for referrals to other Perth Solar City products and services
• identify and understand barriers relating to the adoption of energy efficiency behaviours and uptake of energy efficiency
products and services
• understand the effect of such a targeted behaviour change program on household energy consumption.
Further details on this program can be found in the 2012 Perth Solar City annual report [11].
39
Perth Solar City had two control groups: internal and external.
The internal control group consisted of randomly selected sites from within the Eastern Metropolitan Regional Council with
Perth Solar City participants filtered out at the time of the extract.
The external control group was made up of randomly-selected sites from the suburbs of Coolbinia, Yokine, South Perth,
Koondoola, Landsdale and Maddington, all of which are located outside the Eastern Metropolitan Regional Council but
reasonably close to the boundary.
There are 17,082 households registered as Perth Solar City control group participants [11]. Of these, 7,175 belong to the
internal control group, with the remaining 9,907 in the external control group. None of the control group households
were actively recruited, and the data from these households were retrieved directly from the Western Power database.
No demographic information on the Perth Solar City control group households was collected. Note that as the households
inside the Eastern Metropolitan Regional Council were broadly engaged in the program and offered the opportunity to
participate, a selection bias is likely to be evident.

Perth Solar City selected five locations in Perth for the installation of large solar PV systems. These iconic installations were
aimed at maximising community engagement and promoting renewable energy. A brief description of each installation follows.
• Central Institute of Technology

–– 48.6 kW of solar PV panels were installed at the Central Institute of Technology.
–– This institute is a major training provider in Perth for technicians installing solar PV panels and the solar PV installations
will provide hands-on experience for students. The project was launched in April 2010.
• Midland Atelier
–– 60k W of solar PV was installed at the Midland Atelier, which is a Western Australian state heritage site that is more
than 100 years old. This project was launched in May 2010.
• Perth Zoo
–– A 90.9-kW solar PV system (1,303 panels) was installed at Perth Zoo across eight buildings, including the elephant
barn. This Stage 1 installation was launched in March 2011.
–– Stage 2 of the project was the development of a bus port structure that housed 147.8 kW of solar PV. It was launched
in July 2012.
• Kings Park and Botanic Garden
–– Perth Solar City partially funded the design and construction of an education building that incorporated energy
efficient design, smart metering and a 15kW solar PV system. The Kings Park Education building was officially launched
in June 2012.
• Perth Arena
–– A 111-kW solar PV system was installed on the new Perth Arena, a new iconic building within the Perth central
business district, by Synergy. The installation was completed in November 2012.

No commercial trials were conducted in the Perth Solar City project.

2.7 Townsville
2.7.1 Overview
The Townsville Solar City program is a $31-million project that commenced in April 2007 with contributions from the
Australian Government ($15 million)8, the Queensland Government ($5 million) and the consortium members ($11 million).
Ergon Energy led the Townsville Solar City consortium. Other consortium members included Delfin Lend Lease,
Honeycombes Investment Group, Cafalo Pty Ltd, Chester Holdings and Townsville City Council. A summary of the
contribution of each of the consortium partners is shown in Table 16.
Table 16: Contributions of Townsville Solar City Consortium members

Ergon Energy Magnetic Island Solar Suburb – community engagement, demand management, smart meters,
solar generation, tariff trials and technology trials
Smart Lifestyle Centre
Magnetic Island Solar Skate Park
Iconic solar photovoltaic installation at the Townsville RSL Stadium
Delfin Lend Lease Rocky Springs community development – sustainable design, energy efficiency, solar generation,
smart metering and community engagement
Honeycombes Investment Group Itara, Holborn and Kensington medium-density housing developments – sustainable design,
smart metering, solar hot water and community engagement
Cafalo Pty Ltd GreenT high-rise central business district office building investigations – sustainable design,
energy efficiency, solar technology and community engagement
Chester Holdings Federation Place — transformation of a heritage-listed building into sustainable office space
Townsville City Council Community engagement
Community-based social marketing trial
Promoting solar technology
Creating a tropical design cluster
Ergon Energy chose Magnetic Island as the site for the Solar Suburb initiative. Magnetic Island is approximately eight
kilometres off the coast of Queensland and is considered a suburb of Townsville. There were 1,820 properties (1,546
residential and 274 commercial) listed for Magnetic Island (as of the date of publication of the Townsville Solar City 2011
Annual Report) [12].
The peak demand on Magnetic Island increases significantly during holiday periods, such as Easter and Christmas. This is
mainly due to hot weather and an increased population of holiday makers.
The Townsville Solar City seeks to demonstrate ways to reduce:

• total electricity consumption and greenhouse gas emissions
• peak demand, so that additional infrastructure can be deferred (the cost of new infrastructure to meet the increase in
peak demand will be the major factor of increased consumer electricity prices).
Townsville Solar City reported that Magnetic Island Solar Suburb aimed to reduce peak demand on the island by 27 per cent
and electricity consumption by 25 per cent, compared with business as usual (without any energy efficiency measures in
place). This would allow the deployment of a third undersea cable to be deferred by six years.
2.7.2 Interventions
A list of the interventions trialled by the Townsville Solar City, along with the corresponding number of trial sites,
approximate completion status (as at the end of August 2012) and the period of the roll-out is shown in Table 17.
8 Funding figure provided by the Department of Industry.
41
Table 17: Interventions trialled by Townsville Solar City
INTERVENTION NAME TARGET SITES INTERVENTION INTERVENTION INTERVENTION ROLL-OUT ROLL-OUT
Home energy audit 1,741 1,425 0 1,425 Mar 2008 Jun 2012
Photovoltaic 500 210 0 210 Feb 2008 Jul 2012
Solar hot water 87 106 0 106 Apr 2009 Jan 2011
Direct load control 87 87 0 87 May 2009 Sept 2011
(i.e. convert to Tariff 33)
Time-of-use tariff 120 86 3 83 Oct 2010 Apr 2012
(i.e. peak demand
reduction trial)
In-home display 1,150 355 0 355 Mar 2008 Feb 2011

One of the main activities of the Magnetic Island program was the energy assessment. The voluntary assessments were
provided free to participants in the Townsville Solar City project. An energy change behaviour model developed by the
project began with research, followed by the development of a community culture and a personal interview with the
customer. The interview incorporated a range of tailored interventions aimed at changing customer behaviour. It was the
customer’s choice to commit to undertake changes to achieve greater energy efficiency.
In most cases, a team consisting of an assessor and a support officer carried out the energy assessments, although there
were some one-person assessments. Townsville Solar City found the two-person team necessary, so that one person could
record the required data and the other could have meaningful discussions with the customer, thereby maintaining their
interest in the assessment. Although two hours were allowed for each assessment, each was expected to take 90 minutes.
Assessors used the meeting to test appliance loads and discuss a range of energy efficiency behaviours and options, as well
as undertaking some simple changes in the home. The energy assessor replaced lighting in every household with CFLs,
exchanged current showerheads for water-efficient ones, and changed the hot water temperature where appropriate and
possible. Cash-back vouchers were offered to encourage residents to retrofit their homes, e.g. by upgrading to energy-
efficient appliances. The voucher value was equivalent to the difference in price between an efficient and an inefficient
appliance. There were no individual follow-ups of voucher redemptions, but reminders were given to participants via
quarterly newsletters and the media.
The structure of the residential energy assessment program focused on three basic objectives:
• shifting load to better manage peak demand
• motivating customer response to energy management opportunities
• reducing electricity consumption and greenhouse gas emissions by encouraging energy efficient options.
As part of the energy assessment, the assessor also determined if the house was suitable to:
• receive an IHD unit, which could receive information from a smart meter to show the customer, at a glance, how much
electricity is being used
• host an Ergon Energy solar PV system on the roof.
Townsville Solar City aimed to conduct energy assessments in every dwelling on Magnetic Island. Eighty-two per cent of the
island’s residential customers participated.
Townsville Solar City installed solar generation systems on the roofs of homes and businesses to generate renewable energy,
reduce greenhouse gas emissions, demonstrate the effects of distributed generation on the electricity network and trial a
new business and ownership model.

During the energy assessment, participants’ roofs were examined to assess if they were suitable for a solar PV system.
If the roof was found to be suitable, the resident or business person was asked if they were interested in hosting a solar
PV system. If so, a member of the installation team visited the premises, carried out a detailed pre-installation survey,
and decided on the size of the system and the location of panels, conduits and inverter. Once the owner signed a hosting
agreement, the PV system was installed.
The utility, Ergon Energy, owns and maintains the solar PV system for the life of the asset, which is expected to be 25 years.
The electricity generated feeds directly into the grid, with the customer receiving no direct benefit. This is known as the utility
model [12]. The roof space is rented from the owner at a nominal rate; effectively, the owner allows Ergon Energy to install
a PV system on their roof for the general good of the community and for environmental altruism. Customers gain a financial
advantage through savings from the energy assessment. Since November 2007, more than 180 solar PV systems have been
installed by Ergon Energy, with sizes varying from 1.5 kW in residential premises to 23 kW in commercial properties.
The Queensland state government’s feed-in tariff has had some effect on Ergon Energy’s business model. Townsville Solar City
reports that about 25 residents installed their own solar PV system, reducing the number of host roofs available to the project.
As part of the installation of solar panels, four similar PV panels (1.56–1.76 kW), which had been installed in north, south,
east and westerly orientations, were analysed by Townsville Solar City for their normalised generation performance over the
financial year.

Recommendations for a SHW or a heat pump were not made during the energy assessments in the early stages of the
Townsville Solar City project, if the existing hot water service was satisfactory. This was because the upfront cost of
purchasing a SHW system was high. However, when government rebates were offered, recommendations were made and
many people took the opportunity to upgrade to SHW — mostly in the form of heat pumps.
2.7.3.4 Cost-reflective pricing

The load management component of the Magnetic Island Solar Suburb demand management trials initially focused on
the optimisation of customer tariff arrangements. This was done to both save money for the customer, and provide Ergon
Energy with load control options under existing arrangements [12].
The objectives of the Magnetic Island Solar Suburb cost-reflective pricing trials were to:
• signal to customers the impact of peak demand (rather than total energy) as a driver of network cost
• provide customer behaviour incentives to align them with desired distribution system demand outcomes
• reflect costs incurred in energy procurement and network charges in the delivered cost of energy
• manage risk exposure to pool price volatility
• differentiate the product in a competitive market.
The majority of residential customers on Magnetic Island are charged the regulated ‘baseline’ prices (known as Tariff 11). In
Queensland, Tariffs 319 and 3310 are control tariffs. A summary of the notified prices can be seen in [12].
The peak demand reduction trial sought to investigate the impact of cost-reflective incentive options for Magnetic Island
residential customers, as well as their ability to reduce and shift daily load during the peak demand times between 6.00 pm
and 9.00 pm. This trial is known as the peak demand rebate trial for the Townsville Solar City project. The trial lasted 18
months and had 83 participants. Monetary incentives between $15 and $25 a month were paid to participants who reduced
their daily electricity consumption by 15 per cent or more between 6.00pm and 9.00pm for that month, compared with the
same month in the previous year. This trial was only for participants on the regulated Tariff 11 class of supply. If participants
reduced their daily electricity consumption between 6.00 pm and 9.00 pm by 25 per cent or more over a month compared
with the same month in the previous year, a reward of $25 was paid for that month. On completion of the trial, a payment
of $100 was made to participants following an exit survey, regardless of whether or not they had reduced their electricity
consumption. More information on Townsville Solar City’s peak demand reduction trial can be found in Section 3.4.5.1.
9 Electricity supply is available for a minimum eight hours a day, only at low electricity-demand periods — designed for storage water heaters and permanently
connected heat banks, and can also be used to boost a solar hot water heater.
10 Electricity supply is available for a minimum 18 hours per day and is switched using load control equipment.
43
Load control for hot water and air conditioning was trialled at the Bright Point Apartments. This was part of the Ergon
Energy air conditioning program, also known as the DREDs project, which involved the installation of DREDs on 60 hot water
units and 40 air-conditioning units.
Testing of air conditioners was carried out between 1 February and 30 April 2009. The maximum desired control was a
50 per cent load reduction for six hours with no customer discomfort reported (measured by customer calls to Ergon Energy).

Townsville Solar City purchased 1,500 Ampy Email Metering Ecometer IHD units, for installation in 1,150 locations. A total
of 355 IHDs (31 per cent of the project target) were installed. There were some initial connection problems with the IHD
operation, and it was not cost-effective to continue further installation of IHDs past December 2011. The problems noted
from installations of IHDs included:
• poor reliability of the wireless communication link between IHD and the revenue meter, which depends on the
–– distance between the switchboard and IHD
–– number of walls between the switchboard and IHD
–– interference from other wireless equipment with nearby frequencies
• complicated and resource-intensive process to ‘pair’ each individual IHD with its meter, requiring trained on and off-site
staff at the time of pairing
• low integrity of the smart meter to data concentrator11 to the back-office communications link.

For the purpose of independent evaluation of the impacts of the Townsville Solar City project, a control group was chosen
from an area similar to Magnetic Island but distant enough to be unaffected by activities undertaken on the island. The
area chosen was the suburb of Ayr, a coastal town 70 km south of Townsville. The control group for the project comprised
75 randomly selected premises. The trends seen in the load of the feeders for Ayr were very similar to those observed on
Magnetic Island in the years preceding the Solar City project [12]. The control group participants were not made aware of
the program and data from these households were made anonymous.

The major iconic solar PV installations undertaken by the Townsville Solar City are described below.
• Solar Skate Park
–– The Magnetic Island Solar Skate Park is a publicly designed multi-use recreational facility, which acts as a showcase of
renewable energy technologies incorporating thematic signage to support the sustainability message.
–– A 100-kW solar PV system was installed to shade a skate park following community feedback of ‘shade people not cars’.
–– The Solar Skate Park was officially opened on 23 July 2011.
• Townsville RSL stadium
–– The installation consisted of 348 kW of solar PV panels on the roof of the Townsville RSL Stadium in Annandale, Townsville.
–– The energy generated from this solar PV system is believed to be capable of supplying up to half the load of the stadium.
–– The installation was named the Annandale Solar Power Station and was commissioned in June 2012.

The commercial business program of the Townsville Solar City project aimed to determine the challenges of attracting
the interest of commercial enterprises on the island, and therefore the involvement of significant individual energy users.
Energy assessments were offered to commercial premises; these focused on the needs of the business, its operational
processes, major efficiency improvements through appliance upgrades and education for behaviour change. Energy-
efficiency measures taken up by commercial customers include:
• solar and heat pump hot water
• efficient air conditioning
• ‘redflow’ battery systems
• refrigeration compressor controllers
• light-emitting diode (LED) lighting.
11 A data concentrator is a software and hardware solution that connects a number of data channels with one destination. Data concentrators are found within
substations to help manage many different data sources at one main source.

3 Intervention overview
This section outlines the interventions trialled in the Solar Cities program. It includes limited detail, such as the number
of participants, contact method, and start and end dates, for each intervention by City. The quantitative results from the
detailed data analysis are discussed in Section 6.
3.1 Australian and state government initiatives

Some of the interventions carried out by the Solar Cities may have been affected by the introduction and changes of various
Australian and state government initiatives. In particular, the attractiveness of a specific Solar City trial offer may have been
altered if the background financial conditions were changed by new government rebates, or changes in a tariff. Some of
these initiatives, along with a brief description and the interventions that may have been affected as a result, are provided in
the following subsections.
3.1.1 Australian Government initiatives
Residential Photovoltaic Rebate Package and Solar Homes and Communities Plan
The Australian Government’s Photovoltaic Rebate Program was established in 2000 [13] to provide rebates to households
who acquired solar photovoltaic (PV) systems. Before the program ended, it offered a rebate rate of $4.00 per watt, up to a
maximum rebate of $4,000, towards the cost of a household solar PV system [14]. In May 2007, the government announced
that the rebate rate would be doubled to $8.00 per watt, up to a maximum rebate of $8,000 per household.
Following a change of government in November 2007, the new Labor government renamed the program the Solar Homes
and Communities Plan. In May 2008, a means test was introduced on the solar power rebate [13]. The eligibility was limited
to households with an annual taxable income of less than $100,000 [14]. The rebate offer closed for new applications on
9 June 2009 and the vast majority of systems were installed by 6 July 2010 [13]. The Solar Homes and Communities Plan was
replaced by a new government initiative called the Solar Credits scheme on 9 June 2009.
Solar Cities intervention affected: Solar PV
Small-scale Renewable Energy Scheme

The Small-scale Renewable Energy Scheme was established to assist households, small business and community groups with
the cost of installing a solar PV system. The scheme issues small-scale technology certificates (STCs) to eligible households.
STCs are a tradeable commodity attached to eligible installations of renewable energy systems, including solar panels, solar
hot water (SHW) and heat pump systems [15]. The number of STCs is based on the expected amount of electricity either:
• generated by a solar PV, wind or hydro system over the course of its lifetime, up to 15 years
• displaced by a SHW or heat pump system over the course of its lifetime, up to 10 years, where one STC is the equivalent
of one megawatt-hour (MWh) of renewable energy.
The number of STCs households are eligible for varies depending on location, and is based on the expected output of the
system. For example, solar PV systems installed in sunnier locations are eligible for more STCs than those in less-sunny
locations.
Solar Cities intervention affected: Solar PV and Solar Hot Water
Solar Credits
The Solar Credits program replaced the Australian Government’s Solar Homes and Communities Plan on 9 June 2009.
Solar Credits was a mechanism, under the Small-scale Renewable Energy Scheme, that provided additional support
to households, businesses and community groups for the installation of small renewable energy generation units, by
multiplying the number of tradeable small-scale technology certificates (STCs) for eligible installations [15]. The multiplier
reduced over time, as shown in Table 18.
45
Table 18: Small-scale technology certificates (STCs) installation period and multipliers
INSTALLATION PERIOD MULTIPLIER (TO THE NUMBER OF ELIGIBLE STCS)
1 July 2010–30 June 2011 5

1 July 2011–30 June 2012 3
1 July 2012–31 December 2012 2
1 January 2013 onwards 1 (no multiplier)
Solar Credits applied to the first 1.5 kW of capacity installed at eligible premises.
Solar Cities intervention affected: Solar PV
Energy Efficient Homes Package

The Energy Efficient Homes Package was announced by the Australian Prime Minister on 3 February 2009. The package was
administered by the then Department of Environment, Water, Heritage and Arts, and included the following streams:
• Home Insulation Program
• Low-Emissions Assistance Plan for Renters
• Solar Hot Water Rebate Program.
The Home Insulation Program was intended to be implemented in two phases [16], [17]. Phase 1 was the early installation
phase from 3 February to 30 June 2009, and Phase 2 was the main program that ran from 1 July 2009. The program was
intended to run for two and a half years. However, following safety and compliance concerns, it was terminated prematurely
on 19 February 2010. The program then moved into a third phase with the implementation of safety remediation programs:
the Foil Insulation Safety Program and the Home Insulation Safety Program [16].
Under the Home Insulation Program and the Low-Emissions Assistance Plan for Renters, home owner-occupiers were
eligible to be reimbursed up to $1,600, and landlords or tenants up to $1,000, for the installation of insulation before Phase
2 began on 1 July 2009 [17]. During Phase 2, the installer was paid the rebate directly, instead of the householder.
Solar Cities interventions affected: Retrofit (insulation) and Solar Hot Water
Renewable Energy Bonus Scheme – Solar Hot Water Rebate

The Renewable Energy Bonus Scheme offered households a rebate of $1,000 to install a SHW system, or $600 to install a
heat pump hot water system, from 19 February 2010 through to 30 June 2012 [18]. The SHW system or heat pump was
required to have replaced an electric storage hot water system. The intent of introducing the rebate was to encourage
households to switch to more efficient hot water systems by addressing the upfront cost barrier.
Solar Cities intervention affected: Solar Hot Water
Green Loans Program

The Australian Government conducted the Green Loans program to help Australian households install solar, water-saving
and energy-efficient products. The program officially commenced on 1 July 2009 and was scheduled to run until 2012–13,
or until available funding was exhausted [19]. Following a number of reviews, the government announced in late July 2010
that the Green Loans program was to be phased out by the end of 2010, and replaced by a new Green Start program. In
December 2010, the government announced that it would not proceed with the Green Start program due to identified
implementation risks. Instead, the Green Loans program would be extended to 28 February 2011 to allow assessors working
on the program to identify opportunities to diversify or undertake training for new employment in the sector.
As part of the Green Loans program, independent assessors visited homes, conducted assessments and made recommendations.
The initial phase of the program included a loan component, through which householders could borrow up to $10,000 from
participating banks to implement recommendations, with the government funding the interest. The loan component was
discontinued, but Household Sustainability Assessments continued until the program concluded on 28 February 2011.
Solar Cities intervention affected: Home Energy Audit

3.1.2 State Government initiatives
Victorian Energy Efficiency Target Scheme
The Victorian Energy Efficiency Target scheme commenced on 1 January 2009. Under this program, accredited businesses
could offer discounts and special offers on selected energy saving products and appliances to be installed in homes,
businesses or other non-residential premises.
Solar City and intervention affected: Central Victoria Solar City – Home Energy Audit
Queensland Solar Bonus Scheme

The Solar Bonus Scheme pays eligible households for the surplus electricity generated from solar PV systems. The scheme
compensates households for energy exported to the Queensland electricity grid [21] whenever generation exceeds
consumption during the day.
Solar City and intervention affected: Townsville Solar City – Solar PV
New South Wales Solar Bonus Scheme

The Solar Bonus Scheme provides a feed-in tariff for eligible households with small solar or wind generators connected to
the grid. The scheme commenced on 1 January 2010 and runs until 31 December 2016 [22]. This scheme is now closed
to new applicants. Households who applied to join the scheme by midnight 28 April 2011 were able to proceed with their
connection until 30 June 2012 to receive payments from the scheme. Systems connected on or after 1 July 2012 were not
eligible to receive payment from the scheme.
Solar City and intervention affected: Blacktown Solar City – Solar PV
Victorian feed-in tariff schemes

Similar to the Queensland and New South Wales governments’ Solar Bonus schemes, the Victorian feed-in tariffs provide
households producing their own renewable energy with a financial return for excess power fed into the electricity grid.
Multiple feed-in tariffs were offered, including the Transitional Feed-in Tariff (closed on 31 December 2012) and the
Premium Feed-in Tariff (closed on 29 December 2011) [23].
Solar City and intervention affected: Central Victoria and Moreland Solar Cities – Solar PV
Queensland Solar Hot Water Rebate

The Solar Hot Water Rebate program was introduced in April 2010 and offered a rebate to eligible households that replaced
their electric storage hot water system with a SHW system or heat pump. The program offered a rebate of $1,000 for
pensioners and low-income earners, or $600 for others [24]. To be eligible for this rebate, SHW or heat pump systems were
required to have been purchased or ordered (and a deposit paid) by 22 June 2012 and installed by 27 July 2012.
Solar City and intervention affected: Townsville Solar City – Solar Hot Water
South Australian Residential Energy Efficiency Scheme

The Residential Energy Efficiency Scheme commenced on 1 January 2009. The first stage ran from 2009 until 2011, and the
second stage has been running from 2012 and is scheduled to end in 2014. Under this scheme, energy retailers with 5,000
or more electricity or gas residential customers were required to provide incentives to South Australian households to
reduce greenhouse gas emissions and potentially lower their energy bills by using less energy [25]. This was done through
establishing obligations to be met by electricity and gas retailers.
HEAs were made available for low-income households to help assess their energy use practices, compare them to energy-
efficient practices, and identify practical ways to be more energy efficient at home.
Solar City and intervention affected: Adelaide Solar City – Home Energy Audit
47
3.2 Home energy audits
3.2.1 Overview
A Home Energy Audit (HEA) involves an assessor visiting a household, auditing the household’s energy usage and providing
recommendations on potential measures to reduce energy consumption. The assessor is usually subcontracted, or the
assessment can be conducted by the retailing partners of each Solar City consortium.
Examples of recommendations of the energy audits included efficient appliances, low-flow shower heads, SHW, insulation,
external shading, evaporative air conditioning, pedestal fans and efficient lighting. The aim of these recommendations
was to improve household energy efficiency. For example, an article published by the Department [26] suggests that by
recommending and making smarter lighting choices, most homes could reduce the amount of energy they use for lighting
by at least 50 per cent.
HEAs were conducted by all Solar Cities. However, no two Cities had the same intervention. As seen in Table 19, the number
of assessors and the method of carrying out the assessment (electronic or paper) varied from City to City.
Table 19 outlines the number of sites assessed in each Solar City for the HEA intervention, details on how the audits were
carried out and the duration of the intervention.
Figure 3-1 depicts the visual timelines of Solar Cities’ programs, trial deployment and government initiatives regarding the
HEA intervention.
Table 19: Overview of size and method of home energy audits conducted by each Solar City
YEARS OVER WHICH NO. OF
NO. OF SITES AUDITS WERE ASSESSORS METHOD OF
SOLAR CITY AUDITED CONDUCTED PER AUDIT ASSESSMENT
Adelaide 879 2.5 3 Electronic/Paper

Alice Springs 2,566 5 1 Electronic/Paper
Blacktown 3,517 2.5 2 Electronic
Central Victoria 2,750 1.25 1 Paper
Moreland 1,000 3 2 Electronic
Perth 3,500 2.5 2 Electronic
Townsville 1,425 3.25 2 Electronic

Green Loans 1 Jul 09 – 28 Feb 11
Federal
Government
SA - REES 1 Jan 09 – Ongoing
VIC - VEET 1 Jan 09 – Ongoing
State
Government
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4
Adelaide Solar City 5 Jun 07 – 30 Jun 13

HEA trial 1 Jan 08 – 1 Dec 10
Home Energy Assistance Program 1 Oct 11 – Ongoing
Alice Solar City 2 Nov 07 – 30 Jun 13
HEA trial 1 Jan 08 – Ongoing
Blacktown Solar City 12 Apr 07 – 30 Jun 13
HEA trial 1 Oct 07 – 1 Sep 09
Central Victoria Solar City 10 Dec 08 – 30 Jun 13
HEA trial 1 Jul 10 – 1 Mar 12
Moreland Solar City 8 Dec 08 – 30 Jun 13
Solar cities
HEA trial 1 Apr 09 – 1 Jun 12
Perth Solar City 7 Sep 09 – 30 Jun 13
HEA trial 1 Jan 10 – 1 Sep 12
Townsville Queensland Solar City 19 Apr 07 – 30 Jun 13
HEA trial 25 Feb 08 – 1 Mar 12
Figure 3-1: Visual timelines of Solar Cities’ programs, trial deployment and government initiatives regarding the home energy audit (HEA) intervention
49
3.2.2 Trial details
A description of the HEA trials deployed by each of the Solar Cities is presented in this section.
3.2.2.1 Adelaide
Adelaide Solar City’s HEAs were delivered by Big Switch Projects and Origin Energy. At the beginning of the program, it
was anticipated the campaign would test the price point for HEAs. The first HEAs for the Adelaide Solar City program were
conducted during the quarter ending March 2008. HEAs were initially offered at $90 per audit, and $45 per audit during
the last quarter of 2008. The discounted rate increased the number of HEA bookings. However, under the South Australian
Government Residential Energy Efficiency Scheme, which commenced in January 2009, low-income households were
eligible for free HEAs. Adelaide Solar City reported that due to this, they found it challenging to reach their milestone target
number of HEAs for the 2008/2009 period. Due to increased competition with energy retailers offering free HEAs under the
government scheme, Adelaide Solar City offered their HEAs at no charge from January 2009.
Free HEAs offered by Big Switch Projects included energy-saving equipment of six compact fluorescent light bulbs (CFLs)
and an AAA-rated showerhead. Energy-efficiency packs (i.e. light globes and showerheads) were distributed earlier in the
program by Origin Energy. The distribution was later discontinued, because the market for these products became saturated
as numerous utilities and other suppliers offered free light globes and showerhead replacements. In-home assessments,
carried out by Fieldforce Services, were introduced to replace the distribution of the energy-efficiency packs. About 20
customers who initially signed up to receive an Adelaide Solar City HEA changed their minds and chose other home energy-
efficiency programs, such as Green Loans. Delivery of HEAs under the Adelaide Solar City program was completed during the
quarter ending December 2010.
The Home Energy Assistance Program was offered within the Adelaide Solar City area to Origin customers, in particular
new Australian residents, with free help to manage their electricity bills. This trial, which commenced in October 2011,
included an in-home assessment to help participants understand their energy consumption and power bills and identify
opportunities for using less energy. Participants also received energy-saving devices to use in their home.
A total of 1,039 HEAs were completed under the Adelaide Solar City project. This includes 160 audits under the Home
Energy Assistance Program, in addition to the 879 audits conducted before the program began. A summary of Adelaide Solar
City’s HEA trial is presented in Table 20.
Table 20: Summary of home energy audit trial conducted by Adelaide Solar City
METRIC DETAILS COMMENTS
Participation target 879 –

Number of participants 879 Total of 1,039 including Home Energy Assistance Program
Start of trial December 2007 –
End of trial June 2010 –
Participation Participants sourced through mass and Service had to be requested
targeted marketing campaigns
Assessment details Three assessors, in-person, 90-min assessment Ability to add extra notes if required
Paper or personal digital assistant
Measures installed at Compact fluorescent lighting and AAA rated Installation date not recorded
time of audit showerheads offered to residents
3.2.2.2 Alice Springs

The Residential Energy Efficiency component of the Alice Solar City project aimed to [27]:
• increase household and community awareness of the range of energy-efficiency measures appropriate for Alice Springs,
and to demonstrate that they are effective options for Alice Springs’ residents
• increase the uptake of household energy-efficiency measures, particularly based on advice relevant to household
circumstances
• develop a range of recommended energy efficiency measures suitable for Alice Springs, and to provide an opportunity
to introduce appropriate new energy-efficiency measures based on a rational investigation
• contribute to reducing demand and peak demand on the electricity network, and to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

To satisfy these objectives, Alice Solar City offered participating households free energy advice and a free HEA, with the
opportunity for one or more follow-up support engagements. Financial incentives were also offered for undertaking a range
of energy-efficiency measures. Registration for HEAs under the Alice Solar City program was open to owner-occupiers,
landlords and tenants.
A HEA offered by Alice Solar City took approximately 90 minutes. The auditor reviewed the household’s electricity
consumption and self-reported electricity usage behaviour, using prior electricity consumption data (if available), site audit,
observation and dialogue. The household was then provided with customised electricity-use advice and a personalised HEA
report. The report included recommendations for various energy-efficiency measures, some of which were incentivised and
some behavioural. Household demographic data were also collected during the HEA.
If one or more measures was agreed to and recommended at the energy audit, the household received an energy-efficiency
voucher providing either a capped or 35 per cent discount towards the implementation of the energy-efficiency measures.
The maximum incentives (as at August 2011) offered by Alice Solar City included:
• $3,500 for the installation of double-glazed windows
• $750 for painting roof white
• $1,500 towards retrofitting insulation into walls
• $400 for the replacement of an old refrigerator or freezer
• $400 for the installation of a variable-speed pool pump.
The energy-efficiency vouchers were valid for four months from the date of issue. They were generally cancelled if not used
within this time, unless an extension was requested. A reminder e-mail/letter was sent to households approximately two
months after vouchers were issued to alert them of the possible future cancellation and encourage them to take action.
A total of 1,727 HEA participants of Alice Solar City received one or more vouchers before 30 June, 2011. Of these, 912
participants used at least one of the vouchers issued.
As at September 2012, 2,638 HEAs had been completed under the Alice Solar City project. A summary of Alice Solar City’s
HEA trial is presented in Table 21.
Table 21: Summary of home energy audit trial conducted by Alice Solar City
Participation target 2,250 –

Number of participants 2,638 –
Start of trial April 2008 –
Participation Mandatory as part of sign-up as an Alice Solar –
City customer
Assessment details One assessor, in-person, 90-min assessment by Ability to add extra notes if required
paper and computer
Measures installed at None. Vouchers issued to help pay for Installation date of recommended energy efficiency
time of audit recommended future measures measure recorded as vouchers redeemed
3.2.2.3 Blacktown
The HEA component of the Blacktown Solar City program was managed by Endeavour Energy. The task of conducting the
HEAs was contracted out to external parties. Each HEA took between 60 and 90 minutes.
The initial recruitment of participants for Blacktown Solar City’s HEA trial involved mailing 4,000 invitation letters on 14 June,
2007 to invite customers to a free in-home energy assessment. Ecosmart conducted the earlier HEAs for Blacktown Solar City,
but in early 2008, the task was assigned to Low Energy Supplies & Services. Four hundred and fifty HEAs were offered at a
variety of prices in the first quarter of 2009 for the ‘price point trial’ of HEAs, the breakdown of which is shown in Table 22 with
the corresponding number of audits purchased. About 15,000 flyers were distributed and more than 3,000 outbound calls
were made to recruit participants for the price point trial. This trial was completed in the second quarter of 2009. Blacktown
Solar City concluded from the outcome that householders were not willing to pay more than $10 for an energy audit.
51
Table 22: Price point trial of Blacktown Solar City’s home energy audit (HEA) program
PRICE POINT TRIAL HEA PRICE NUMBERS PURCHASED
Price point 1 $49.95 4

Price point 5 Free 60
The delivery of HEAs for the Blacktown Solar City project was completed in the quarter ending September 2009. A total of
3,517 HEAs were completed under the Blacktown Solar City project, including 77 audits at various price points. A summary
of Blacktown Solar City’s HEA trial is shown in Table 23.
Table 23: Summary of home energy audit trial conducted by Blacktown Solar City
Participation target 7,500 (including Western Sydney Pricing Trial, WSPT) –

Number of participants 8,666 (including WSPT) –
Start of trial November 2006 –
End of trial May 2009 –
Participation Participants sourced from: –
Door-to-door campaigns, cold calls, brochures sent
and follow-up calls and events such as the Blacktown
Festival
Assessment details Two assessors, in-person, 90-min assessment by iPad/ No ability to add extra notes if required
personal digital assistant
Measures installed at time None No installation date recorded
of audit
3.2.2.4 Central Victoria

The Victorian Energy Efficiency Target scheme commenced on 1 January 2009. It was designed to make energy-efficiency
improvements more affordable, contribute to the reduction of greenhouse gases, and encourage investment, employment
and innovation in industries that supply energy efficiency goods and services. The scheme introduced a reward (in the form
of Victorian Energy Efficiency Target Credits) for households who undertook retrofit works. As a result, Central Victoria
Solar City faced the challenge of retaining a comprehensive standalone Energy Audit and Education service costing $495
and considered the amalgamation of its Energy Audit and Retrofit packages. The HEA product was made part of both the
Victorian Energy Efficiency Target and Green Loans schemes, and was offered at a cost (not known at the time of writing) to
the customer. Central Victoria Solar City’s HEAs were initially priced at $495 [28]. Nine households took up the offer at this
price. The HEA package was revised by Central Victoria Solar City and made available to the market for free in October 2010.
Sustainable Regional Australia employed a team of home energy assessors across the region in 2011. The Home Energy
Assessment Team included an assessor for 11 of the 14 municipalities. Assessors from neighbouring shires provided
assessments to some of the more remote communities in the region. The purpose of the team’s campaign was to engage
participants in the Central Victoria Solar City program through a free HEA, which all consumers were to receive before
deciding whether to take up any of the other products and services on offer. This meant that all intervention participants of
the Central Victoria Solar City project had an HEA at their premises as their first intervention.
Each HEA was conducted by a single assessor and lasted 90 minutes. It involved a combination of kitchen-table
conversations, energy bill analysis, household walk-throughs, and consideration of one or more energy-efficiency and
renewable-energy product and service packages. Assessors provided each participant with a set of recommendations
designed to reduce their energy consumption in the home. The recommendations were customised for each participant
depending on their household characteristics, and ranged from relatively simple and inexpensive actions (e.g. changing
light bulbs) to treatments likely to incur high levels of expenditure (e.g. double-glazing of windows). Some of the
recommendations, including behavioural recommendations, were:

• turning off appliances on stand-by
• washing clothes in cold water
• replacing inefficient appliances
• using energy during off-peak tariff
• adjusting hot water temperature
• installing or replacing insulation
• installing a SHWsystem
• tinting windows.
Central Victoria Solar City reported that the recommendations, in many cases, aligned with treatments offered under
the Central Victoria Solar City retrofit program. The three most common retrofit strategies taken up by households were
curtaining, external shading and installing insulation.
Central Victoria Solar City conducted 2,750 HEAs. A summary of the HEA trial is shown in Table 24.
Table 24: Summary of home energy audit trial conducted by Central Victoria Solar City

Start of trial August 2010 –
End of trial December 2011 –
Participation Participants sourced from the Home Energy Assessment Assessments were used as a
Team’s campaign using free home energy assessments mechanism to sign participants up
and advertised through paid and free media events and to the trial
online (e.g. websites, stakeholder newsletters)
Assessment details One assessor, in-person, 90-min assessment by paper Ability to add extra notes if required
(40-page booklet)
Measures installed at time of audit None No installation date recorded
3.2.2.5 Moreland
Moreland Solar City’s HEA program targeted people living on a low income, who have limited funds to invest in energy-
saving infrastructure. Free home energy retrofits were provided by Concession Assist and were managed by three local
organisations: Moreland Energy Foundation Limited, Brotherhood of St Laurence and Kildonan UnitingCare. The audit
and retrofit were undertaken in a single home visit. Brotherhood of St Laurence established a new community enterprise
called Brotherhood Green Enterprise to coordinate and undertake home visits. Participants were recruited using a range of
different channels, including a broad advertising campaign, Moreland City Council communication channels, low-income
and health service organisations, community groups such as seniors groups and neighbourhood houses, and community
events and festivals.
Two-person, 90-minute audits were carried out for participants of the low-income program (Warm Home Cool Home/Energy
Hub). During the audit, the assessors spoke to the householder about retrofitting options and behavioural actions, retrofitted
the home with the agreed products (with the householder’s permission), and sought permission to access the household’s
billing data. An additional 500 self-audits were undertaken for the Zero Carbon Moreland general household program.
Measures applied during the HEAs for retrofit included draught sealing, replacing light bulbs and shower heads, and installing
external blinds, standby power controllers, pedestal fans and power boards. The Warm Home Cool Home program was affected
by the Australian Government’s Green Loans program. One thousand HEAs were completed as part of the Warm Home Cool
Home program by the end of June 2012. A summary of Moreland Solar City’s HEA trial is shown in Table 25.
53
Table 25: Summary of home energy audit trial conducted by Moreland Solar City

Start of trial June 2009 –
Participation Participants sourced from advertising and Mass advertising included Local Leader
marketing campaigns newspapers, SBS Radio, community radio, and
on-tram advertising
Targeted promotions included council mail out
and community organisation referrals (e.g. from
Merri Community Health Service)
Assessment details Two assessors, in-person, 90-min assessment Ability to add extra notes if required
by iPad/personal digital assistant or computer
Measures installed at time of Draught sealing, light bulbs, low-flow shower –
audit heads, pedestal fans, power boards, door
snakes, ‘draft stoppa’ and ceiling fan seals
3.2.2.6 Perth
The HEA trial of the Perth Solar City program was known as Home Eco-Consultation (HEC). Mojarra, one of the Perth
Solar City Consortium members, was responsible for the administration and delivery of HECs. HECs were designed to help
participants understand their own energy consumption by informing householders about factors contributing to their
household energy usage. Participants were recruited by a range of different methods, including referrals from the program
call centre, the Living Smart program, collaboration with other Consortium members and via Mojarra’s own recruitment
campaigns. The recruitment of participants in the quarter ending June 2011 was affected by the reduction of the Renewable
Energy Certificate (REC) multiplier, because Mojarra redirected staff to meet increased demands on the solar PV side of the
business. A joint HEC and in-home display (IHD) campaign run by Mojarra and Synergy allowed customers to opt-in for an
IHD, which would be installed by Mojarra during a HEC. However, this campaign was terminated soon after its introduction,
reportedly due to a problem with the IHDs.
Perth Solar City’s HECs consisted of a two-person, 90-minute consultation. Reports consolidating the findings of the HEC
were mailed to participants within three weeks of the consultation. The HEC was also used as an opportunity to educate
participants about the broader Solar Cities program, including participation in other products, services and technical trials.
A total of 3,517 HEAs were conducted as part of Perth Solar City’s HEC program. A summary of Perth Solar City’s HEA trial is
shown in Table 26.
Table 26: Summary of home energy audit trial conducted by Perth Solar City

Start of trial December 2009 –
Participation Participants sourced from marketing Mass marketing and engagement, e.g. local newspaper
campaigns and Living Smart program advertisements, billboards
Targeted marketing campaigns with follow-up phone calls
Significant percentage of recruitment achieved by Living
Smart engagement program
Assessment details Two assessors, in-person, by iPad/personal No ability to add extra notes if required
digital assistant
Measures installed at time None Limited installation dates recorded. Some recorded if
of audit measure was pre-existing (e.g. insulation)

3.2.2.7 Townsville
HEAs were offered at no cost to participants in the Townsville Solar City project. Several methods were used to contact
customers to obtain a HEA booking, including:
• an initial mailout survey, which allowed respondents to register
• allowing customers to register at the office of the Smart Lifestyle Centre
• presence of project at community and other out-and-about events
• cold calls to customers (to a larger extent later in the project).
The Townsville Solar City HEA program commenced on 25 February, 2008. In the quarter ending December 2007, EcoSmart
Pty Ltd was engaged to conduct HEAs and a second energy assessment team was deployed in the quarter ending March
2009. In most cases, a team consisting of an assessor and a support officer carried out the energy assessments, although
there were some one-person assessments. Townsville Solar City found the two-person team necessary, so that one person
could record the required data, and the other could have meaningful discussions with the customer, maintaining their
interest in the assessment. Two hours were allocated for each assessment, however, it was expected that each assessment
would last 90 minutes. Assessors used the meeting to test appliance loads and discuss a range of energy-efficiency
behaviours and options, as well as undertaking some simple changes in the home. The top six energy efficiency behaviours
recommended were:
• switching appliances off at the wall to reduce standby load
• switching to gas for cooking to reduce peak load
• having four-minute showers
• buying high-energy-rated appliances
• painting roof white
• switching to gas, solar or heat pump for hot water.
The energy assessor replaced lighting in every household with CFLs, giving priority to those that were predominantly
used between 6:00 pm and 9:00 pm. They also exchanged existing showerheads for water-efficient models, and changed
the hot water temperature where appropriate and possible. Cash-back vouchers (introduced in April 2009) were offered
to encourage residents to retrofit their homes e.g. by upgrading to energy-efficient appliances. The voucher value was
equivalent to the difference in price between an efficient and an inefficient appliance. There were no individual follow-ups
of voucher redemptions, but reminders were given to participants via quarterly newsletters and the media. Townsville Solar
City reported that on average, only half the vouchers that were issued were redeemed, which indicated that participants
were overoptimistic about the likelihood of making an energy-efficiency purchase.
The residential energy assessment program focused on three basic objectives [29]:
• shifting load to better manage peak demand
• motivating customer response to energy management opportunities
• reducing electricity consumption and greenhouse gas emissions by encouraging energy-efficient options.
As part of the HEA, the assessor determined if the house was suitable to:
• receive an IHD unit, which could receive information from a smart meter to show the customer, at a glance, how much
electricity is being used
• host an Ergon Energy solar PV system on the roof.
Some HEA participants were provided with IHD units as part of field tests designed to monitor the communication between
the smart meter and IHD. In the quarter ending December 2008, IHDs were distributed when the assessments coincided
with new smart meter installations.
Townsville Solar City aimed to conduct HEAs in every dwelling on Magnetic Island. Eighty-two per cent of the island’s
residential customers participated. The HEA program of the Townsville Solar City project was completed by the first quarter
of 2011 with a total of 1,277 residential assessments conducted. A summary of Townsville Solar City’s HEA trial is presented
in Table 27.
55
Table 27: Summary of home energy audit trial conducted by Townsville Solar City

Start of trial February 2008 –
Participation Participants sourced from surveys, phone calls, door –
knock and through the Solar City office location
(Smart Lifestyle Centre)
Assessment details Two assessors, in-person, 90-min assessment by No ability to add extra notes if required
personal digital assistant
Measures installed at time of Compact fluorescent lights installed, shower heads Limited installation dates recorded. Some
audit changed, and hot water temperature changed where recorded if measure was pre-existing (e.g.
appropriate and possible insulation)
3.3 Solar hot water

SHW systems are widely used in Australia as a cost-effective, low-emission source of residential hot water. These systems
generally work by heating water in a solar collector situated on the roof of the house, with the water then stored in
insulated tanks ready for use. The majority of systems have a booster that maintains hot water supply when insufficient
sunlight is available. The booster also helps eliminate the risk of incubation of dangerous Legionella bacteria.
There are two main types of SHW systems. Close-coupled systems have the tank located directly above the collectors. Split
systems have the tank located either in the roof space or at ground level, and require a pump and a temperature differential
controller.
The two most common collector types are flat plate (an open-loop system that heats the water directly) and evacuated
tubes (which typically use a closed-loop heat-transfer system). The heat boost system in urban areas is generally either gas or
electrically powered, and its energy consumption depends on the performance of the solar heating system. The performance
is determined by the type, aspect and exposure of the system, and solar irradiance levels at the location. The heat boost is
typically either incorporated into the SHW storage tank or in-line with a standard instantaneous hot water system.
Correct installation is critical for efficient operation. For homes in Australia with a north–south facing roof, the collectors
should be north facing. For homes with an east–west facing roof, the western side should generally be chosen. This
minimises overnight booster usage, by maximising overnight storage temperature using afternoon solar heating. Ideally, a
household’s hot water should mostly be used in the morning, to allow time for the sun to heat the water throughout the
day and store it in the insulated storage tank overnight.
Like solar PV systems, SHW systems vary in performance, because of their reliance on exposure to sunlight. For more
information on the causes of variability, see Section 3.5. However, the variability effects are generally less extreme for SHW
systems, owing to the thermal properties of the water and the low heat-transfer characteristics of properly installed systems.
It was reported by the Department of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency [26] that households with a modern SHW
system generally save 1.5–2 kilowatt-hours (kWh) per day on hot water-related energy costs when compared with
traditional hot water systems.
Figure 3-2 depicts the visual timelines of Solar Cities› programs, trial deployment and government initiatives regarding the
SHW intervention.

EEHP 3 Feb 09 – 19 Feb 10
REBS 19 Feb 10 – 30 Jun 12
Federal
REBS Announcement 28 Feb 12
Government
Discontinuation of REBS
Queensland Govt. Solar Hot Water Rebate 13 Apr 10 – 28 Sep 12
Queensland Govt. Solar Hot Water Rebate 22 Jun 12
State
Announcement of Discontinuation of Qld govt solar hot water rebate
Government
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

SHW trial 1 Oct 11 – 30 Jun 12
SHW trial 1 Apr 08 – 1 Dec 11
SHW trial 1 Apr 09 – 1 Dec 09
SHW trial 1 Apr 10 – 1 Mar 12
Solar cities
SHW trial 1 Apr 10 – 1 Sep 12
SHW trial 1 Apr 09 – 1 Jun 12
Figure 3-2: Visual timelines of Solar Cities’ programs, trial deployment and government initiatives regarding the solar hot water intervention
57
3.3.1 Solar Cities trials
All the Solar Cities deployed SHW systems as part of their programs. The uptake of SHW systems was affected by a variety of
Australian and state government incentives during the Solar Cities Program, and these are outlined in Section 3.1.
The following outlines the basic details for each of the Solar Cities.
3.3.1.1 Adelaide
The SHW trial component of the Adelaide Solar City program was launched on 23 July 2011 with the distribution of Origin
advertising catalogues in the Adelaide Solar City area. Participants were recruited primarily through a web-based marketing
campaign. Adelaide Solar City reported that the high upfront cost of SHW and heat pump systems, in comparison with
electric and gas water heaters, was identified as a significant barrier for purchase in the absence of government subsidies.
This was particularly the case for disadvantaged groups. Origin offered a discount of $250 on the price of SHW and heat
pump units, and an additional discount of $250 (making a total of $500) was offered by the Adelaide Solar City project. The
additional discount of $250 offered by the Adelaide Solar City project was later increased to $500, thus enabling participants
to obtain a $750 discount on the price of a SHW or heat pump unit. The Australian government announced in late February
2012 that the subsidy of $1,000 for a SHW system or $600 for a heat pump unit under the Renewable Energy Bonus Scheme
would be discontinued on 30 June 2012. Marketing for these products was reduced as a result. Active campaigning activities
ceased in April 2012 due to low uptake numbers, with 11 participating households. This consisted of four customers from
the Origin sales campaign and seven from Housing SA participants. Sales activities for residential SHW systems and heat
pumps ceased on 30 June 2012.
A summary of Adelaide Solar City’s SHW trial is shown in Table 28.
Table 28: Summary of solar hot water trial conducted by Adelaide Solar City

Number of participants 10 –
Start of trial July 2011 –
Participation/recruitment Participants recruited through an online Service had to be requested. Not related to the
advertising campaign energy audit trial

A commercial company, commissioned by Alice Solar City, conducted a telephone survey at the inception of the Alice
Springs program. The survey indicated that in early 2008, 52 per cent of Alice Springs’ households had a SHW system (49 per
cent with electric boost, 3 per cent with gas boost), 25 per cent had an electric storage hot water system and 23 per cent
had a form of gas hot water system. This shows the presence of significant awareness and use of SHW systems in Alice
Springs at the beginning of the Alice Solar City project.
The objectives of the residential SHW trial of the Alice Solar City project were to:
• increase the uptake of SHW in houses with electric or gas hot water storage systems
• contribute to reduce demand on electricity generation, and reduce greenhouse gas emissions by replacing existing
electric and gas storage systems.
At the beginning of the program, Alice Solar City established a sole-provider agreement with Solahart for the supply of SHW
systems. Local plumbers could apply to Alice Solar City to become a registered Alice Solar City supplier for installation and
servicing of SHW systems. Table 29 shows the different types of SHW systems offered under the Alice Solar City project.
Four different systems using 180 and 300-litre tanks were initially available, and three additional 270-litre split systems were
later added. A heat pump hot water option with 270-litre capacity was added in 2010, to cater households where it was not
practical or feasible to install a SHW system.

Table 29: Solar hot water systems offered under the Alice Solar City project
SYSTEM TANK CAPACITY (L) PANEL AREA (M2) BOOST ELEMENT
Solahart 302J OTP Electric Boost 300 2 x 1.87 2.4 kW

Solahart 302JOTP Gas Boost 300 2 x 1.87 Approx. 20 L/m
Solahart 181J OTP Electric Boost 180 1 x 1.87 2.4 kW
Solahart 181J OTP Gas Boost 180 1 x 1.87 Approx. 20 L/m
Solahart Streamline 272 DJV Electric Boost Split 270 2 x 1.87 2.4 kW
Solahart Streamline DJV272 Integrated Gas Boost Split 270 2 x 1.87 Approx. 20 L/m
Solahart Streamline DJV272 Gas In-line Boost Split 270 2 x 1.87 Approx. 20 L/m
Participants for the trial were recruited through the HEA process and associated recommendations. Other customers were
able to contact the Alice Solar City office at a later date and request a voucher to purchase a SHW unit. The installation of a
SHW unit under the Alice Solar City program was the same as that for other energy-efficiency measures (see Section 3.2.2.2
for details). The initial target of the Alice Solar City project was to install 1,000 SHW systems over the course of the project.
The Alice Solar City SHW system vouchers offered a 35 per cent incentive, up to $2,000, towards the cost of installing a SHW
system with electric boost, or up to $2,100 off the cost of installing a SHW system with gas boost. Solahart provided a $150
rebate to Alice Solar City customers. From late 2010, vouchers for discounts of 35 per cent, up to a maximum of $1,000,
were also offered towards the cost of installing a heat pump hot water system.
By the end of September 2012, 854 SHW systems had been installed as part of the Alice Solar City project, and about
93 per cent of these systems were 300-litre electric boost units. About 55 per cent of all installations were replacements of
existing, but faulty solar systems with an electric boost, and 33 per cent were for replacement of electric storage systems. A
summary of Alice Solar City’s SHW trial is shown in Table 30.
Table 30: Summary of solar hot water trial conducted by Alice Solar City

Number of participants 823 (Aug 2012) –
Participation/recruitment Participants sourced from customer base, Installation was allowed prior to the HEA if deemed
following home energy audit (HEA) urgent by the customer, incentive then paid direct to
Customers could also request a voucher at the customer after the audit
a later date following an HEA
3.3.1.3 Blacktown
SHW systems were offered in the Blacktown Solar City project under two different trials. One of the trials was promoted and
advertised together with one of its solar PV offer branded as Solar Home Offer 2. This package, priced at $7,808, involved
the supply and installation of a BP Solar Energizer 1kW solar PV system with a SHW system [30]. ANZ provided finance
options for the purchase of solar PV and SHW systems in the Blacktown Solar City project. The other trial was Blacktown
Solar City’s Department of Housing Retrofit program. Under this program, electric hot water systems in Department of
Housing premises were replaced with SHW systems, and solar PV systems were installed to reduce the energy bills of
tenants. The cost for the systems was taken up by Housing New South Wales and there was no charge to qualifying tenants.
The Australian Government announced the introduction of an Energy Efficient Homes Package on 3 February 2009. Under
this scheme, a $1,600 rebate was offered for SHW installation to all eligible Australian home owner-occupiers. Blacktown
Solar City was not able to clearly explain to customers whether they would be able to claim the rebate, and this appeared to
have a significant impact on the sales of the Solar Home Offer 2 package.
A total of 152 SHW systems were installed as part of the Blacktown Solar City project. Of these, 52 were part of the Solar
Home Offer 2 package, and the remainder were part of the Department of Housing Retrofit package. A summary of
Blacktown Solar City’s SHW trial is shown in Table 31.
59
Table 31: Summary of solar hot water trial conducted by Blacktown Solar City
Participation target Information unavailable –

Start of trial November 2008 –
Participation/recruitment Systems were offered to participants at the PV offers were sent to customers in the project
same time as solar photovoltaic (PV) was localities, through the project website, call centre,
offered, using the same marketing channels project events and council staff
and eligibility criteria

As part of Central Victoria Solar City project’s SHW offer, participants were offered $500 cash back for purchasing and
installing a SHW system of their choice. This was made up of a $250 bonus from the project office on receipt of purchase
and installation receipts, and a $250 performance bonus at the end of the trial. Participants were required to complete all
relevant surveys to receive the performance bonus at the end of the trial.
Central Victoria Solar City project’s SHW installations began in early 2010, with the original offer presenting a choice of
three Origin SHW products. This offer was revised later in 2010, when Central Victoria Solar City decided to open up the
supply and installation of SHW product to all providers across the region, to allow for timely post-installation follow-up.
Another reason for the change was that some participants wanted to purchase evacuated solar tube systems, which were
unavailable through Origin. As a result of the redesigned offers, participants were able to choose their own systems.
Sixty-five households purchased and installed a SHW system under the Central Victoria Solar City program. A summary of
the SHW trial conducted by Central Victoria Solar City is shown in Table 32.
Table 32: Summary of solar hot water trial conducted by Central Victoria Solar City
METRIC DETAILS
Participation target 65
Number of participants 65
Start of trial August 2010
End of trial December 2011
Participation/recruitment Participants sourced through the home energy audit process
3.3.1.5 Moreland
Participants for the SHW trial were recruited through mainstream media channels, council publications and via existing
participants of Zero Carbon Moreland. Residents purchased systems from a recommended supplier who underwent rigorous
technical and customer service checks by Moreland Energy Foundation Limited. The supplier offered discounts to residents
and no additional financial assistance was provided. Among the results of these offers was the installation of 108 SHW
systems. A summary of the SHW trial conducted by Moreland Solar City is shown in Table 33.
Table 33: Summary of solar hot water trial conducted by Moreland Solar City
Participation target Nil –

Start of trial May 2011 –
End of trial March 2012 –
Participation/recruitment Participants through general advertising: Solar hot water supplier was recommended by the
local newspapers and radio. Targeted program, price was negotiated on behalf of the residents
promotions: council mail outs, community and independent technical expertise was provided by
facilities and e-mail groups. Moreland Energy Foundation Limited

3.3.1.6 Perth
Solahart, one of the consortium members of the Perth Solar City project, was responsible for running the residential
SHW trial of the project. An incentive of $1,100 discount was provided by Perth Solar City and Solahart to residents in
Perth’s eastern region for the purchase of a family-sized Solahart SHW system [11]. The discount offered was in addition
to other state and Australian Government rebates and applied for both electric and gas-boosted SHW systems. The uptake
of SHW systems was affected by both the reductions to the solar PV multiplier (from five to three) in late 2011, and the
announcement of the discontinuation of the Australian Government’s renewable energy bonus scheme in February 2012.
An additional incentive of $550 (total discount of $1,650) was offered to households, in late 2011 and early 2012, to
encourage sales of SHW systems.
Solahart dealers received Perth Solar City referrals from the Living Smart program, enquiries through the Perth Solar City call
centre, and directly from the public. The average cost to households for the purchase of an electric or a gas-boosted SHW
system was $3,724 and $4,592 respectively [11].
A total of 1,157 SHW systems were purchased and installed as part of the Perth Solar City project. The majority (98 per cent)
of these systems were electric-boosted [11]. A summary of the SHW trial conducted by Perth Solar City is shown in Table 34.
Table 34: Summary of solar hot water trial conducted by Perth Solar City
METRIC DETAILS
Participation target 1,200

Number of participants 1,157
Start of trial December 2009
End of trial September 2012
Participation/recruitment Participants were recruited via Solahart dealers and Perth Solar City broad-reach, direct-marketing
campaigns; solar hot water systems also offered through Living Smart as part of a self-directed coaching
conversation (via referral to Solahart dealer)
3.3.1.7 Townsville
As part of Townsville Solar City project’s HEA trial, cash-back vouchers (introduced in April 2009) were offered to encourage
residents to retrofit their homes with energy efficiency in mind, including appliance upgrades. One use of the vouchers
was to upgrade a household’s existing hot water system to a SHW system. If the existing hot water service was satisfactory,
recommendations were not made for a SHW or a heat pump system during the energy assessments in the early stages of the
Townsville Solar City project. This was due to the high upfront cost of purchasing a SHW system. However, when government
rebates were offered, recommendations were made and some households took the opportunity to upgrade to SHW – mostly
in the form of heat pumps. The voucher value was generally equivalent to the difference in price between an efficient and an
inefficient appliance. Townsville Solar City reported that on average, only half the vouchers that were issued were redeemed.
The Australian Government provided rebates of $1,000 for approved SHW systems, or $600 for approved heat pumps,
through the Renewable Energy Bonus Scheme. However, the government announced on 28 February 2012, that this scheme
would be discontinued on 30 June 2012. The Queensland Government Solar Hot Water Rebate was introduced in April 2010.
It provided a rebate of $1,000 for pensioners and low-income earners, and $600 for other households.
A total of 106 SHW systems were installed as part of the Townsville Solar City project. A summary of the SHW trial
conducted by Townsville Solar City is shown in Table 35.
Table 35: Summary of solar hot water trial conducted by Townsville Solar City
Number of participants 106 Not known at time of this report
Start of trial February 2008 –
End of trial June 2012
Participation/recruitment Participants sourced through the home energy audit process –
61
3.4 Cost-reflective pricing
3.4.1 Overview
Demands on the electricity network are not uniform over time. Consumption patterns vary with, among other things, the
time of day and the season. Of particular concern to electricity utilities are peak periods – those times when demand is
significantly higher than average.
Supplying peak demand is expensive. In the short term, it is costly in terms of exposure to generation market price spikes,
and efforts to hedge against this volatility. In the longer term, there are significant costs in maintaining and, in particular,
augmenting a network so it can cope with demand peaks that may only occur in a few short periods each year. While these
costs are ultimately passed on to the consumer through higher electricity prices, they tend to be spread out over relatively
long billing periods. Due to an absence of short-term feedback, the residential consumer is largely shielded from the
time‑varying nature of the true supply cost – that is, the price they pay for each unit of energy is not cost reflective.
Cost-reflective pricing is an attempt to encourage customers to reduce their electricity consumption during peak periods by
providing them with price signals that reflect, to some extent, the cost of supply during a particular time period. The Solar
Cities program trialled three approaches to cost-reflective pricing – time-of-use tariffs, critical peak pricing (CPP), and peak
demand reduction rewards.
cost-reflective pricing interventions.
3.4.1.1 Time-of-use tariffs

Time-of-use tariffs attempt to provide cost reflectivity by establishing a pricing schedule that reflects typical daily
consumption patterns and associated energy supply costs. Over a day, and on different days of the week, electricity
consumption across the network varies with some regularity. Among other factors, this reflects:
• space cooling and heating patterns over the day
• typical office hours
• the difference between weekday and weekend consumption.
Time-of-use tariffs reflect these patterns by breaking the day up into several time-interval bands. Each band has a different
price per unit of electrical energy supplied. Generally, a higher-priced peak period corresponds to the part of the day when
there is relatively high demand: for example, early evening on weekdays when people return from work. Other periods
are based on diminishing levels of demand and are priced accordingly. This gives occupants an incentive to shift their
consumption from peak periods to times of low demand. Examples include turning the clothes dryer on late at night instead
of when they get home from work, or eliminating the demand completely by using the clothesline instead.

Critical peak pricing (CPP) provides more targeted and time-specific cost reflectivity than time-of-use tariffs. CPP aims to
change energy-consumption behaviour related to forecast peak events on the network.
A CPP trial involves residents signing up to a scheme where they are charged a significantly higher tariff during a small
number of supplier-nominated days and time intervals, referred to subsequently as CPP events. A CPP event is called by the
supplier in response to anticipated network peak demand, such as when very high temperatures are forecast. The event
involves the supplier notifying the residents who are part of the scheme that, for example, the CPP tariff will apply the
following day between 2:00 pm and 8:00 pm. The conditions of signing up to the Solar Cities trials restricted the number of
CPP events to 7–10 per season. Trial participants were usually offered other incentives to participate in the scheme, such as
provision of an IHD or a reduced tariff for time periods outside the CPP event period.

3.4.1.3 Peak demand reduction rewards
Another approach taken during the Solar Cities trials was to provide residents with a financial reward if they reduced their
consumption during peak periods. Townsville Solar City, for example, identified a peak demand period (between 6:00 pm
and 9:00 pm). They offered residents monetary incentives for each unit of electrical energy they reduced their consumption
by during these hours, relative to their consumption during the same month the previous year. This reward-based approach
contrasts with CPP, in which the mechanism is essentially punitive; if residents do not reduce their consumption during a
CPP event, they are charged a significantly higher amount for their consumption.
3.4.1.4 Consumption reduction reward

In addition to programs that focussed on reducing peak demand, Alice Solar City offered an incentive for participants to
reduce their overall consumption. This program was not strictly cost reflective, because participants would receive the
reward if they reduced their consumption outside peak periods. However, because it was a cost-oriented program, it is
included in this section for comparison.
63
64
Solar Cities Data Analysis Report
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Time-of-use tariff trial 1 Apr 08 – Ongoing
Time-of-use tariff trial 1 Nov 08 – 1 Mar 12
Time-of-use tariff trial 1 Oct 07 – 1 Sep 09
CPP trial 1 Oct 07 – 31 Mar 09
Solar cities
Time-of-use tariff trial 24 Jan 11 – Ongoing
Peak Demand Reduction Trial 1 Oct 10 – 30 Apr 12
Note: CPP = critical peak pricing

Figure 3-3: Visual timelines of Solar Cities’ programs and trial deployment regarding cost-reflective pricing interventions
This section gives a snapshot of the cost-reflective pricing trials conducted by the Solar Cities.
3.4.2.1 Time-of-use trials

Table 36 identifies the time-of-use programs that were trialled as part of Solar Cities.
Table 36: Time-of-use programs

SOLAR CITY TRIAL/TARIFF NAME TYPE
Adelaide Smart Time of Use Peak/off-peak

Alice Springs Cost-Reflective tariff Peak/off-peak
Blacktown Seasonal Time of Use Peak/off-peak
Perth PowerShift Peak/shoulder/off-peak

Table 37 identifies the CPP programs trialled as part of the Solar Cities Program.
Table 37: Critical peak pricing programs

SOLAR CITY TRIAL
Adelaide Critical Peak Pricing Trial – Dynamic Saver

Blacktown Solar City – Dynamic Peak Pricing Trial
Blacktown Western Sydney Pricing Trial – Dynamic Peak Pricinga
a
Despite having data for the Western Sydney Pricing Trial in the Department’s Solar City database, the program was not strictly part of the Solar Cities Program.
3.4.2.3 Peak demand reduction rewards

Townsville Solar City trialled a peak-demand-reduction reward program called the Peak Demand Reduction Trial.
3.4.2.4 Consumption reduction rewards

Alice Solar City trialled a consumption-reduction-reward program called the 10:10/20:20 trial.
3.4.3 Trial details – Time-Of-Use
3.4.3.1 Adelaide
The Adelaide Solar City project conducted two different time-of-use trials, both of which were known as ‘Smart Time of
Use’ plans. The structure of the two tariffs is shown in the tables below. For the seasonal tariff, rates were lowest during off-
peak periods (from 9.00 pm to 7.00 am on weekdays and the whole weekend). Higher rates were charged for all electricity
consumed between 7.00 am and 9.00 pm on weekdays.
The structure of the whole-year time-of-use tariff as of July 2012 is shown in Table 38.
Table 38: Adelaide Solar City whole-year time-of-use tariff

TARIFF LEVEL TIME PERIOD RATE
Peak Weekdays 9.00am – 6.00pm 53.80 c/kWh

Off-peak Other times 16.90 c/kWh
The structure of the seasonal time-of-use tariff as of July 2012 is shown in Table 39.
Table 39: Adelaide Solar City seasonal time-of-use tariff

Peak (Summer: 1 Jan–31 March) Weekdays 7.00 am–9.00 pm 61.30 c/kWh

Peak (Rest of year) Weekdays 7.00 am–9.00 pm 50.52 c/kWh
Off-peak Other times 16.90 c/kWh
65
Adelaide Solar City’s Time of Use pricing product offered participants the following [7]:
• installation of a smart meter at no cost
• access to a web portal that displayed half-hourly energy usage and greenhouse gas emissions data
• a free IHD – this was limited to 550 pricing product participants
• a complimentary home assessment that included the replacement of inefficient showerheads and light bulbs
• energy tips on how to shift load
• no exit fees.
The aims of Adelaide Solar City’s cost-reflective pricing trial included:

• identifying customer preferences for different pricing structures
• quantifying the impact of behavioural change on energy consumption
• estimating the bill savings associated with different pricing structures
• determining the potential for replicating the pricing structure outside the trial area.
The Time of Use pricing products were developed based on the expectation that consumers who had the ability to shift their
‘non-essential’ peak electricity usage were likely to be best suited.
A total of 357 households participated in the Time of Use pricing trials. This represents 18.2 per cent of the total number of
Adelaide Solar City households that participated in cost-reflective pricing trials (Time of Use and Critical Peak Pricing). The
CPP product was preferred by customers. Adelaide Solar City believes this is probably because customers think it is easier to
significantly modify behaviour on a relatively small number of ‘critical peak’ days and be better off financially over the year,
instead of adopting less stringent behavioural changes every day if they adopted the Time of Use product.
The details of the trial are summarised in Table 40.
Table 40: Summary of Adelaide Solar City’s cost-reflective pricing trial

METRIC DETAILS

Start of trial April 2008
End of trial May 2011
Participation Participants sourced from direct mail, telemarketing, and local newspaper advertising

Alice Springs introduced the Cost-Reflective Tariff (CRT) for its residential time-of-use trial. The aims of this trial, as reported
by Alice Solar City, included:
• trialling a two-level (peak/off-peak) CRT for a group of Alice Solar City residential customers
• trialling the use of IHDs by providing them to all customers who are on a CRT – the initial plan was to provide these to
customers at a cost, but there were provided free of charge
• examining the influence of a CRT-IHD on households’ electricity consumption patterns, in particular the shifting of
electricity consumption (load) from peak to off-peak periods
• raising awareness among the trial group of the economic benefits for PWC, and therefore its customers, of shifting load
from peak to off-peak periods.
A two-tiered tariff structure, as shown Table 41, was established and structured to use the same price points as pre-existing
commercial time-of-use tariff, but with different peak and off-peak periods.

Table 41: Alice Solar City cost-reflective tariff structure
Peak Weekdays 9.00 am–6.00 pm 23.11 c/kWh (start of trial – 2008–2009)

29.43 c/kWh (2011–2012)
Off-peak Weekends and weekdays 6.00 pm–9.00 am 13.01 c/kWh (start of trial – 2008–2009)
16.57 c/kWh (2011–2012)
Participants for the CRT trial were mostly recruited through discussions with the assessor during HEAs. An online calculator
was developed to help households assess their level of benefit from the CRT. Households that installed a rooftop solar PV
system under the Alice Solar City program were also required to move onto the CRT, and were also provided with an IHD
that displayed PV generation as well as peak/off-peak consumption. Therefore, two groups of customers participated in the
CRT-IHD trial. Households who voluntarily chose to be on the CRT trial following an HEA had to agree to be on the trial for
a minimum of 12 months (with the option to return to the flat-rate tariff after the 12-month period). All participants in the
CRT-IHD trial were offered a ‘no worse-off safety net’ to ensure that they were not disadvantaged by their involvement. This
meant that if the cost of electricity consumed per billing period at the CRT rates was greater than what would have been the
cost at the flat-rate tariff, a refund of the extra cost incurred would be provided. Residents had to apply to Alice Solar City for
the refund, which, if approved, appeared as a credit on a subsequent electricity bill.
Three hundred and seventy-eight households voluntarily participated in the Alice Solar City’s CRT trial, and an additional 277
households that had a BP-PV system installed were placed on the CRT tariff.
The trial was conducted as per Table 42.
Table 42: Summary of Alice Solar City’s cost-reflective tariff trial

METRIC DETAILS

Number of participants – CRT only 378
Number of participants – CRT and BP-PV 277
Start of trial June 2008
End of trial July 2013
Participation Participants sourced from home energy audits
Note: BP= BP Solar; CRT = cost-reflective tariff; PV = photovoltaic
3.4.3.3 Blacktown
Blacktown conducted a ‘Seasonal Time Of Use’ trial for the Solar Cities project. One aim of this trial was to provide
participants with a better reflection of the true cost of electricity delivery by introducing differentiated tariffs.
Before the trial, participants were on an ‘incline block’ tariff, where the amount charged per unit of energy consumed
increases once consumption passes a certain threshold.
Table 43 describes the trial’s tariff structure.
Table 43: Blacktown Solar City’s time-of-use tariff structure

Fixed daily charge N/A 44.88 c/day

Seasonal peak (1 Nov–31 Mar) 1.00 pm–8.00 pm 37.67 c/kWh
Off-peak All other times 12.26 c/kWh
A total of 270 households participated in Blacktown Solar City’s time-of-use trial, which ended in October 2009. Two focus
groups were held at the end of the trial to investigate customer attitudes to and experience of this trial.
A summary of the trial is shown in the Table 44.
67
Table 44: Summary of Blacktown Solar City’s time-of-use trial
METRIC DETAILS

Start of trial October 2007
Participation Participants sourced from home energy audits, telemarketing, direct mail and door-to-door
3.4.3.4 Perth
Synergy introduced the ‘PowerShift’ time-of-use tariff for the Perth Solar City project. Before the Solar Cities program, the
relevant householders had the option of two existing tariff structures:
• ‘A1’ – flat tariff of 24.89 c/kWh
• ‘SmartPower’ – branded time-of-use tariff with peak period of 11:00 am–5:00 pm during weekdays in summer charged
at 45.88 c/kWh.
PowerShift introduced the three-tier tariff structure (as of July 2012) shown in Table 45.
Table 45: Perth Solar City’s time-of-use tariff structure

Super peak Weekdays 2.00 pm–8.00 pm 40.15 c/kWh

Peak Weekdays 7.00 am–2.00 pm 23.08 c/kWh
Weekdays 8.00 pm–10.00 pm
Weekends 7.00 am–10.00 pm
Off-peak All days 10.00 pm–7.00 am 13.04 c/kWh
Synergy was responsible for recruiting participants for Perth Solar City’s PowerShift trial. To participate, the household had to
have an interval meter. This could either be a smart meter installed as part of the Perth Solar City project, or a reprogrammable
electronic meter. Households that had a basic meter could also participate, but required a meter exchange, which cost
the household $176.15 for a single-phase meter or $276 for a three-phase meter [11]. As this was seen to be a barrier to
participation for such households, Western Power agreed to waive the meter exchange cost for up to 500 participants. Before
starting the recruitment campaign, Synergy developed an interactive web-based calculator to help households evaluate
whether they could save on their electricity bills by shifting some of their consumption to off-peak periods. Synergy launched
the bundled PowerShift and IHD (called Max in the Perth Solar City project) product offer in January 2011.
The objectives of Perth Solar City’s time-of-use tariff trial were to understand the potential for a voluntary peak-demand
based price signal to [11]:
• shift household electricity consumption from periods of peak demand to periods of off-peak demand
• reduce household electricity costs.
A total of 746 households participated in Perth Solar City’s time-of-use tariff trial.
A summary of the trial is shown in Table 46.

Table 46: Summary of Perth Solar City’s time-of-use trial
Participation target 5,000 reduced to 1,000 –

Number of participants 746 475 households received a smart meter as part of signing up to the
program
271 households either already had an appropriate interval-capable
(non-smart meter) meter installed before the trial, or received one
installed at no cost under the trial
Start of trial September 2010 –
End of trial September 2012 –
Participation Voluntary sign-up –
3.4.4 Trial details – critical peak pricing
3.4.4.1 Adelaide
Adelaide introduced two pricing structures for their CPP trials, referred to as ‘Option 1’ and ‘Option 2’, allowing for an
investigation into the impact of different pricing regimes on behaviour. The pricing structures for the two options are shown
in the summary table below.
Adelaide Solar City developed questions to identify participant suitability for each of the pricing options. The qualifying
questions for CPP were mainly aimed at identifying participants who [7]:
• had discretionary appliances, such as air conditioners, pool pumps or second fridges
• liked to have control over their energy bills
• were keen budgeters
• had the economic means to invest in energy-efficient appliances and building technology
• were attracted to new technology and innovative ideas
• had an appetite and eagerness for knowledge and information
• had a strong community, environmental and social focus.
The CPP Option 1 package was significantly more popular than Option 2, with about 85 per cent of participants choosing
Option 1 [7]. Some CPP trial participants had Origin IHD units, which gave them access to real-time information on solar PV
generation, household consumption and energy imported from the grid.
Participants were notified of CPP events 24 hours before the event via telephone calls, short message service (SMS), e-mail
and IHDs. A maximum of ten CPP events were allowed to be called between 1 December and 31 March each year. These
events were expected to occur when the temperature was 30 °C or higher. However, some events were called at lower
temperatures to test participants’ responses.
Events were limited to:

• occur only between 2.00 pm and 8.00 pm on weekdays (excluding public holidays)
• run for no more than two consecutive days.
Nine critical peak events were called in the 2011/2012 summer period. Critical peak events were also called between
1 December and 31 March in each of the previous three years.
A total of 1,600 participants took part in Adelaide Solar City’s CPP trial [7].
Adelaide Solar City’s CPP trial is summarised in Table 47.
69
Table 47: Summary of Adelaide Solar City’s critical peak pricing trial

End of trial July 2012 –
Participation Participants self-selected in response to –
broadcast and targeted advertising of
program
Notification method • telephone –
• SMS
• e-mail
• in-home display
Notice given Participants contacted the day before the –
critical peak pricing (CPP) event
Maximum CPP event count per participant Up to 10 per year –
Event trigger(s) Primarily forecast high temperature Some trials conducted on low-
temperature days for response testing
Peak pricea (2:00 pm–8:00 pm, up to 10 days 390.4 c/kWh (Option 1) –
per annum) 179.40 c/kWh (Option 2)
Off-peak pricea (other times) 28.60 c/kWh (Option 1) –
32.80 c/kWh (Option 2)
Peak duration 2.00 pm–8.00 pm –
a
Prices as at 1 July 2012
3.4.4.2 Blacktown
Blacktown Solar City’s CPP trial was known as the ‘Dynamic Peak Pricing’ trial. Similar to Adelaide Solar City, two tariff
structures, labelled ‘Light’ and ‘Medium’, were trialled to evaluate whether pricing was a critical factor of response.
Participants of the CPP trial were notified of an event the day before. Events were called when the forecast temperature was
either below 10 °C or above 35 °C – these days corresponded to high-demand days. Notification of CPP events was by SMS,
e-mail or IHD (if participants had one) and participants could choose their preferred method. The number of events called
for the CPP trial of Blacktown Solar City and Western Sydney Pricing Trial projects over the years since August 2006 are
shown in Table 48.
Table 48: Blacktown Solar City critical peak pricing events

NO. OF CRITICAL PEAK
PERIOD PRICING EVENTS
Summer 2006/2007 5
Winter 2007 7
Summer 2007/2008 12
Winter 2008 2
Summer 2008/2009 14
The number of participant households for the CPP trials of the Western Sydney Pricing Trial and Blacktown Solar City
projects was 448 and 303, respectively. CSIRO was not provided with background information on the Western Sydney Pricing
trial, such as how it was conducted or how customers were notified. As a result, any conclusions relating to those trials
should be considered indicative.
Details for the Blacktown Solar City CPP trials are summarised in Table 49.

Table 49: Summary of Blacktown Solar City’s critical peak pricing trial
METRIC DETAILS

Participation Participants sourced from home energy audits, telemarketing, direct mail and door-to-door
Notification method Phone and/or SMS
Notice given Participants contacted the day before the critical peak pricing (CPP) event
Maximum CPP event count per Up to 7 per year
participant
Event trigger(s) High demand relating to peak summer temperatures
Peak price (1:00 pm–8:00 pm,
a
56.28 c/kWh (Light)
event days) 112.56 c/kWh (Medium)
Off-peak price a (other times) 14.33 c/kWh (Light)
13.16 c/kWh (Medium)
Peak duration 1:00 pm–8:00 pm
a
Tariffs for the period July 2008–September 2009
3.4.5 Trial details – peak demand reduction reward
3.4.5.1 Townsville
Townsville Solar City introduced a residential peak demand-period rebate trial to target electricity consumption figures
during the peak demand times of 6:00 pm–9:00 pm on Magnetic Island. This trial investigated the effects of cost-reflective
incentive options for Magnetic Island residential customers, and their ability to reduce and shift daily load during the peak
demand times of between 6:00 pm and 9:00 pm daily. The trial was known as the ‘Peak Demand Reduction trial’ and lasted
18 months from its commencement in October 2010, with 83 participants.
Customers who had smart meters installed and functioning IHD units were targeted for participation in this trial. Monetary
incentives between $15 and $25 a month were paid to participants for an electricity consumption reduction of 15 per cent
or more achieved between 6.00 pm and 9.00 pm daily for that month, compared with the same month in the previous year.
The trial was only for participants on the regulated Tariff 11 class of supply. The tariff 11 is the general tariff for household
electricity consumption. If participants reduced their daily electricity consumption between 6.00 pm and 9.00 pm by
25 per cent or more over a month, compared with the same month in the previous year, a reward of $25 was paid for that
month. On completion of the trial, a payment of $100 was made to participants following an exit survey, regardless of
whether they had reduced their electricity consumption.
The Peak Demand Reduction trial was used as an opportunity to educate customers on the effects of peak demand on
the network. The trial was a way of incentivising customers who were able to shift or lower their average electricity usage
during the peak demand period of between 6.00 pm and 9.00 pm daily [29].
A summary of Townsville Solar City’s Peak Demand Reduction trial is shown in Table 50.
71
Table 50: Summary of Townsville Solar City’s peak demand reduction trial
METRIC DETAILS

End of trial April 2012
Participation Participants sourced via home energy audit
Reward structure $1 for every 1 per cent reduction of monthly consumption, relative to same month during previous year,
during the peak period. To receive the reward, a minimum 15 per cent reduction needed to be observed
($15) up to a maximum reward of $25
Peak period 6.00pm–9.00pm
3.4.6 Trial details – consumption reduction reward

Alice Solar City’s ‘10:10/20:20’ rebate program was designed to reward residents when they reduced their general electricity
consumption by 10 per cent or 20 per cent over a billing period compared with the same billing period the previous year.
If participants were able to reduce their electricity consumption by between 10 and 19 per cent compared to the same
quarter the previous year, they were given a 10 per cent discount on the cost of the electricity consumed on their present
invoice (daily supply charges not included). If participants reduced their consumption by 20 per cent or more compared to
the previous year, they received a 20 per cent discount. Participants had to present their bills to the Alice Solar City office
for assessment. Successful claims were then lodged with PWC, who provided the corresponding rebates as credits on the
participants’ subsequent electricity bills.
As at September 2012, Alice Solar City’s 10:10/20:20 trial program had 463 participants.
The 10:10/20:20 trial program is summarised in Table 51.
Table 51: Summary of Alice Solar City’s 10:10/20:20 trial
METRIC DETAILS

Start of trial March 2008
End of trial March 2013
Participation Self-selection by registered customers
Reward structure A credit equal to 10 per cent or 20 per cent reduction applied to the next bill if resident reduced
their consumption by 10/20 per cent compared with same billing period in the previous year
3.5 In-home display
3.5.1 Overview
The IHD device provides real-time feedback of electricity consumption. It allows householders to track their energy usage
in chart form based on energy (kWh) consumed. Energy-awareness information, such as carbon footprint data and total
energy consumption, can be conveyed using an IHD. The availability of real-time or near real-time power consumption
information may enable customers to be more aware of how their actions contribute to their quarterly energy bill. Most
IHDs can immediately show a power reduction when a consumer turns off an appliance.
Some IHDs also have the capability to inform the customer of the retail cost of their electricity usage. The two components
of the retail cost are the amount of energy consumed by a customer, and the retail price per unit of electricity. For example,
if a customer is on a time-of-use tariff, they will want to know the retail price of electricity to determine the best time to use

their appliances, and so reduce or minimise their energy bill. Some IHDs can also receive custom real-time messages from
the utility company regarding billing, energy prices, and event notifications such as CPP.
Three basic types of IHDs are available on the market [31]:

• simple IHD that shows by coloured lights which time-of-use rate is applicable – peak, shoulder, or off-peak
• mid-range IHD that has a numeric display in addition to lights for time-of-use rates
• high-range IHD that has a colour graphical display.
Table 52 shows the capabilities of the these three types of IHDs.
Table 52: Capabilities of in-home displays

CAPABILITY SIMPLE MID-RANGE HIGH-RANGE
Shows time-of-use rate   

Numeric display x  x
Text and graphical display x x 
Support local generation (e.g. photovoltaic) x  
Instantaneous $ or kW x  
Display of energy component of tariff x  
Numeric display of current and historic consumption x  
Graphics of current and historic consumption x x 
Greenhouse gas emissions x x 
Messaging x x 
Water and gas x x 
3.5.2 Solar Cities Trials

The following subsections describe how each Solar City trialled and rolled out IHDs.
3.5.2.1 Adelaide
Adelaide Solar City initially deployed IHDs to CPP participants, to provide them with close to real-time information on energy
consumption and as a notification method for peak events. The IHDs showed household energy usage and greenhouse gas
emissions in half-hourly intervals, as well as information such as weather forecasts. The weather forecast information could
also be used by participants to predict the likelihood of a critical peak day occurring.
A small market trial of IHDs commenced in March 2009 and the main rollout began in February 2010 when the first batch
of IHDs and installation instructions was sent to participants. Adelaide Solar City reported that about 500 participants in the
cost-reflective pricing trials received IHDs.
A solar PV version of the IHD, later developed by Origin, was introduced in May 2012. This IHD displayed near real-time
information on the household’s electricity consumption, solar PV generation, amount of electrical energy imported from
and exported to the grid, and greenhouse gas emissions from electricity use, as well as weather forecasts. Participants of
the solar IHD trial were required to complete two questionnaires six months apart.
A web portal was developed by Adelaide Solar City that provided access to energy usage and other information to around
2,600 participants of cost-reflective pricing, solar PV and SHW trials. The web portal was known as the ‘Your Power’ website.
Accessible information included both current and historical data in 30-minute intervals, enabling the user to compare their
energy usage over time from the date their smart meter was installed. Data was available for viewing on the web portal
18 hours after collection. The web portal was made available to trial participants from 2008.

All participating households of Alice Solar City’s cost-reflective pricing trial were provided with an IHD unit. As all solar PV
trial participants were required to move onto the time-of-use tariff (Alice Solar City’s cost-reflective pricing trial), this implied
that all solar PV trial participants also received an IHD. The IHD units in the Alice Solar City project were deployed by PWC.
73
The IHDs communicated with installed smart meters via a short-range wireless system, enabling householders to access
their electricity consumption and/or solar PV generation data. Every IHD was individually programmed to communicate with
a specific smart meter. The IHDs were Millenium Electronics In-home Displays, which cost approximately $350 to purchase
and an additional $120 for installation, as reported by Alice Solar City. For the cost-reflective pricing trial, PWC provided the
IHDs as part of their in-kind contribution. For the solar PV participants, the cost of the IHD was included in the overall solar
PV package price, and BP Solar was responsible for the distribution and maintenance of the IHDs.
The rollout of IHDs to participants of both the cost-reflective pricing and solar PV trials began in September 2010 and lasted
for 2–3 months. A total of 331 Millenium IHDs were deployed as part of the cost-reflective pricing trial and an additional 277
IHDs were distributed by BP Solar to the solar PV trial participants.
3.5.2.3 Blacktown
Blacktown Solar City deployed IHD units to participants of their time-of-use tariff, CPP and solar PV trials. IHDs were rolled
out in Blacktown late in the last quarter of 2009, and installation was complete by the end of the first quarter of 2012.
BP Solar provided IHDs as part of their solar PV offers, in which the cost of the IHD was included in the total price of
the solar PV package. The IHDs were installed and paired on-site by a technician, and the operation of the units was
demonstrated to each customer.
A total of 1,065 Blacktown Solar City participants were provided with an IHD, including 298 units that were associated with
the various solar PV trials.

Central Victoria Solar City offered IHD units to participants as part of their HEA. This product became available during the
second half of the HEA offer, and was recommended if customers met pre-qualifications. IHDs provided participants with
information about the cost of the energy they consume and the ability to rapidly see how changes in behaviour alter energy
consumption and expenditure. The IHDs were delivered at the same time as the installation of smart meters, and provided
displays in graphical and data formats on energy used in daily, weekly and monthly periods.
The rollout of IHDs in the Central Victoria Solar City project commenced in August 2011 and as at the end of August 2012,
524 units were installed. A fraction of all the IHDs installed were paired with the installation of solar PV systems, and the
remainder (more than 250 IHDs) represented the only technical intervention strategy undertaken.
3.5.2.5 Moreland
Instead of delivering IHDs, Moreland Solar City used the embedded network at the ‘The Nicholson’ residential apartment
development to deploy an online energy portal tailored for the site.
A web portal known as ‘My energy dashboard’ was developed by the Moreland Energy Foundation Limited for The Nicholson
residents. The online tool aimed to improve user awareness of their energy consumption and actions they could take to reduce
the costs and environmental effects of energy use. All residents had access to the web portal, with interval data uploaded
monthly. In addition, nine apartments were provided with near real-time updates (updated half‑hourly). Although the web
portal provided increased information about the users’ energy consumption, Moreland Solar City reported that there was a
strong demand for real-time data, which could not be provided due to technical and project budget reasons.
3.5.2.6 Perth
As part of Perth Solar City’s IHD trial, householders were provided with portable IHDs that showed their real-time electricity
consumption, both in energy units and cost, through wireless communication with the smart meter via the home-area
network. Synergy was responsible for procuring and deploying IHDs and recruiting trial participants.
Two generations of IHDs were developed for the Perth Solar City trial. First-generation IHDs could display [11]:
• electrical consumption information in both energy units and dollars
• historical electricity consumption based on a user-defined time range
• time-based tariff consumption blocks via a coloured light display
• current tariff rate in dollar per unit.

In addition to these capabilities, second-generation IHDs were micro-generation capable, and could show the household’s
net generation, such as when a solar PV system was installed in the home.
The first IHD in the Perth Solar City project was commissioned in February 2011. As at the end of November 2011, Synergy
deployed more than 1,900 IHD units to smart meter households, 1,544 of which were sent to smart meter households
without the householder specifically opting in to the trial [11]. Another 397 IHD units were deployed to households that
specifically opted in to the trial. Western Power pre-matched IHDs to participants’ smart meters before the participants
received the IHD. Upon receipt of the IHD, the householder was responsible for pairing the device. As at the end of
September 2012, 1,252 households were reported to have paired their IHD units.
3.5.2.7 Townsville
Townsville Solar City rolled out ‘ecoMeter’ IHD units progressively during HEAs. A few ongoing issues were faced with pairing
and communications of the IHD units with smart meters. The issues included [29]:
• poor reliability of wireless communication link between IHD and smart meter
• complicated and resource-intensive process to ‘pair’ each individual IHD with its meter, requiring trained on and off-site
staff at the time of pairing
• low integrity of the smart meter to data concentrator to the back-office communications link.
The installation of IHDs was discontinued past December 2011. A total of 355 IHDs were installed as part of the Townsville
Solar City project.
3.6 Photovoltaic installation

A substantial amount of energy can be generated by a solar PV system installed on a house’s roof. The primary component
of a solar PV power system is the PV panel, which converts sunlight into electricity. A PV panel is made up of a number of PV
cells. PV cells are generally made of a silicon wafer mixed with small amounts of carefully selected elements. The resultant
semiconductor material can convert light into electrical energy via the PV effect, which is the creation of electron flow in a
material as a result of exposure to light.
The PV panel produces direct-current power. This generally needs to be converted to alternating current power to allow
the use of standard household electrical devices and for connection to the electricity grid to export energy. The conversion
process requires a power electronics device commonly called a solar inverter.
Key challenges related to energy production using solar PV are detailed below.
Energy generation by PV systems is variable, because of the reliance on exposure to sunlight, which can vary with the time
of day, season and weather. Figure 3-4 demonstrates the variation in sunlight at the CSIRO Newcastle site, measured on a
partly cloudy day in August 2012.
75
100
900
800
700
Irradiance – Wm-2
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
0:00:00 2:24:00 4:48:00 7:12:00 9:36:00 12:00:00 14:24:00 16:48:00 19:12:00 21:36:00 0:00:0
Time of Day
Solar Data – Direct Irradiance
Figure 3-4: Direct irradiance measurements for CSIRO Newcastle solar field
Solar PV systems are generally installed with an orientation and tilt angle designed to maximise the production of electricity.
However, energy production typically does not occur at peak energy usage times in Australia. This is especially the case
during winter, when the evening peak demand period is well after the sun has already set. This can be seen from Figure 3-5,
which was generated using median energy production and consumption from solar PV installed on the rooftops of
Blacktown Solar City households.
0.45
0.4
Median kWh per half-hour interval
0.35
0.3
0.25
0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
0
0 6 12 18 24
Hour of Day
Median PV Site Cons Median PV Site Gen
Figure 3-5: Blacktown photovoltaic (PV) generation (light blue) vs. consumption (dark blue)
As a result of the variability in energy production and the potentially poor correlation of PV energy production and
consumption peaks, an electricity network cannot rely solely on PV-generated electricity to address peak demand challenges.
However, households can generate a large portion of their energy needs using solar PV systems. With the current downward
trend of solar PV prices, these systems are becoming an increasingly viable energy-saving option for households.
PV interventions.

PVRP 1 Jan 00 – 1 Nov 07
PVRP Rebate Doubled 8 May 07
SHCP 1 Nov 07 – 9 Jun 09
Solar Credits 09 Jun 09 – Ongoing
Solar Credits 01 July 11
Multiplier Change 5 to 3 Solar Credits 01 July 12 Solar Credits 01 Jan 13
Federal
Multiplier Change 3 to 2 Multiplier Change 2 to 1
Government
Carbon Tax 01 July 12 – Ongoing
NSW Feed-in-Tariff: 60 c/kWh GFiT 1 Jul 10 – 27 Oct 10 20 c/kWh NFiT 28 Oct 10 – 28 Apr 11
QLD Feed-in-Tariff: 44 c/kWh NFiT 1 Jul 08 – 9 Jul 12
State
VIC Feed-in-Tariff (Premium): 60 c/kWh NFiT 1 Nov 09 – 28 Dec11
VIC Feed-in-Tariff (Transitional): 25 c/kWh NFiT 1 Jan 12 – 31 Dec 12
Government
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Adelaide Solar City Program 5 Jun 07 – 30 Jun 13

Origin solar PV offer 1 Oct 7 – 1 May 08
BP Solar PV offer 1 Mar 08 – 1 Aug 11
Origin solar PV round 2 offer 11 May 12 – 31 May 12
Alice Solar City Program 2 Nov 07 – 30 Jun 13
Solar PV installations 1 Apr 08 – 1 Dec 10
Blacktown Solar City Program 12 Apr 07 – 30 Jun 13
Solar PV trial 1 Oct 07 – 1 Jun 11
Solar Home Offer 1: 1 Oct 07 – 1 Dec 09
Solar Home Offer: Suspension of Solar Home Offer 3 - 1 May 09
Solar cities
Solar Home Offer 4: 1 Apr 08 – 1 Dec 09
Solar Home Offer 5: 1 Sep 09 – 1 Jun 11
Central Victoria Solar City Program 10 Dec 08 – 30 Jun 13
Solar PV trial 1 Apr 10 – 1 Mar 12
Moreland Solar City Program 8 Dec 08 – 30 Jun 13
Perth Solar City Program 7 Sep 09 – 30 Jun 13
Perth - Solar PV trial 1 Dec 09 – 1 Sep 12
Townsville Queensland Solar City Program 19 Apr 07 –30 Jun 13
Solar PV trial 1 May 08 – 1 Jun 12
Note: GfiT = gross feed-in tariff; NfiT = net feed-in tariff; PV = photovoltaic; PVRP = Photovoltaic Rebate Program; SHCP = Solar Homes and Communities Plan
Figure 3-6: Visual timelines of Solar Cities’ programs, trial deployment and government initiatives regarding the photovoltaic interventions
77
All Solar Cities deployed solar PV as part of the Solar Cities Program intervention. The uptake of solar PV systems was affected
by a variety of Australian and state government incentives during the Solar Cities Program, as outlined in Section 3.1.
The following outlines the basic details for each of the Solar Cities.
3.6.1.1 Adelaide
The marketing activities associated with the residential solar PV trial of the Adelaide Solar City project commenced in the
last quarter of 2007. Initially, both BP Solar and Origin offered solar PV systems for new home buyers and also for customers
retrofitting existing homes. BP Solar provided finance-only offers for both new home and retrofit customers in conjunction
with ANZ Bank, while Origin provided cash-only offers to customers who were retrofitting existing homes. The BP Solar offer
introduced a cash option from June 2009 onwards.
The solar PV offer developed by BP Solar in early 2008 provided the options described in Table 53.
Table 53: BP Solar photovoltaic offers

BP SOLAR OFFER FEATURES
Solar residential retrofit (ANZ refinance) No up-front payment

Financed by discounted ANZ mortgage
No change in mortgage repayment levels
Solar residential new home (ANZ refinance) No up-front payment
Financed by ANZ mortgage refinance at same repayment levels as previous
loan
Solar residential new home (Green loan, self finance) Financed up-front by participant or ANZ personal loan
Financed by Green personal loan or refinance
The ANZ refinance offers aimed to reduce the barriers to customers purchasing the system. The objective was to make the
PV system an investment, with no additional cost to participants who had already obtained a new home loan. ANZ provided
participants with interest-rate discounts on mortgage loans, which did not change their monthly repayments, to service the
loan. The offer was revised in March 2008 for potential participants who were applying for a new home loan (i.e. new home
buyers and builders).
The BP Solar offers were based on 1-kW and 1.5-kW solar PV system sizes. A new solar PV offer, consisting of three financial
options (personal loan, credit card or standard variable home loan), was launched on 22 November 2008. This price of a
solar PV system under this offer was $3,495, which included the Australian Government’s Solar Homes and Communities
Plan rebate. However, this offer was withdrawn on 9 June 2009, due to customer reluctance to take up financing in the
poor economic climate, as reported by Adelaide Solar City. It was also reported that the removal of the $8,000 rebate for
households with annual income greater than $100,000 affected the sales of solar PV systems. A new offer was subsequently
developed, which was based on a single 1.5-kW residential solar PV system, marketed to both the retrofit and new-build
segments, with the option of either cash or finance. In August 2011, BP Solar announced that they would discontinue
all solar PV sales in Australia, due to a change in strategic direction in their global operations. As a result, product
responsibilities for the BP solar part of the Adelaide Solar City project were transferred to Origin. Origin commenced
marketing the former BP Solar residential solar PV offer on 11 May 2012.
Origin commenced marketing its 1-kW solar PV system offer in October 2007 for $2,995 in the residential retrofit market.
This offer included:
• Photovoltaic Rebate Program rebate of $8,000
• Origin’s GreenEnergy Home product
• an energy-efficiency pack
• smart meter installation.
The initial Origin PV marketing campaign was completed once their overall target was met in May 2008. As a result of the
transfer of the BP Solar product responsibilities, Origin recommenced marketing residential solar PV on 11 May 2012. The
new offer comprised:

• $1,000 off an Origin 1.5-kW solar PV system
• smart meter installation at no cost to the customer
• energy-efficiency pack that included an energy-saving power board and shower timer
• access to half-hourly electricity usage and solar generation via a web portal.
This Origin solar PV marketing campaign was completed on 31 May 2012.
A total of 500 residential solar PV systems were installed as part of the Adelaide Solar City project.
A snapshot of Adelaide Solar City’s residential solar PV trial is shown in Table 54.
Table 54: Summary of Adelaide Solar City’s residential solar photovoltaic trial
METRIC DETAILS

Start of trial December 2007
Participation/recruitment Participants sourced from advertising, direct mail, promotion via council channels and community events

The Alice Solar City incentives for solar PV systems were only available in the Alice Springs greater municipality, and to
residents who were connected to the local electricity grid. The aims of the Alice Solar City residential solar PV trial, as
reported by Alice Solar City, were to:
• increase the uptake of household PV
• increase household and community awareness of the PV technology, and demonstrate that PV is a viable option for
Alice Springs’ residents
• reduce demands on the local electricity generation system
• reduce greenhouse gas emissions due to household electricity consumption
• trial the influence of a cost-reflective tariff linked with installation of residential PV.
BP Solar was engaged as the sole provider of solar PV systems for residential Alice Solar City customers. As part of this trial,
BP conducted residential site assessments for PV suitability, provided quotations for installation and employed an accredited
PV system installer. All Alice Solar City-funded solar PV participants had a smart meter installed, moved onto a time-of-use
tariff and received an elevated buy back rate for PV-generated electricity. Participants were also provided with IHD units,
which communicated locally with the installed smart meters.
Three different capacity systems were made available (1, 1.5 and 2-kW systems). Alice Solar City reported that the 2-kW
systems had the highest number of uptake amongst participants. The subsidies offered to participants, which allowed them
to pay less than half of the total cost of an installed system, were a direct cash subsidy from the Alice Solar City project,
and a BP Solar ‘environmental cashback’ based on the value of the sale of certificates under the Australian Government’s
national Renewable Energy Target scheme.
Initially, the BP Solar environmental cashback represented the purchase of RECs at a fixed rate. Following changes to the
Renewable Energy Target scheme, it represented purchase of STCs under the Small-scale Renewable Energy Scheme,
including the new Solar Credits multiplier. Alice Solar City reduced its capital incentive accordingly, so that the net cost to
customers remained unchanged after the introduction of the Small-scale Renewable Energy Scheme. The BP environmental
cashback meant that BP received the RECs/STCs for the installation of the PV system. Customers could, however, choose not
to receive the BP environmental cashback, resulting in a higher net upfront cost and customer ownership of the RECs/STCs.
The package prices of the solar PV systems decreased after June 2009 due to global reductions in the cost of solar PV
systems. Table 55 shows the total costs of these three systems, both before and after June 2009, along with the associated
Alice Solar City incentive. The value of the BP Solar ‘environmental cashback’ is not included in this table.
79
Table 55: Alice Solar City photovoltaic systems
SYSTEM SIZE (KW) BEFORE JUNE 2009 AFTER JUNE 2009
Total Alice Solar City incentive Total Alice Solar City incentive
Energizer 1000 1 $14,900.00 $7,920.00 $13,981.99 $7,920.00
Energizer 1500 1.5 $20,208.00 $10,104.00 $18,394.68 $9,197.34
Energizer 2000 2 $25,042.00 $12,521.00 $21,157.95 $10,578.97
One of the requirements for customers that received the Alice Solar City incentive to purchase a BP Solar PV system was to
move onto a cost-reflective (time-of-use) tariff with peak and off-peak periods and tariffs. Details on Alice Solar City’s CRT
program are given in Section 3.4.3.2. An elevated buyback tariff was provided all Alice Solar City solar PV participants. This
was made up of the existing PWC peak rate, and a subsidy provided from Alice Solar City funds, which was fixed at 22.65
cents per kWh of solar energy generated. Table 56 shows the breakdown of this elevated buyback tariff for the last few
financial years.
Table 56: Alice Solar City elevated buyback tariff details

COMPONENT BUYBACK TARIFF PER KWH OF SOLAR PHOTOVOLTAIC GENERATION FOR FINANCIAL YEARS
2008–2009 2009–2010 2010–2011 2011–2012 2012–2013

Power & Water 23.11 27.27 28.63 29.43 31.07
Corporation
Alice Solar City 22.65 22.65 22.65 22.65 22.65
Total buyback 45.76 49.92 51.28 52.08 53.72
A total of 277 residential rooftop solar PV systems were installed with funding support from the Alice Solar City program. All
Alice Solar City BP Solar PV installations were completed by June 2010.
A snapshot of Alice Solar City’s residential solar PV trial is shown in Table 57.
Table 57: Summary of Alice Solar City’s residential solar photovoltaic trial

End of trial July 2010 –
Participation/recruitment Community-wide advertising, initial sign up to Participants needed to be a registered customer
program and through the home energy audit and have a home energy audit to be eligible
3.6.1.3 Blacktown
A range of solar PV and SHW packages were offered to the residents of the Blacktown Local Government Area (LGA) under
a ‘Solar Home Offer’ product range as part of the Blacktown Solar City project. Table 58 outlines the different solar home
offers provided, categorised into three groups.
Table 58: Solar Home Offers by Blacktown Solar City

OFFER CATEGORY OFFER DESCRIPTION
Solar Home Offer 1 Residential retrofit Supply and installation of 1-kW photovoltaic (PV) systems
Solar Home Offer 2 Residential retrofit Supply and installation of 1-kW PV systems with solar hot water
Solar Home Offer 3 Residential refinance Supply and installation of 1.5-kW PV systems through ANZ home loans
Solar Home Offer 4 Residential new-build Supply and installation of 1-kW PV system for newly built homes at The Ponds
development
Solar Home Offer 5 Residential retrofit Supply and installation of 1.65-kW PV systems, self funded, incorporating upfront
discounts for Solar Credits

Solar Home Offers 1 and 2 aimed to provide a discounted bundled solar offer to qualifying residents in the Blacktown LGA.
The offers included the supply and installation of a 1-kW solar PV system, initially in conjunction with a residential HEA, but
were later de-bundled. The offers were made available through a discounted ANZ personal loan and incorporated a $4,000
subsidy to compete with the Australian Government’s Photovoltaic Rebate Program that was then available to households.
The offer had the intent of removing the barrier of upfront capital cost by providing a fully financed option to the customer.
Participants also had the option of funding their solar PV systems through a discounted ANZ credit card, discounted ANZ
personal loan, or self-funding option.
Solar Home Offer 3 provided a discounted solar PV offer to qualifying residents in the Blacktown LGA via a discounted new
or re-financed ANZ home loan. The offer consisted of the supply and installation of a 1-kW PV system, also incorporating
a $4,000 subsidy similar to that of the Solar Home Offers 1 and 2. The Solar Home Offer 3 was structured to test a new
financial model to address the prohibitive upfront capital costs of solar PV systems.
Solar Home Offer 4 provided a discounted solar PV offer to qualifying residents building new home in The Ponds
development. The offer consisted of the supply and installation of a discounted 1-kW solar PV system available to new-build
home customers, either via a cash option or a discounted ANZ home loan. A similar subsidy to that offered for Solar Home
Offers 1, 2 and 3 was offered for Offer 4. Customers that chose to pay cash for their solar PV system received an additional
$1,000 discount from Landcom (the developer), which was later reduced to $500 upon revision of the offer. This offer was
structured to incorporate solar PV systems into the process of building a new home, and to eliminate or reduce the barrier
to customers building a new home not having access to, or being made aware of, PV as an option at the construction stage.
Solar Home Offer 5 was launched in September 2009 and consisted of the supply and installation of a 1.65-kW solar PV
system. This offer incorporated upfront discounts for Solar Credits, but did not have any finance options and therefore had
to be self-funded.
All participants who took up solar offers received a smart meter and a specifically developed IHD unit.
As part of the Blacktown Solar City project, solar PV systems were also installed by BP Solar in their Department of Housing
Retrofit program. Under this program, SHW and solar PV systems were installed to reduce the energy bills of tenants in
Department of Housing premises. The cost for the systems was taken up by Housing NSW and there was no charge to
qualifying tenants. A total of 187 1-kW and five 2.5-kW solar PV systems were installed under the Blacktown Solar City
Department of Housing Retrofit program. Smart meters were also installed at these premises, but IHD units were not
provided. The 2.5-kW solar PV systems were used for common area lighting.
The first 16 solar PV installations of the Blacktown Solar City project took place in the quarter ending September 2007.
Following the announcement by the Australian Government of the discontinuation of the Photovoltaic Rebate Program in
May 2008, BP Solar temporarily suspended all solar PV installations in Blacktown Solar City and redefined their PV offers.
Solar Home Offers 1, 2, 3 and 4 were completed by December 2009, and Solar Home Offer 5 was completed in the second
quarter of 2011. A total of 490 solar PV systems were installed in the Blacktown Solar City project, with the breakdown for
the different solar offers and programs shown in Table 59.
Table 59: Blacktown Solar City offers and programs

OFFER NO. OF SYSTEMS INSTALLED
Solar Home Offer 1 51

Department of Housing Retrofit 1 kW 187
Department of Housing Retrofit 2.5 kW 5
A snapshot of Blacktown Solar City’s residential solar PV trial is shown in Table 60.
81
Table 60: Summary of Blacktown Solar City’s residential solar photovoltaic trial
Participation target Information unavailable –

Participation/recruitment Photovoltaic (PV) offers were sent to PV offers had system specification pre-
customers in the project localities, through determined. There were five different PV
project website, call centre, project events offers during the project
and council staff. Solar hot water was
offered in conjunction

As part of Central Victoria Solar City’s HEA, participants were offered the opportunity to purchase a 1.5-kW solar PV system
through Origin. The offer included 10 per cent off Origin’s retail price, and waiving of the Powercor service truck visit fee
and any additional inverter inspection project fees. A $250 performance bonus was also offered to participants at the end
of the trial, for which participants were required to complete all relevant surveys. A total of 521 participants signed up for
the project’s solar PV offer during their HEA. Once a household agreed to participate in the solar PV trial during a HEA, their
contact details were forwarded to Origin, who then contacted the household to make the sale. For the successful sales, the
average timeframe for the solar PV installation in the Central Victoria Solar City project was four weeks.
Residential solar PV prices changed over the duration of the trial period due to changes in government subsidies. The Victorian
Government introduced the ‘5 times’ REC multiplier for 1.5-kW systems to encourage the uptake of residential solar PV systems
[9]. The average price of 1.5-kW systems fell from around $5,000 in 2010 to $2,700 in 2011 when subsidies were increased
through RECs. Check meters, which were installed at the residences of the solar PV intervention participants, recorded solar
generation on a half-hourly basis. Data from these check meters were collected by Powercor once every six months.
Out of the 521 households that signed up for Central Victoria Solar City ’s solar PV trial, solar PV systems were installed at
482 of these residences [9]. A snapshot of Central Victoria Solar City’s solar PV trial is shown in Table 61.
Table 61: Summary of Central Victoria Solar City’s residential solar photovoltaic trial

Number of participants 521 signed up at HEA: 482 trial (research) –
participants
Start of trial August 2010 –
Participation/recruitment Participants recruited through the home energy The Home Energy Assessment Team Campaign
audit process, paid and free media advertising, delivered by home energy assessors
events and online through website, stakeholders’
newsletters and initial trial sign-ups
3.6.1.5 Moreland
Participants for the photovoltaic trial were recruited through mainstream media channels, council publications and via existing
participants of Zero Carbon Moreland. The trial was delivered in the style of a community bulk buy. Residents purchased
systems from a recommended supplier who underwent rigorous technical and customer service checks by Moreland Energy
Foundation Limited. The supplier was able to offer discount to residents and no additional financial assistance was provided.
The photovoltaic rollout was designed to take advantage of the RECs and feed-in-tariffs. The fluctuations and eventual closure
of these support structures impacted heavily on the uptake of photovoltaic systems by residents.
Table 62 summarises Moreland Solar City’s solar PV trial.

Table 62: Summary of Moreland Solar City’s residential solar photovoltaic trial
Start of trial May 2011 –
Participation/recruitment Participants sourced through general advertising: Photovoltaic system recommended by program
local newspapers, radio and targeted
promotions: council mail outs, community
facilities and e-mail groups
3.6.1.6 Perth
Perth Solar City encouraged households to take up solar PV systems by offering a financial discount. A minimum discount
of $1,260 on SunPower residential solar PV systems was provided to households in Perth’s eastern region. The discount
was made available through selected SunPower dealers in the region, and is in addition to other rebates such as RECs
and Western Australia’s residential net feed-in-tariff. Perth Solar City reported that the Western Australian Government’s
discontinuation of the residential feed-in tariff, combined with a reduction in the price of the RECs, significantly reduced
demand for residential solar PV systems from July 2011. To address this decline, Perth Solar City increased the available
discount via targeted campaigns.
SunPower dealers received Perth Solar City referrals from the Living Smart Program, through enquiries to the Perth Solar
City call centre, and also directly from the public. SunPower’s objective was to install a total of 825 residential solar PV
systems at a minimum size of 1.05 kW per system. A total of 673 residential solar PV systems were installed in the Perth
Solar City project. The average size of residential PV systems installed was 2.3 kW.
A snapshot of Perth Solar City’s residential solar PV trial is shown in Table 63.
Table 63: Summary of Perth Solar City’s residential solar photovoltaic trial
METRIC DETAILS

Start of trial November 2009
End of trial October 2012
Participation/recruitment Recruited via SunPower, SunPower dealers and Perth Solar City’s broad-reach direct marketing
campaigns. Photovoltaics also offered through Living Smart as part of a self-directed coaching
conversation (via referral to SunPower dealer)
3.6.1.7 Townsville
Townsville Solar City used a hosting model for their residential solar PV trial. Solar generation systems were installed on the
roofs of homes and businesses to test a new business and ownership model.
In the process of carrying out HEAs, participants’ roofs were examined to assess if they were suitable for installation of solar
PV systems. If a roof was found to be suitable, the resident or business person was asked if they were interested in hosting
a solar PV system. If so, a member of the installation team visited the premises one week later, carried out a detailed pre-
installation survey, and decided on the size of the system and the location of panels, conduits and inverter. Once the owner
signed a hosting agreement, the PV system was installed. The unsuitable roofs included old, highly shaded or asbestos roofs,
as well as multi-dwelling premises and rental houses, in which the project team could not meet with the owner.
Ergon Energy, the electricity distributor, owned and maintained the solar PV systems for the life of the asset, which is
expected to be 25 years. The electricity generated feeds directly into the grid, with the customer getting no benefit from the
generation. This is known as the utility model [12]. The roof space is rented from the owner of the house at a nominal rate.
Effectively, the owner allows Ergon Energy to install a PV system on their roof for the general good of the community and
83
for environmental altruism. Customers gained a financial advantage through savings from the HEA. Townsville City Council
waived the building certification fee for planning approval needed for installation of SHW and solar PV systems on homes.
Townsville Solar City reported that the Queensland state government’s Solar Bonus Scheme implemented in July 2008, which
provided a feed-in tariff of 44 cents per kWh, had some effect on Ergon Energy’s business model. Approximately 25 residents
were reported to have installed their own solar PV system, reducing the number of host roofs available to the project.
Since November 2007, a total of 210 residential solar PV systems have been installed by Ergon Energy. Cyclone Yasi hit
Queensland on 2 February 2011, and all 174 solar PV installations prior to this date were inspected for damage. It was found
that two sites had damaged solar panels caused by flying debris and one site had a single solar panel detached.
A snapshot of Townsville Solar City’s residential solar PV trial is shown in Table 64.
Table 64: Summary of Townsville Solar City’s residential solar photovoltaic trial
METRIC DETAILS

Start of trial November 2007
Participation/recruitment Participants sourced through home energy audit process
3.7 Direct load control
3.7.1 Overview
Direct load control (DLC), like cost-reflective pricing, addresses peak demand (see Section 3.4 for a more detailed discussion of the
issues relating to peak demand). DLC falls within the broad category of ‘demand response’ capabilities. Cost-reflective pricing uses
price signalling to encourage behaviour change, whereas DLC involves the utility exercising remote control of specific loads, as
agreed by participants, for the purpose of reducing energy consumption during peak periods. In contrast to cost-reflective pricing,
human behaviour is not as involved in the demand response equation (as long as the DLC system is operational).
Two mechanisms were used during the trials to control loads: demand response enabling devices (DREDs) and controlled
load circuits.
Figure 3-7 depicts the visual timelines of Solar Cities’ programs and trial deployment regarding the DLC interventions.
3.7.1.1 Demand response enabling device

A DRED is installed at the participant’s house, allowing remote manipulation of load-producing devices, so they use less
energy during the control interval. For an air conditioner, the DRED allows the utility to cycle the compressor for intervals of
time. The aim is that, with appropriate management, the system can reduce the energy consumption of the air conditioner
without noticeably affecting the comfort of the resident. In the case of a pool pump, the DRED allows the utility to switch off
the pump for a period of time during the DLC event window.
For Solar Cities, the DRED devices were controlled either via ‘ripple control’, where a relay is switched via frequency
signalling over the power network, or, in the case of the Perth Solar City trial, by using wireless smart-meter communication
to control the DRED via the home-area network.
3.7.1.2 Controlled load circuits

In Townsville, some participants moved part of their discretionary load to circuits that would be switched off by the energy
supplier during peak times of the day. The two control tariffs are described in Table 65.
Table 65: Townsville control tariffs

METRIC DETAILS
Tariff 31 Devices on Tariff 31 circuit could run between 10.00 pm and 7.00 am
Tariff 33 Devices on Tariff 33 circuit would be available for a minimum of 18 hours per day at Ergon’s discretion

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
DLC trial 1 Jan 08 – 31 Mar 09

Year 1 events 1 Jan 08 – 31 Mar 08
DLC trial 1 Jan 11 – 31 Mar 12
Solar cities

DLC trial 1 Feb 09 – 30 Apr 09
Figure 3-7: Visual timelines of Solar Cities’ programs and trial deployment regarding the direct load control (DLC) interventions
85
Table 66 summarises the DLC trials for the three participating Solar Cities: Blacktown, Perth and Townsville. Section 3.7.3
outlines each trial.
Table 66: Summary of direct load control trials

SOLAR CITY DETAILS COMMENTS
Blacktown Air conditioners Demand response enabling device (DRED) via ripple
control
Perth Air conditioners DRED activated via remote communication with a smart
meter
Townsville Any devices on the controlled load circuit Controlled load circuit
Air conditioners and hot water systems DRED
3.7.3 Trial details
3.7.3.1 Blacktown
Blacktown Solar City’s DLC trial, conducted by Endeavour Energy, gave energy providers direct access to air conditioner
and pool pump switches to remotely control their energy consumption during periods of peak electricity demand. Only air-
conditioning units under seven years old were used for Blacktown Solar City’s DLC trial. Participants were notified of DLC
events at least the day before via SMS, e-mail or IHDs. Details of the control methodology used were not available at the
time of writing. Indirect load control was implemented with pool pumps by reprogramming the timers to turn on at certain
times of the day.
Load control of air-conditioning units involved turning the compressors off for a period of time each hour. Participating
air‑conditioning units were turned off for 20 minutes and on for 40 minutes every hour during times of peak demand,
resulting in a duty cycle of 33 per cent for the hours between 1:00 pm and 8:00 pm. Seventeen participants had AS4755-
compliant air conditioners, which were controlled so as to limit their capacity to either 75 per cent or 50 per cent, instead
of duty cycling, during the same hours on event days. For pool pump control, the majority of the participants used a timer
to adjust switching rather than DLC. This was due to technical complexities of the chlorinator being on while the pump was
controlled off resulting in a potential safety hazard if chlorine gas was to build up.
A total of 15 DLC events were called by Blacktown Solar City over a period of two years; six events during January–March
2008 and another nine events during January–March 2009. The majority of the event days (10 out of 15) recorded
maximum temperatures above 30 oC. Two focus groups were conducted by Blacktown Solar City at the end of the trial to
investigate participants’ attitudes to and experience of this trial.
As at June 2009, 529 households remained active participants for the air conditioner control trial and another 642
households for the pool pump trial, 545 of which were on timer adjust and 97 on load control. A summary of Blacktown
Solar City’s DLC trial is shown in Table 67.

Table 67: Summary of Blacktown Solar City’s residential direct load control trial
Number of 1,134 –
participants
Start of trial October 2007 –
End of trial September 2009 –
Participation Participants sourced from home energy audits, direct Numbers of participants obtained via home energy
mail, telemarketing, shopping centre and door-to-door audit were described as ‘low’
Equipment older than 7 years was excluded from
the trial
Notification Participants were not notified of the specific times their –
air conditioner was being controlled
Incentive $25 on sign-up, $75 at completion of the trial –
Control exercised Air-conditioner controlled by DRED to run at either –
50 per cent or 75 per cent of capacity for 20 minutes
each hour during the event window
3.7.3.2 Perth
Perth Solar City’s DLC trial was known as the air-conditioner trial and was conducted by Western Power. Synergy, the
electricity retailer in the Western Australian South-West Interconnected System residential sector (for electricity users
below 50 MWh/annum), was responsible for engaging and recruiting participants for the air-conditioner trial. The financial
incentive offered to each trial participant was a $100 electricity bill credit for the first year of the trial and a $200 credit for
the second year.
Perth Solar City’s DLC events were called over the summer periods of 2010/2011 and 2011/2012. The aim of the trial was to
research the technical feasibility and cost-effectiveness of DLC as a demand-side management tool for reducing electricity
consumption at times of peak demand.
Custom-designed DREDs were installed in the air conditioners of participants for this trial. Demand response signals were
initiated by Western Power and remotely sent to smart meters in the participants’ households. The DREDs received these
signals wirelessly from the smart meters via the home-area network, which allowed the operation of the air conditioners’
compressors to be controlled. Air-conditioners with electrical capacity of less than 2 kW were initially considered unsuitable
for the trial, but Perth Solar City later decided to include at least 20 air conditioners with an electrical capacity between
1.5 kW and 2 kW. A number of different DLC event notification methods were tested, including the ‘no notification’ method.
Ten DLC events were run in the first year of the trial between January and March 2011. Air conditioners were cycled either
in alignment with other participants’ air conditioners, i.e. synchronised on and off times, or randomly across the time
period. The DLC events in the first year lasted between one and four hours. Eleven DLC events were run in the second year
of the trial between January and March 2012. The first event in the second year lasted two hours, and the remainder lasted
four hours. Two different duty cycles were applied to the operation of the air conditioners’ compressors in both years of the
trial: 50 per cent, where the compressors were on for 15 minutes and off for the next 15 minutes, and 67 per cent, where
the compressors were on for 20 minutes and off for 10 minutes every half-hour. Two different cycling configurations were
used in the second year of the trial: randomised and non-randomised. In the randomised cycling configuration, load control
commands were sent to the DREDs to stagger the start of the event randomly. For the non-randomised configuration, the
participant group was divided into two subgroups for the 50 per cent duty cycle, and three for the 67 per cent duty cycle.
Alternative event start times were programmed for each of the subgroups, to provide a balanced cycle profile: i.e. as one
group is cycled on, another is cycled off [11].
A total of 202 households participated in first year of the trial. Additional households were recruited for the second year of
the trial bringing the total number of participants for 2011/2012 trial to 380.
A summary of Perth Solar City’s DLC trial is shown in Table 68.
87
Table 68: Summary of Perth Solar City’s residential direct load control trial

Start of trial January 2011 –
Participation Participants sourced from energy retailer Participants received a $100 credit on the electricity bill
engagement and direct mail to homes with during Year 1, and $200 in Year 2
smart meters
Notification Participants were not usually notified when Perth Solar City trialled a number of communication
direct load control (DLC) was being applied methods, and found the most effective in terms of
reducing energy consumption was to not notify the
occupant that a DLC event was about to occur
Incentive Participants received $100 credit in Year 1, –
$200 in Year 2
Control exercised Air conditioner controlled by DRED run 15/15 indicates the air conditioner was cycled for 15
according to one of the following regimes: minutes off, then 15 minutes on
• 15/15 Randomisation 10/20 indicates the air conditioner was cycled for 10
• 15/15 Opposing minutes off, then 20 minutes on
• 10/20 Randomisation ‘Randomisation’ indicates the beginning of the cycling

period was randomised among the DLC pool
• 10/20 Opposing
‘Opposing’ indicates that half the participants would have
the air conditioners cycled off while the other half had
theirs on, and vice versa
3.7.3.3 Townsville
Ergon Energy undertook the deployment of Townsville Solar City’s DLC trial. Load control for hot water and air-conditioning
units was trialled at the Bright Point Apartments on Magnetic Island. This was part of the Ergon Energy Air Conditioning
Program, also known as the DREDS project due to the use of Demand Response Enabling Devices (DREDs). The program
aimed to assess the customer acquisition model with regard to customer participation, as well as test the control of
air‑conditioning compressors in a tropical climate during a summer period, while not compromising customer comfort
levels. As part of the Townsville Solar City component of this project, DREDs were installed at no cost to participants on 60
hot water units and 40 air-conditioning units (for cycling the compressors off for portions of the period of peak demand).
Testing of air conditioners was carried out between 1 February and 30 April 2009. The load control events for air
conditioners lasted two hours (2:00 pm–4:00 pm), with the exception of one event that lasted four hours. A duty cycle of
50 per cent (15 mins on and 15 minutes off) was applied to the operation of the air conditioners’ compressors, with the fan
kept on all the time. The switching of all compressors was synchronised. Townsville Solar City was unable to provide the
dates on which the air-conditioning load control were carried out, but the events generally took place when the ambient
temperature hit 30 oC.
The load control events for hot water units took place daily (until 30 April 2009) between 6:00 pm and 9:00 pm once DREDs
were installed on the hot water units.
A summary of Townsville Solar City’s DLC trial is shown in the Table 69.

Table 69: Summary of Townsville Solar City’s residential direct load control trial
METRIC DETAILS
Number of 87
participants
Start of trial February 2008
Participation Participants sourced from direct contact with resident
Control exercised Hot water was switched off remotely between 6.00 pm and 9.00 pm
Air-conditioner compressors were cycled on and off every 15 minutes for varying trial times up to four hours
3.8 Retrofit
A house can be retrofitted in various ways to reduce energy consumption and save money, while maintaining or improving
occupant comfort level. Measures such as extensive insulation, draught proofing and efficient appliances can potentially
save a household significant amount on their electricity bill due to a reduction in energy consumption [32]. The installation
of a SHW system, which is one of the reported Solar Cities interventions, can also be considered a residential retrofit. Other
residential retrofit measures include:
• double-glazing of windows
• efficient lighting – CFLs or light-emitting diode (LED) lighting
• AAA-rated showerheads.
A brief description of some of these retrofit measures and their benefits are presented in the following subsection.
retrofit interventions.
3.8.1 Insulation
Households with roof and ceiling insulation can save up to 45 per cent of their energy consumption on heating and cooling
[33]. A further 20 per cent can be saved with wall insulation. Insulation provides a barrier to heat flow and can keep the
building at a comfortable temperature year-round: warm in winter, and cool in summer [26].
The two most commonly used types of ceiling, roof and wall insulation are bulk and reflective. Bulk insulation is typically
made from materials that restrict air flow, thus minimising the heat movement. Reflective insulation uses aluminium foil
to prevent the radiation of heat into or out of the house. All types of insulation are rated by an ‘R’ value. The greater the R
value, the less heat will pass through the insulation.
Further effective ways to reduce energy consumption include installing roof vents to allow hot air to escape from the roof space,
insulating floors, sealing draughts and double-glazing windows. However, not all Cities applied or recorded the installation of
insulation. Additionally, implementing the intervention was primarily, if not entirely, the responsibility of the householder.
The recommendation of insulation may have been provided with the HEA, but the cost of installation remained with the
householders. Households with lower incomes generally live in housing with little to no insulation [8], most likely due
to the high initial cost of installation. As a result, participation numbers of this intervention in this study were very low.
Additionally, programs such as the Australian Government’s Home Insulation Program [17] (2009–2010), separate from the
Solar Cities program, meant some Cities could not directly link the installation to their programs.
Four Solar Cities listed insulation as an intervention as part of the Solar Cities Program: Adelaide, Alice Springs, Blacktown
and Moreland.
89
3.8.2 Shading
One way of improving the comfort level inside a house while saving energy is by shading the building and outdoor spaces.
Direct sun can generate the same amount of heat as a single bar radiator over each square metre of a surface, and shading
can block up to 90 per cent of this heat [26].
Unprotected glass is often the greatest source of unwanted heat gain in a house. Radiant heat from the sun passes through
glass and is absorbed by building elements and home furnishings, which then re-radiate the heat. The re-radiated heat has
a different wavelength, and cannot pass back through the glass as easily. This trapped radiant heat is desirable for winter
heating, but best avoided in summer. Shading glass is a critical way to reduce this unwanted heat gain.
Other ways of reducing summer heat gain inside a house include shading the wall and roof surfaces, particularly if they are
dark in colour.
Shading requirements vary according to climate and orientation of the house. Suggestions reported in [26] are shown in
Table 70.
Table 70: Shading options for houses of different orientations

ORIENTATION SUGGESTED SHADING TYPE
North Fixed or adjustable shading placed horizontally above window

East or west Adjustable vertical screens outside window
North-east or north-west Adjustable shading
South-east or south-west Planting
3.8.3 Lighting
Australia has seen a rapid increase in energy use due to household lighting in recent years [26]. This is due to the
construction of larger homes and the installation of more light fittings per home. Some homes could reduce the amount
of energy used for lighting by 50 per cent or more, by making smarter lighting choices and moving to more efficient
technologies [26]. Lighting contributes to 11 per cent of all greenhouse gas emissions from home energy use [26].
In February 2007, the Australian government announced plans to phase out inefficient lighting technologies where viable
energy-efficient alternatives exist, by introducing minimum energy performance standards.
3.8.4 Appliances
A significant proportion of all household energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions comes from household
appliances. A household’s energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions can be reduced by replacing inefficient
appliances with more efficient ones, and choosing appliances that are the right size for the household’s needs. Most
efficient appliances can be selected by using the appliance rating schemes. The appliances also need to be operated
efficiently and maintained carefully to maximise the savings from reduced energy consumption.

Home Insulation Program - Phase 1: 3 Feb 09 – 30 Jun 09
Home Insulation Program - Phase 2: 1 Jul 09 – 19 Feb 10
Federal
Green Loans 1 Jul 09 – 28 Feb 11
Government
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Ceiling insulation trial 1 Jan 08 – 1 Sep 09
Retrofit trial 1 Apr 08 – Ongoing
Ceiling insulation trial 1 Oct 07 – 1 Sep 09
Solar cities
Retrofit rebate offer 1 Jan 10 – 1 Mar 12
Moreland Solar City 8 Dec 08 – 30 Jun 13
Retrofit trial 1 Apr 09 – 1 Jun 12
Figure 3-8: Visual timelines of Solar Cities’ programs, trial deployment and government initiatives regarding the retrofit interventions
91
The uptake of various energy-efficiency measures, including different types of retrofits and installation of insulation,
was affected by a variety of Australian and state government incentives during the Solar Cities Program, as outlined in
Section 3.1. Five Solar Cities participated in retrofit trials, as summarised in Table 71: Adelaide, Alice Springs, Blacktown,
Central Victoria and Moreland.
Table 71: Summary of retrofit trials

SOLAR CITY RETROFIT TYPE RECORDED MECHANISM
Adelaide Ceiling insulation Promotion via press advertising, direct mail, council channels and
community events
Service had to be requested
Alice Springs Insulation and various other energy Recommended at audit, could also request a voucher at a later date
efficiency measures
Blacktown Ceiling insulation Recommended at audit, customer request, insulation provider quote,
installation
Central Victoria Insulation, appliance replacement, Recommended at audit by assessor and choice given at audit to
external shading, heating and cooling participate in retrofit rebate trial
equipment, and other energy efficiency
measures
Moreland Insulation Householder asked to estimate the installation date
3.8.6 Trial details
3.8.6.1 Adelaide
A ceiling insulation package was offered under the Adelaide Solar City program. This package included a discount on the
installation costs of implementing insulation in homes. The ceiling insulation offer was promoted primarily through print
media and direct mail marketing campaigns. The introduction of rebates of up to $1,600 under the Australian Government’s
Energy Efficient Homes Package, announced in early February 2009, made it challenging for Adelaide Solar City to continue
offering ceiling insulation at commercial rates. As a result, Adelaide Solar City’s ceiling insulation offer was suspended in
June 2009 and subsequently withdrawn.
Big Switch Projects conducted the ceiling insulation trial in the Adelaide Solar City project. Some of the participants’ homes
were intensively monitored for temperature fluctuations inside the home. This involved having one to four temperature
monitors placed in the home for one month before and two months after the installation of the ceiling insulation.
Aside from the ceiling insulation offer, energy-saving equipment that included six CFLs and an AAA-rated showerhead were
provided to participants of Adelaide Solar City’s HEA program.
Adelaide Solar City’s ceiling insulation trial was completed in June 2009 with a total of 101 participants. A summary of the
ceiling insulation trial is shown in Table 72.
Table 72: Summary of Adelaide Solar City’s ceiling insulation trial


Start of trial January 2008 –
Participation/recruitment Promotion via press advertising, direct mail, Service had to be requested
council channels and community events Not related to energy audit trial
Type of insulation recorded Ceiling insulation –

One of the main objectives of the Alice Solar City project was to promote the informed and intelligent use of electricity
within the Alice Springs community. As energy-efficiency measures contribute to this objective, financial incentives were
offered to households for undertaking these measures.
A personalised HEA report provided to households following a HEA included recommendations for the implementation of
various energy-efficiency measures, some of which were incentivised and some behavioural. If one or more incentivised
measures was agreed and recommended at the energy audit, the household received an energy-efficiency voucher providing
either a fixed or 35 per cent (with a cap) discount towards the implementation of the energy-efficiency measures. A list of the
incentives offered by Alice Solar City for various energy-efficiency measures, as at August 2011, is shown in Table 73 [27]:
Table 73: Alice Solar City energy-efficiency measures and incentives

ENERGY EFFICIENCY MEASURE FINANCIAL INCENTIVE MAXIMUM
Install a ‘one-shot’ relay for existing solar hot water (SHW) system $150
Service of existing SHW system $200
Install a heat-pump water heater system $1,000
Install double-glazed windows $3,500
Tint windows $700
Paint roof white $750
Replace old roof with white sheeting $2,500 (materials only)
Install or replace ceiling or floor insulation Between $750- $1,500
Retrofit insulation into walls $1,500
Install roof ventilation device $300
Install vertical shading on walls/windows $1,000
Install thermal ‘skin’ over external walls $1,000
Replace 12-volt halogen downlights with 240 volt compact fluorescent $350
light bulbs (CFL) or light‑emitting diode (LED) lights and fittings
Replace lighting with low-energy replacements (CFL, LED or T5 tubes) $200 (min. purchase $50)
Install motion sensors on existing outdoor lighting $150
Service evaporative air conditioner $100
Replace perished fridge seals $100
Replace old refrigerator or freezer $400
Surrender old fridge or freezer $100 voucher
Purchase swimming pool cover roller $150
Install a variable speed pool pump $400
The energy-efficiency vouchers provided to households had a validity of four months from the date of issue and were
generally cancelled if not used within this time, unless an extension was requested.
The list of energy-efficiency measures shown in Table 73 includes a number of insulation offers. Alice Solar City offered
vouchers giving incentives of 35 per cent of the cost, up to a maximum value of $750, for standard bulk insulation (batts),
and up to $1,500 for loose fibre/foam insulation. A summary of the insulation component of the trial is shown in Table 74.
93
Table 74: Summary of Alice Solar City insulation trial
Participation target No target set –

Number of participants 40 Many installed under the aborted Home
Insulation Program
Start of trial March 2008 –
Participation/recruitment Participants sourced from self-selection, advice –
provided by potential installer and through
audit process and associated recommendation.
Customers could also come into Alice Solar City
at a later date and request a voucher
Type of insulation recorded Insulation materials; glass wool Some insulation types recorded as ‘other’ and
unknown
3.8.6.3 Blacktown
A ceiling insulation offer was trialled as part of the Blacktown Solar City project. The trial was conducted by Big Switch Projects.
The trial provided an incentive of $200 per household for the installation of R3.5 glass-wool, pink batts ceiling insulation.
The residential ceiling insulation retrofit package was planned to be rolled out on 1 October 2007 to align with the
commencement of rebates of up to $300 per household offered under the New South Wales Climate Change Fund. The
Blacktown Solar City ceiling insulation trial was, however, affected by the New South Wales Climate Change Fund program.
Blacktown Solar City’s ceiling insulation offer faced considerable challenges when the Australian Government announced,
on 2 February 2009, free ceiling insulation for Australian homes as part of the Energy Efficient Homes Package. This made
the rebate offered by Blacktown Solar City not as attractive as households were able to claim back the full cost of having
their homes insulated under the national program. As a result, Blacktown Solar City’s ceiling insulation offer was suspended
in late April 2009 and subsequently discontinued.
Intensive monitoring of energy and temperature data before and after installation of insulation was planned for 50
selected households. The households were required to have a smart meter and air conditioning to be eligible for the
intensive monitoring. Data was collected for the same house for one month before and at least one month after installation
of the insulation. Four temperature sensors were installed in the monitored households, which logged the ambient
temperature every 30 minutes. Big Switch Projects collected the data from the temperature meters. The households’
energy consumption data was sampled every 30 minutes using smart meters provided by Endeavour Energy. Only a small
number of households (17) signed up for the intensive monitoring. Blacktown Solar City anticipated that the participating
household’s energy bill would reduce by $100 each year following the installation of the insulation.
A total of 139 Blacktown Solar City households participated in the discounted ceiling insulation offer. A summary of the
insulation trial of the Blacktown Solar City project is shown in Table 75.
Table 75: Summary of Blacktown Solar City insulation trial


Participation/recruitment Participants sourced from advertising Insulation recommended by program
Type of insulation recorded Insulation materials; cellulose fibre, glass wool and Some insulation types recorded as ‘other’
sheep’s wool

Participating households of Central Victoria Solar City’s HEA program were provided with a set of recommendations
designed to reduce their energy consumption in the home. Participants who chose to join the retrofit rebate package were

able to select from a range of treatments and were given up to six months to install applicable energy-saving products.
The incentive provided to participants was $500 cash back for those who spent more than $2,000 on retrofit items. A
performance bonus of $250 was also given to participants at the end of the trial, upon completion of all relevant surveys.
Among the various retrofit measures that were available, the major ones taken up by participating households included
replacing appliances, installing curtains and pelmets, external shading, insulation and heating and cooling equipment, and
double-glazing windows.
A total of 351 households participated in Central Victoria Solar City’s retrofit rebate package and implemented
recommendations received from their home energy assessor. A summary of the insulation component of Central Victoria
Solar City’s retrofit rebate trial is shown in Table 76.
Table 76: Summary of Central Victoria Solar City insulation trial

Participation target Unknown –

Participation/recruitment Participants sourced from home energy audit Insulation recommended by home energy assessor
Type of insulation recorded Unknown –
3.8.6.5 Moreland
Concession Assist, a collaboration between Moreland Energy Foundation Limited and Brotherhood of St Laurence with
support from Kildonan UnitingCare, delivered more than 1,000 energy-efficiency audits and retrofits to low-income
households across Moreland.
Retrofits were implemented during the same visits as the HEAs. The HEA included the assessor speaking to the householder
about retrofitting options and behavioural actions, and retrofitting the home with agreed products (with the householders’
permission). Products retrofitted to homes included portable fans, light bulbs, shower heads, ceiling insulation top-ups,
external blinds and standby power controllers. Concession Assist provided these retrofits at no cost to Moreland Solar City
low-income households.
In recognising that not all households have large budgets to expend on energy efficiency, Zero Carbon Moreland ran a
number of low cost retrofit programs where prices were lightly subsidised:
• Window insulation-film drive to promote a cheaper alternative to double glazing in May and June 2012. Sixty
households took part in the offer, and 260 windows were insulated across Moreland
• Draft proofing program saw 134 houses seal up the cracks and gaps in their homes, helping to reduce energy use and
also improve the thermal comfort of homes
• Summer Savers Offers attracted 68 households. Products installed included efficienct showerheads, power boards,
efficient globes, blinds, energy saving kettles and standby power controllers.
A summary of Moreland Solar City’s retrofit trial is shown in Table 77.
Table 77: Summary of Moreland Solar City retrofit trial

Number of participants 60 260 windows insulated
Start of trial June 2009 –
Participation/recruitment Participants sourced from general advertising in Insulation product was recommended by
local newspapers, SBS Radio, community radio program and provided at discounted price
and targeted promotions such as council mail
outs, community facilities and e-mail groups
Type of insulation recorded Window insulation film – type unknown –
95
4 Data preparation
This section details the processes undertaken to prepare the data for analysis by CSIRO.
4.1 Creation of database for final analysis

Over the Solar City trials period the various Cities submitted data to the Department as comma-separated files containing
the details of the interventions conducted. This data included lists of participants, trial dates and details of control groups,
as well as electricity consumption data crucial to any analysis of the effect of the intervention on consumption behaviour.
The files were loaded onto a Solar Cities database maintained by the Department. A copy of the Department’s database was
received by CSIRO in November 2012 to be used as the basis for this data analysis report. However, as a result of the long,
large and complex nature of the program, data continued to be delivered by the various Cities beyond this date, including
supplementary data requested by CSIRO to overcome identified data limitations (discussed in later parts of this section). On
4 March 2013, CSIRO and the Department took the decision to cease accepting any further data so as not to adversely affect
the delivery of the final analysis and report.
4.2 Summary of actions required to finalise dataset

There were various issues with the data presented to CSIRO that required remedial action before any analysis could be
conducted. For example, it was identified that there was significant duplication of energy data in the database (more than
one record for a particular period at a particular site), significant gaps in that same energy data (periods missing) and
inconsistencies in how energy meter channels were identified between Cities.
For trials that were analysed by CSIRO, Table 78 shows a subset of the actions needed to make dataset fit for use.
Table 78: Issues and actions taken for the Solar Cities data
ALICE
ADELAIDE SPRINGS BLACKTOWN CENTRAL VIC MORELAND PERTH TOWNSVILLE
Accumulation data (NEM13) FF FF M/S P M/S P FF
Interval data (NEM12) FF P M/S M/S N/A P P
Home energy audit P P P P M/S FF P
Photovoltaic system P P P P ND FF P
Solar hot water system P P P P ND FF P
Time-of-use tariff FF FF P N/A N/A P N/A
In-home display FF FF P FF N/A FF FF
Critical peak pricing ND N/A P N/A N/A N/A N/A
Direct load control N/A N/A P N/A N/A P ND
Control group M/S M/S P P N/A M/S FF
ND No data available
FF Data provided separately to CSIRO in flat file format that required integration before fit for use
M/S Provided in database, needed manipulation or supplementary data before fit for use
P Provided in database and fit for use
N/A Trial not conducted
NEM = National Energy Market
The remainder of this section outlines some of the limitations that were present in the finalised dataset and corrective
actions that were taken to address these limitiations (where possible).

4.3 Limitations of final dataset
4.3.1 Control data

Control groups are particularly important for gauging the impact of an intervention on a site. Without a good control group,
it is very difficult to separate out changes in behaviour that occurred as a result of the intervention itself from changes
that were a result of unaccounted-for variables. Such variables include seasonal temperature variations, changes in energy
prices, or changing attitudes to energy consumption and climate change. Ideally, participants should be randomly assigned
to intervention and control groups from the same selection pool. This provides the best conditions for drawing inferences
from the data, in particular, by avoiding systematic differences between the control and intervention groups.
Adelaide, Alice Springs, Blacktown, Central Victoria, Perth and Townsville collected energy data from a number of sites
intended for use as controls.
Control groups were recruited, or selected, using a variety of methods that differed between the Cities. Table 79 summarises
the control type, differences in how control group participants were recruited, the data associated with them, and other
important details about the control sites in each City. Additional detailed information regarding control groups for each City
can be found in Section 2.
Table 79: Control group selection and data details

DEMOGRAPHIC DATA
CITY RECRUITMENT METHOD DATA INTERVAL NOTES
Adelaide De-identified utility data Yes 30 min Group consisted of 266 randomly chosen owner-occupied
from non‑participant households that were not part of Solar Cities trials. Smart
sites meters were installed for this purpose. There was an effort
to weight their locations to match the program participant
locations
Alice Springs Formal: Advertising, Yes 30 min Recruitment began 18 months after program commencement.
recruitment of Difficulty in recruiting large numbers. These controls were
non‑intervention sites intended to be used for cost-reflective pricing only
Informal: De-identified No Quarterly Cannot explicitly distinguish between residential and
utility data from commercial sites. Outliers have been pre-filtered in an
non‑participant sites attempt to overcome this limitation
Blacktown Formal: Solar Cities and Yes 30 min Sites have a wider geographic spread than the informal
Western Sydney Pricing controls
Trial participants
Informal: De-identified Postcode only 30 min All sites are within 5 km of each other, because data is from
utility data from power line carrier and wireless data collection trials
non‑participant sites
Central Random digit dialling Yes 30 min Weightings applied to randomised dialling to remove
Victoria regional bias. Participants were aware of their sign-up as
controls. A follow-up survey asked for estimates of perceived
influence of the trial. Participants were paid to encourage
them to sign up
Perth Internal: Random No 30 min / A random selection of sites was chosen from within the
selection of sites within 60 days geographical area of the Solar Cities program, excluding
the trial area participating sites
External: Random No 30 min A random selection of sites from six suburbs nearby (but not
selection of sites within) the trial area were chosen
outside the trial area
Moreland – – – Moreland has no control group data in the current dataset
Townsville Random selection from No 30 min Participants were unlikely to be aware of program. Selected
control town exclusively from the town of Ayr, 70 km south-east of
Townsville
Random selection of No 3 months A large number of sites were chosen from non-trial sites on
sites outside the trial Magnetic Island. Data was provided in a format similar to
area NEM13, but with readings attributed to the first day of each
month, i.e. without real interval start or end dates, making it
difficult to use for accurate analysis of consumption
Note: NEM = National Energy Market
97
Selection and recruitment of controls
The creation of a representative control group was problematic for all Cities. In some cases, control data was not available,
and in no case was there random assignment to intervention and control groups.
Issues included:
1. Control group data typically was unrepresentative of the intervention groups. In particular, energy consumption
behaviour was often quite different, on average, to the intervention group.
2. Control data often had little, or no, demographic information. When random assignment is not performed, a fall-back
approach is to ‘match’ control group members with participants who received interventions on the basis of demographic
details. Without sufficient demographic details, this is not possible.
3. ‘Interval’ data for some control groups was missing (see Section 4.3.2.1 for a description of the different types of energy
readings and their utility). This made it very difficult to gauge the impact of an intervention that is intended to affect the
daily load profile of a participant.
4. Some participants were originally allocated to the control group, but subsequently received an intervention.
5. There were potential selection biases introduced through the recruiting of control groups. For example, in some trials,
the members of the control group were members of the public that opted out of being a participant in a Solar City trial.
People opting in or out of a trial may have done so because of differing attitudes to climate change. If those different
attitudes are associated with different consumption behaviour, then comparing the two groups is problematic.
4.3.2 Intervention dates being close to accumulation and interval metering changeover/border
A consistent challenge with working with the Solar Cities data concerned the timing of interventions.
4.3.2.1 Background – How consumption is measured

Electricity consumption is typically metered in one of two ways – ‘accumulation’ metering or ‘interval’ metering.
Traditionally, residences have had their electricity consumption measured over a time period which, depending on the state
they live in and the utility that provides them with electricity, is typically somewhere between 60 and 100 days. This style of
metering is referred to as ‘accumulation’ metering and is represented in the Solar Cities database as ‘NEM13’ data.
As part of Solar Cities, many participants were upgraded to an ‘interval’ (also known as ‘smart’) meter. Interval meters
are capable of recording consumption at shorter time scales – typically at 30-minute intervals. So, where a utility may
have recorded a single value to represent the consumption of a house over a three-month period for a site where an
accumulation meter was installed, the installation of an interval meter means they would now have more than 4000
individual measurements (90 days multiplied by 48 half-hour readings). The Australian Energy Market Operator specified
interchange format for interval data is NEM12.
NEM12 and NEM13 definitions12

NEM12 is an Australian Energy Market Operator specified file format for meter data used in communication between
service providers and participants with the National Energy Market (NEM). The NEM12 format is used to record a day of
electricity consumption broken up into short intervals of typically 30 minutes.
NEM13 is an Australian Energy Market Operator specified file format for meter data used in communication between
service providers and participants with the National Energy Market (NEM). The NEM13 format is used to record
accumulated consumption over an extended period – typically between 60 and 100 days.
4.3.2.2 The utility of NEM13 vs NEM12

There is a stark contrast between the utility of NEM13 and NEM12 data for data analysis purposes. A year of electricity
consumption can be represented in four or five NEM13 readings. Daily variations in consumption patterns are therefore lost,
and there is no way to assess any changes in within-day consumption patterns.
12 See http://www.aemo.com.au/Electricity/Retail-and-Metering/Metering-Services/Meter-Data-File-Format for more details of the format specification.

If the same house is interval metered, it is possible to see the variation in daily consumption that is lost with NEM13 data.
For those interventions where the profile of consumption within a day matters, NEM13 masks that detail. For example, this
would occur when assessing whether a time-of-use tariff encouraged the occupant to change the time of day where they
consumed the most electricity.
4.3.2.3 Energy Data profile

Interval meters were often rolled out to intervention sites relatively close to the time of an intervention. A recurring pattern
was observed in the data:
1. Accumulation data is collected for a site over a period of time.
2. An interval meter is installed at a site and interval data starts to be collected.
3. An intervention is conducted at a site.
4. Interval data is collected for a period of time after the intervention.
Steps 2 and 3 were often within a short period of time of each other. This had multiple effects on the ability of CSIRO to
analyse the data in depth. For example:
1. Statistical power is lost when there are very few measurements before the intervention takes place.
2. It is more difficult to produce reliable indicators of confidence in the effect of a result when the statistical properties of
the pre and post-intervention data are markedly different.
These issues will be elaborated upon in the methodology section of this report.
4.3.3 Limited electricity consumption data pre and post-intervention

A critical requirement for assessing the effect of an intervention on participant behaviour is access to electricity
consumption data before and after the intervention took place. As demonstrated in Data summary, a large number of sites
had limited amounts of energy data. In particular, many sites had a substantial amount of energy data after the intervention
was implemented but very little information before, making it difficult to gauge the effect of the intervention.
CSIRO considered sites with a minimum of 90 days pre and post-intervention energy data for analysis of ‘short-term’ impact,
and sites with a minimum of 365 days pre and post-intervention energy data for ‘long-term’ impact. Ideally, however, the
analysis would include data from multiple years’ worth of pre and post-intervention consumption so as to best account
for the effect of longer-term factors, such as fluctuations in seasonal temperature, changes in energy prices and changing
attitudes to climate change. If, for example, the data collected includes consumption data from a single summer period that
was cooler than a typical summer, then the effect of seasonal temperature fluctuations on an occupant’s behaviour may not
be accurately reflected in the data.
4.3.4 Data duplication

The data often included duplicate NEM12 and/or NEM13 records. Where the records were true duplicates (every significant
field was exactly the same), the corrective action was relatively easy to implement. In a small number of cases, the
significant values were not identical. In those cases, the corrective action was to use the most recent record submitted to
the Department.
4.3.5 Missing energy data

For some sites there were differences in energy consumption for periods where NEM12 data overlapped with NEM13.
It was expected that where data was provided from the two metering sources for the same period, that the sum of the
NEM12 daily aggregates should add up to the same value as the NEM13 consumption for that period. However, this was not
always the case. Investigating these cases further identified that this discrepancy was usually due to gaps in the energy data
provided. These gaps typically took one of two forms – either there were days missing in the NEM12 data, or there were
data missing from NEM13 metering streams for the same time interval.
Expanding this line of enquiry showed that these problems also were present in periods outside the overlapping NEM13/
NEM12 period.
99
4.3.5.1 Missing NEM12 readings
Figures 4-1 through 4.5 give an indication of the extent of the gaps present in NEM12 data for particular sites at the various
Cities (Moreland Solar City did not have NEM12 data, and so do not appear below). The criteria for appearing in the graph
is that the site was missing >5 per cent of days between their first NEM12 reading and their last (due to the large number of
sites with missing data only a subset of sites is shown).
The y-axis shows an anonymised site identifier for the participant site, and the x-axis shows the monthly interval. The
colour of each cell indicates the ‘density’ of data CSIRO received for that month. If the cell is dark blue, then 100 per cent
of days for that month have a NEM12 record present – as the shade lightens, a reduced percentage of days are covered by
NEM12 data. White cells indicate there were no records at all for that month. The density metric for each month is only an
indication of whether CSIRO received data for that month – it does not give an indication of the quality or accuracy of that
collected data.
Figure 4-1: Alice Springs NEM12 density – selected sites

Figure 4-2: Blacktown NEM12 density – selected sites
Figure 4-3: Central Victoria NEM12 density – selected sites
101
Figure 4-4: Perth NEM12 density – selected sites
Figure 4-5: Townsville NEM12 density – selected sites

4.3.5.2 Missing NEM13 metering streams
For both NEM12 and NEM13 meter readings, it is common to have multiple measurement ‘streams’ or ‘channels’ per meter.
For example, a site might have a specific metering channel for a controlled load circuit, and another for the remainder
of consumption on the site. This will result in multiple NEM13 readings for the same date and meter, with an indicator
identifying which of the streams is reflected in the measurement. Unfortunately, sites were observed with NEM13 intervals
in which only one of the metering streams was reported. In these cases, the aggregate reading for the site over that period
would be lower than it should.
4.3.6 Impact of heterogeneous intervention programs

Interventions were not deployed uniformly across the Solar Cities program. As can be seen in Section 3, the manner in which
a particular intervention was deployed varied both across the different Cities, as well as within the lifetime of a particular
City’s program. So, for example, not only did the cost to the resident of a home energy audit (HEA) vary in different Cities,
in some cases it also varied over time within an individual City’s program. With careful design, such variations are desirable,
because they would (e.g. in the case of cost) allow assessment of the effect of that criterion on intervention uptake and
efficacy. The Solar Cities data did not always allow for such an analysis. Variations were often the result of market pressures,
rather than explicit program design and the details of which offer was made to each participant was not always recorded.
CSIRO has therefore not split interventions according to different program offerings. All interventions of a particular type are
treated as if they were uniform within a given City’s program.
4.3.7 Impact of multiple interventions

Most Cities provided data on more than one intervention. A City may have conducted HEAs with some sites, installed
solar hot water (SHW) systems at others, and conducted a critical peak pricing (CPP) trial for other participants. If sites
are exposed to a single intervention and there is a statistically valid control group for those sites, then the process for
determining whether the intervention had an effect or not is relaltively straightforward.
If, however, sites experience multiple interventions and consideration is not given to experimental design, it becomes more
difficult to isolate the effect of one intervention from another. Where due care has been taken with the design, it can be
considered desirable to have multiple intervention sites, because this would allow for the analysis of interaction effects. For
example, an interaction effect could be observed in the case where:
• sites that had intervention A saved 1 kilowatt-hour (kWh) compared to the control group
• sites that had intervention B saved 1 kWh compared to the control group
• sites that had both A and B saved 4 kWh compared to the control group; i.e., the effect of the two interventions was not
additive – there was an interaction between them.
The Solar Cities dataset had multiple factors that generally worked against CSIRO’s ability to analyse any interaction effects
in detail:
• The sample sizes of participants receiving multiple interventions were usually small.
• Some interventions always preceded others. For example, all participants in Central Victoria’s Solar City trials received a
HEA prior to any other intervention. Ideally, the order of treatments would be randomly assigned.
• The amount of time between the multiple interventions was generally very small, making it difficult to isolate the effect
of the first intervention from the second.
Ultimately, these issues reflect the nature of the trials. They were generally not run with a strict experimental design.
Instead, they were often market-based trials with success criteria and constraints that did not always allow for strict
statistical rigour.
4.4 Confidence around data

Given the limitations outlined above, caution should be exercised in considering any results reported in this document as
being supportive (or not) of the effect of the trials on participant behaviour. The reported results should be interpreted
as an observation of the behaviour of the participants over the life of the trial, and not necessarily an account of a causal
relationship between interventions and changes in participant behaviour.
103
5 Data summary
This section provides a summary of the data used for analysis and details on how it was derived. It covers the filtering
applied to the data to remove sites with incomplete or abnormal records, as well as providing details on site (household)
counts for the various interventions for each City. Finally, a baseline of basic weather and household energy consumption
profiles for the seven Solar Cities is provided.
5.1 Statistical filtering

Filtering performed on the dataset before analysis included removing:
• sites with abnormally high average daily consumption (more than 150 kilowatt-hour (kWh)/day)
• sites with abnormally low average daily consumption (less than 0.2 kWh/day)
• sites with zero variance in their consumption readings
• sites missing more than 10 per cent of their readings over the period under analysis
• sites with insufficient control data around the time of the intervention
• days from the control dataset with less than 20 control sites available
• NEM13 data at a site in favour of any concurrent NEM12 data.
These processes will affect the site counts in some of the tables in the following section.
5.1.1 Final released dataset

The final dataset to be released publicly will include only minimal filtering, and will not include any filtering described in
Section 5.1 above. This will allow alternate data filtering strategies to those used in this report to be applied for future research.
5.2 Site count summaries

The quantity of data used for analysis varies for each City. Table 80 shows a summary of the number of sites in each subset
of the final database.
Table 80: Residential site counts

WITH
INTERVENTIONS WITH WITH
RESIDENTIAL SITES AND NEM12 OR INTERVENTIONS INTERVENTIONS
CITY IN DATABASE NEM13 AND NEM12 AND NEM13 NEM12 CONTROLS NEM13 CONTROLS
Adelaide 3,474 2,126 1,927 216 20 217

Alice Springs 2,529 2,262 628 2,254 1 162
Blacktown 21,667 10,169 4,953 7,911 332 409
Central Vic 2,658 1,797 1,007 248 589 671
Moreland 1,036 291 – 291 – –
Perth 5,226 4,788 882 4,228 – 17,059
Townsville 1,164 637 507 623 73 19,430
Total 37,754 22,070 9,904 15,771 1,015 37,948
Table 81 shows the number of interventions of each type performed and reported by each City, and the number of sites
available for analysis in the final data set at each stage of the data pre-processing and statistical filtering.
In addition to filtering at Perth, all sites with solar generation had to be excluded from analysis of all other interventions.
This was because nearly all PV installations used net metering, and no check metering data was available, which means
household consumption would appear abnormally low whenever solar energy was generated. After discussion with Perth
Solar City staff, it was decided that these sites should be excluded from analysis so they did not bias the results.
Moreland supplied energy data and information about a number of HEAs, but no controls, so Before–After Control–Impact
(BACI) and modelling analysis were not possible.

Table 81: Home energy audit site counts at each stage of data processing
WITH >90 WITH
REPORTED WITH ENERGY WITH >0 DAYS DAYS ENERGY USED FOR >365 DAYS USED FOR
CITY BY CITY IN DATABASE DATA ENERGY DATA DATA BACI ENERGY DATA BACI
Adelaide 1,039 937 239 169 163 151 118 115

Alice Springs 2,638 2,572 2,424 2,114 1,867 1,211 1,263 1,249
Blacktown 3,517 2,560 2,550 1,803 1,403 1,385 548 548
Central Vic 2,750 2,851 2,442 1,560 1,339 1,264 248 246
Moreland 1,000 705 291 180 144 – 62 –
Perth 3,517 3,517 3,290 2,711 1,445 1,430 98 98
Townsville 1,277 1,097 598 587 584 556 578 553
Tables 82 to 85 show the counts for photovoltaic (PV), SHW, insulation and in-home display (IHD) sites, respectively.
Table 82: Photovoltaic site counts at each stage of data processing
WITH >90 WITH

Adelaide 500 427 329 55 17 17 5 5

Alice Springs 277 312 274 270 266 183 235 232
Blacktown 510 488 485 484 476 453 464 462
Central Vic 482 492 472 447 261 233 42 39
Moreland 72 – – – – – – –
Perth 673 546 411 230 96 93 24 24
Townsville 210 193 99 95 95 12 84 14
Table 83: Solar hot water site counts at each stage of data processing
WITH >90 WITH

Adelaide 11 – – – – – – –
Alice Springs 854 882 816 705 632 414 445 441
Blacktown 152 82 82 82 82 35 1 –
Central Vic 65 72 69 56 38 – 7 –
Moreland 108 – – – – – – –
Perth 1,157 871 796 628 247 244 35 35
Townsville 106 58 29 28 28 8 28 8
Table 84: Insulation site counts at each stage of data processing
WITH >90 WITH

REPORTED BY WITH ENERGY WITH >0 DAYS DAYS ENERGY USED FOR >365 DAYS USED FOR
CITY CITY IN DATABASE a
DATA ENERGY DATA DATA BACI ENERGY DATA BACI
Adelaide 101 99 11 2 1 – – –
Alice Springs 40 40 39 34 29 19 19 19
Blacktown 139 133 133 132 129 123 128 128
Central Vic 15 – – – – – – –
Moreland 60 – – – – – – –
a
This includes records which had a non-null installation date, meaning that only sites with newly installed insulation are counted,
not those that already had pre-installed insulation.
105
Table 85: In-home display site counts at each stage of data processing
WITH >90 WITH
CITY BY CITY IN DATABASEa DATA ENERGY DATA DATA BACI ENERGY DATA BACI
Adelaide Unknown – – – – – – –
Alice Springs 331 (+277 for 338 337 335 327 313 291 291
photovoltaic
participants)
Blacktown 1,065 507 506 506 505 504 437 437
Central Vic 524 460 379 62 51 50 – –
Perth 1,252 1,235 268 263 257 211 122 91
Townsville 355 306 248 247 247 20 235 22
a
This includes sites where an in-home display was paired with the smart meter.
5.3 Baselines
5.3.1 Weather
Meteorological conditions are an important factor in energy consumption. The most significant of these is air temperature,
which is used as one of the main explanatory variables in the modelling analysis, described in Section 6.3.2. Baseline plots of
air temperature at weather stations associated with postcodes of residential sites are presented in Figures 5-1 and 5-2.
Figure 5-1 gives a general impression of the varying climate for each City, averaged per calendar month from 2005 to 2012.
It shows:
• the average air temperature, represented by the thick line
• the maximum air temperature, represented by the top of the coloured area
• the minimum air temperature, represented by the bottom of the coloured area.
Figure 5-1: Average, minimum and maximum monthly air temperatures, averaged per calendar month

Figure 5-2 shows the average, minimum and maximum temperatures at each City for all months from 2005 to 2012.
Figure 5-2: Average, minimum and maximum monthly air temperatures, per City
5.3.2 Yearly energy consumption

Table 86 shows average daily household electricity consumption for different states in Australia. Comparing these values
to the averages observed in the Solar Cities data gives a sense for how representative the consumption behaviour of Solar
Cities participants and controls was of the general population. Representativeness is important for applicability. The more
representative the participants in the program, the more applicable the results are to the general population.
Table 86: Average daily household electricity consumption for each state, 2007–2011
YEAR ELECTRICITY CONSUMPTION (IN KWH) BY STATE
NSW & ACT VIC QLD SA WA TAS NT

2007 20.49 16.12 20.60 16.92 16.88 27.16 24.48
2008 19.80 15.41 19.75 17.02 16.23 24.82 24.27
2009 20.22 15.64 20.45 16.82 17.70 No data 30.89
2010 19.11 15.43 21.44 17.22 16.43 24.81 26.26
2011 18.96 15.35 20.30 16.73 16.87 25.57 24.48
Source: Average electricity consumption per household was calculated using data obtained from annual reports published by the Energy Supply Association of
Australia. ACT = Australian Capital Territory; NSW = New South Wales; NT = Northern Territory; QLD = Queensland; SA = South Australia; TAS = Tasmania; VIC =
Victoria; WA = Western Australia
Figure 5-3 shows the average daily electricity consumption per household for different Australian states from 2007 to 2011.
Tasmania is excluded from the figure, due to missing data.
107
Average daily household electricity consumption (by state)
35
Electricity consumption (kWh) 30
25
20
15
10
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Year
NSW & ACT VIC SA WA NT QLD
Note: ACT = Australian Capital Territory; NSW = New South Wales; NT = Northern Territory; QLD = Queensland; SA = South Australia; VIC = Victoria; WA =
Western Australia
Figure 5-3: Average daily electricity consumption per household for Australian states and territories (excluding Tasmania)
5.3.3 Seasonal profiles by year and City

Figure 5-4 to Figure 5-7 show median load profiles for each season, broken down by Solar City and year. These figures
demonstrate some of the regional differences in consumption behaviour. For example, where Townsville has a fairly flat
consumption pattern across all seasons, other Cities show more pronounced peaks.
This reflects the behaviour of the sites present in the Solar Cities database where interval data was provided. Whether those
profiles correspond with broader population profiles is a question of representativeness that cannot be addressed with the
data provided.

Summer Load Profiles
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
0.8
0.6
Adelaide
0.4
0.2
0.0
0.8
Alice Springs
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.0
0.8
Median Energy Consumption (kWh)
0.6
Blacktown
0.4 Median Energy
Consumption (kWh)
0.2 0.8
0.0 0.6
0.4
0.8
0.2
Central Victoria
0.6 0.0
0.4
0.2
0.0
0.8
0.6
Perth
0.4
0.2
0.0
0.8
0.6 Townsville
0.4
0.2
0.0
0 5 10 15 20 250 5 10 15 20 250 5 10 15 20 250 5 10 15 20 250 5 10 15 20 250 5 10 15 20 250 5 10 15 20 250 5 10 15 20 25
Hour of Day
Figure 5-4: Summer load profile by year and City
109
Autumn Load Profiles
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
0.6
Adelaide
0.4
0.2
0.0
0.6
Alice Springs
0.4
0.2
0.0
0.6
Blacktown
0.4
Median Energy
Consumption (kWh)
0.2
0.6
0.0 0.4
0.6
0.2
Central Victoria
0.4
0.2
0.0
0.6
0.4
Perth
0.2
0.0
0.6
Townsville
0.4
0.2
0.0
0 5 10 15 20 25 0 5 10 15 20 250 5 10 15 20 250 5 10 15 20 250 5 10 15 20 25 0 5 10 15 20 25
Hour of Day
Figure 5-5: Autumn load profile by year and City

Winter Load Profiles
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
0.8
0.6
Adelaide
0.4
0.2
0.0
0.8
Alice Springs
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.0
0.8
0.6
Blacktown
0.4 Median Energy
Consumption (kWh)
0.2
0.8
0.0 0.6
0.8 0.4
Central Victoria
0.6 0.2
0.4
0.2
0.0
0.8
0.6
Perth
0.4
0.2
0.0
0.8
0.6 Townsville
0.4
0.2
0.0
0 5 10 15 20 250 5 10 15 20 250 5 10 15 20 250 5 10 15 20 250 5 10 15 20 25 0 5 10 15 20 250 5 10 15 20 25
Hour of Day
Figure 5-6: Winter load profile by year and City
111
Spring Load Profiles
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
0.6
0.4
Adelaide
0.2
0.0
0.6
Alice Springs
0.4
0.2
0.0
0.6
Blacktown
0.4
Median Energy
0.2 Consumption (kWh)
0.6
0.0 0.4
0.6
0.2
Central Victoria
0.4 0.0
0.2
0.0
0.6
0.4
Perth
0.2
0.0
0.6
Townsville
0.4
0.2
0.0
0 5 10 15 20 250 5 10 15 20 250 5 10 15 20 250 5 10 15 20 250 5 10 15 20 25 0 5 10 15 20 250 5 10 15 20 25
Hour of Day
Figure 5-7: Spring load profile by year and City
5.3.4 City Snapshots

This section gives single-page snapshot views of the energy and intervention data, intervention timelines and weather at
each City in the Solar Cities program.
Explanation of intervention and energy figures

Below is a brief explanation of the intervention and energy figures presented in this section. An example is supplied in
Figure 5-8. In this figure:
• the horizontal axis shows time

• the vertical axis represents a cumulative count of sites at the City associated with at least one intervention of any type
• energy-measurement ranges for each site are shown as horizontal lines, where a single line indicates the range between
the first and last available energy data available from a single site
• coloured shapes show dates of interventions, with each intervention type having a different colour and shape.
• These horizontal energy lines are colour-coded as in Table 87.

Table 87: Colour codes used in the intervention and energy visualisation charts
DATA TYPE CONTROL SITES INTERVENTION SITES
Quarterly energy data Green lines Blue lines

Half-hourly energy data Orange lines Pink lines
Due to the large number of sites in most Cities, these horizontal lines generally appear as solid blocks of colour.
Intervention events for each site are represented by different symbols and colours along the horizontal energy line. The
legend to the right of each figure describes which interventions the symbols represent. The numbers in brackets next to
each legend entry indicate the number of interventions or sites (for energy entries) shown.
One of the most important considerations for this trial is whether the interventions lie within the range of energy data for
each site. If energy data was available at the time of an intervention, the coloured shape (showing its occurrence date) will
lie within the blue or pink shaded area.
The interventions that are better candidates for analysis are those with a long history of energy data, both before and after
their occurrence date. This means that the coloured shape will lie a long way from the boundary of the blue/pink area to its
left and right.
The figures show only the interventions at sites for which some energy data was available. Interventions without energy
data are not shown.
The vertical axis shows  These interventions are outside the  These interventions are just inside the  These interventions are well inside the These red ovals indicate
the unique site red/blue area, indicating they took red/blue area, indicating they took place red/blue area, indicating they took place critical peak pricing
identification numbers place prior to the available range of at the start of the range of available during the available range of energy data interventions. There are
from the database energy data for these sites, making energy data for these sites, making it for these sites. We also have almost a year multiple ovals per line, because
it impossible to analyse their effect difficult to analyse their long-term effect of energy data before and after them, so this intervention took place
on energy change at these sites on energy change at these sites we can analyse their long-term effect on multiple times at each site
energy consumption
Numbers in the legend show
the number of sites with each
type of data. This entry
indicates that there were
792 home energy audits
The horizontal axis shows

time, from the start of the
City’s trials, to the end of
the available energy and
intervention data
These red lines show the date range of These blue lines show the date range of These green and orange lines show the
the available quarterly (NEM13) energy the available half-hourly (NEM12) energy date range of the available half-hourly
data for each intervention site data for each intervention site (NEM12) and quarterly (NEM13) data for
each control site
Figure 5-8: How to read the intervention and energy visualisation charts
113
Adelaide City snapshot
Figure 5-9 shows Adelaide Solar City’s interventions, which consisted mainly of HEA and PV interventions, with a small
number of insulation installations. Critical peak pricing events were unfortunately unable to be analysed, due to issues with
the recorded event dates. Most sites had NEM12 energy data available, and a smaller number were provided with NEM13.
Controls mainly had NEM13 data, though a small number of NEM12 controls were made available.
Figure 5-9: Adelaide Solar City data snapshot charts

Alice Springs City snapshot
Figure 5-10 shows Alice Solar City’s interventions. These consisted of HEAs, SHW, IHD and PV interventions, with only a
small number of insulation installations. Most sites had NEM13 provided early in the program, and moved to NEM12 during
2009–2010 when smart meters were installed. Control site energy was provided in NEM13 format only.
Figure 5-10: Alice Solar City data snapshot charts
115
Blacktown City snapshot
Figure 5-11 shows the Blacktown Solar City data. This consisted of HEA, insulation, critical peak pricing, DLC, PV, SHW and
IHD interventions. Sites primarily had NEM12 data, after moving from NEM13 early in the program. Similarly, control sites
began with NEM13 data, but most had NEM12 energy data available from 2007 onwards.
Figure 5-11: Blacktown Solar City data snapshot charts

Central Victoria City snapshot
Figure 5-12 shows Central Victoria Solar City’s data, which included HEA, PV, SHW and IHD interventions for sites that moved
from NEM13 to NEM12 later in the program, mostly during 2011. Control sites were similar, moving from NEM13 to NEM12
during the same period.
Figure 5-12: Central Victoria Solar City data snapshot charts
117
Moreland City snapshot
Moreland Solar City provided data on 291 sites with NEM13 energy data and HEA dates (Figure 5-13). Unfortunately, no
control data was collected, making analysis problematic.
Figure 5-13: Moreland Solar City data snapshot charts

Perth City snapshot
Figure 5-14 shows Perth Solar City’s data, which included HEA, DLC, PV, SHW and IHD interventions for sites with a mix
of NEM12 and NEM13 data. Around 17,000 control sites with NEM13 energy data were also provided; these have been
omitted from the figure for clarity.
Figure 5-14: Perth Solar City data snapshot charts
119
Townsville City snapshot
Figure 5-15 shows Townsville Solar City’s data. This included HEA, PV, SHW and IHD interventions for sites with a mix of
NEM12 and NEM13 data, mostly moving to NEM12 in early 2009. Around 19,500 control sites with NEM13 energy data
were also provided; these have been omitted from the figure for clarity.
Figure 5-15: Townsville Solar City data snapshot charts

6 Data analysis
This section provides details of the different types of analysis conducted, including their methodology and limitations.
The analyses aimed to determine the change in residential energy consumption resulting from the different interventions
trialled. Section 6.4 contains the corresponding analysis results for each intervention by City.
6.1 Introduction
The key focus of the data analysis in this report is to quantify the change in residential energy consumption that has resulted
from the Solar Cities interventions. Eight main interventions were considered as part of this analysis:
• Home energy audits (HEAs)
• Solar hot water (SHW) installations
• Time-of-use tariffs
• Retrofit installations – only insulation was considered
• Direct load control (DLC) trials
• Photovoltaic (PV) installations
• Critical peak pricing (CPP) trials
• In-home displays (IHDs)
Details on which interventions each Solar City conducted and a description of the interventions can be found in Sections 2
and 3 respectively.
Retrofits other than insulation were not considered for this quantitative analysis, because of uncertainty about their
installation dates and inconsistencies in their representation in the database.
This section presents the methodology and results of a study of the change in energy consumption associated (where the
necessary data was available) with each of these interventions in each of the seven Solar Cities.
6.2 Dataset preparation

To prepare the data for analysis (as described in detail in Section 4), a large amount of database reorganisation, cleaning,
filtering, duplication removal and validation with Solar Cities’ internal records was required.
This process involved the following broad steps:

1. consulting with each City to determine the correct method of interpreting their energy and intervention records, and
the supplied control data
2. identifying the correct combinations of National Metering Identifier suffixes13 used by each City to identify consumption
and generation records
3. identifying and removing duplicate records resulting from multiple uploads, errors in the supplied data and missing or
ambiguous database fields
4. summarising half-hourly and quarterly energy data by meter and then by site
5. joining energy data with each sites’ intervention records
6. identifying control groups
7. associating control group site records with energy records
8. aggregating energy records from control group sites to form the final control dataset
9. performing a final validation against site and intervention counts from Cities’ reports.
13 A NMI suffix is a unique code which identifies a particular meter channel at a site. A specification for the use of these suffixes exists, but in practise, suffixes were
used differently in almost every City’s supplied data.
121
Following this procedure, the final processed datasets consisted of flat files containing pre and post-intervention energy
data at all sites for each City and intervention. These were further broken down into sites that had at least 90 and 365 days
of pre and post-intervention energy data.
The periods of 90 and 365 days were chosen to illustrate the differing effects over short and long periods following the
interventions. They are a compromise between obtaining datasets with large numbers of sites, and an attempt to compensate
for the effect of seasonal variation by obtaining a full year both before and after the intervention. The 90 day pre and
post‑intervention period is also the minimum that can be analysed with the three-month NEM13 intervals in most Cities.
6.3 Types of analysis

Two main analytical approaches were taken in this analysis: a simple and easy-to-interpret Before–After Control–Impact
(BACI) analysis [34], and a more detailed modelling approach. The BACI methodology is simple to describe and the results
are relatively easy to understand, interpret and reproduce. The detailed modelling techniques can produce more in-depth
information about multiple interactions, temporal effects and confidence of results, but may be more difficult to interpret. Each
approach relies heavily on good-quality control and intervention site data which, as noted previouslt, was not always available.
6.3.1 BACI – Methodology

The analysis of the change in household energy consumption resulting from interventions requires energy measurements
taken from a number of intervention and control sites in each Solar City, before and after the intervention date. BACI
analysis is commonly used to detect and assess the effect of change following a treatment in environmental studies. It is
also highly applicable to this program.
BACI analysis of the Solar Cities trial was performed on a site-by-site basis. The general procedure was as follows.
1. Load all control data for the City, apply statistical filters.
2. Convert NEM13 control data into an interpolated daily-average format.
3. Combine the NEM13 interpolated control data with NEM12 control data and average to produce a whole City daily
mean-control time series (a chart of these can be viewed in Section 6.4.2).
4. Load energy data for the intervention sites and apply statistical filters.
5. Convert intervention NEM13 data into interpolated daily-average format.
6. Combine interpolated NEM13 data with NEM12 intervention data.
7. Split combined intervention data into pre and post intervention date subsets and average per site over the whole of the
pre and post periods.
8. For each site’s pre and post-intervention periods, obtain the average of the mean-control series over these periods, and
calculate the controlled pre and post-intervention change in energy consumption for each site.
9. Average this whole dataset for before and after the intervention dates to calculate the pre and post-intervention change
in energy consumption for the whole intervention at this City.
10. Repeat for all Cities, all interventions and both 90 and 365 day pre and post-intervention periods.
Results from interventions with a small number of sites have been omitted, due to uncertainty associated with such a small
sample size.
Assumptions and limitations for the BACI analysis

The BACI analysis presented below relies heavily on the consistent selection of reliable and representative controls. As
discussed in 4.3.1, controls in this dataset were selected using a variety of methods. These ranged from random site selection
from particular geographical areas and detailed selection using survey results to using people who elected not to participate in
Solar Cities. As a result, the quality of the controls varies from City to City. Metadata (e.g. demographic, building and geospatial
data) were inconsistent and incomplete for control sites, and in a large number of cases were unavailable.
Intervention sites were selected for BACI analysis of a particular intervention, irrespective of whether they had also received
other interventions. Excluding sites with multiple interventions would have resulted in some interventions not being
represented at all; in Central Victoria, for example, all intervention participants received a HEA. Separation of the effect of
the multiple interventions was left for the modelling effort.

The combination of half-hourly NEM12 and quarterly NEM13 energy data also limits the quality of this analysis in a
number of ways. When using NEM13 data, all variance within the 2–3 month sampling period is lost. To work at higher
frequencies (i.e. daily) than those provided by NEM13 data requires interpolation. As discussed in 4.3.2.2, this complicates
the calculation of sampling distributions, confidence estimates and other important statistical measures and tools that are
important for thorough analysis of the data.
When a NEM13 sample lies across an intervention date, this entire block of data is discarded, due to uncertainty as to how
much of the sample corresponds to pre-intervention consumption and how much to post-intervention.
6.3.2 Modelling – Methodology

In addition to the high-level BACI analysis described above, site-level changes in electricity consumption were modelled
where allowed by the data provided. The modelling aimed to assess the effect of the various Solar Cities interventions at
each site: in particular, to gain an understanding of both short and long-term effects of the interventions on participants
in the trial. In addition, where the data collected were of appropriate quality, this approach provided a mechanism for
separating out the effects of each intervention at sites that received more than one intervention.
Modelling was also performed for interventions where the participant experienced more than one instance of the same
intervention: for example, critical peak pricing. This is described in more detail in the relevant sections below.
Assumptions and limitations for the modelling analysis

The modelling work presented in this report contains the following assumptions:
• consecutive observations taken at a particular site are independent of each other
• demographic variables are constant throughout the trial period (e.g. the number of occupants in the household does
not change)
• the correlation between control and intervention sites does not change significantly in the periods before and after the
intervention is conducted (i.e. external factors affecting the intervention group apply equally to the control group)
• no participants withdrew at any stage of the trial (e.g. participants did not move out or travel for extended periods)
• control sites and trial sites should have similar electricity consumption patterns before the intervention.
Effect of data limitations on the modelling effort

CSIRO’s ability to meaningfully model the interventions conducted by the Solar Cities is affected by two main factors: a lack
of statistical power and a lack of demographic detail in the control data.
Statistical power
Statistical power affects the likelihood of making Type II errors. Type II errors are the probability of retaining the
null hypothesis when it is, in fact, false. In the case of the Solar Cities trials, the null hypothesis was that the various
interventions conducted did not affect the trial participants. If statistical power is low, there is an increased possibility of
concluding that the intervention did not affect the trial participant when, in fact, it did. A related concept is sensitivity. This
is the ability to distinguish if changes are a result of the intervention, or from the variation present in the data from other
sources (e.g. individual differences, seasonal temperature variations, measurement error).
Factors that determine statistical power are:

• sample size
• variability in the observations
• the statistical significance criterion
• the magnitude of the effect that the experimenter is aiming to detect.
Statistical power can be increased by increasing the size of the sample, relaxing the statistical significance criterion, and
increasing the magnitude of the effect that the experimenter is aiming to detect. An important component of sound
experimental design is balancing the positives and negatives of the impact of attempts to increase statistical power. For
example, increasing the sample size will increase statistical power but will also increase the cost of recruiting that sample.
123
Statistical power can be calculated for a given sample size, standard deviation and statistical significance level. A power
analysis can be performed in advance of a study, where population variance is known or can be reliably estimated. Power
analysis is a useful technique for anticipating the necessary sample size to detect an effect size of a particular magnitude,
at a particular level of statistical confidence. In the case of the Solar Cities data, power analysis gives an indication of the
number of samples required to perform any meaningful modeling.
For example, to obtain the approximate sample size required to achieve a power of 0.80 at a significance level of 0.05 and
( ) ( )
detect an effect size of 3 kilowatt-hour (kWh)/d, M = µ IA −µ IB − µCA −µ CB is calculated for each site, where:
µ IA represents an average energy consumption per day in that particular impact site (i.e. trial site) after the intervention
µ IB is the average energy consumption per day in that impact site before the intervention
µ CA is the average energy consumption per day in matched control sites after the intervention
µ CB is average energy consumption in matched control sites before the intervention.
∧
The standard deviation of M from all the sites is determined and substituted as σ D2 in the power analysis formula:
∧
n≥
(1.96 + 0.84) σ D2
2
n
. After obtaining the value of n, which represents the overall sample size required, 2 will be the
32 n
number of samples needed in each treatment and control group, whereas 4 will be the number of samples required for
each pre and post-intervention period, assuming a balanced BACI study design.
∧
Using Alice Springs as an example, σ D2 ≈69.5 which, when applied to the power calculation results in n≈61. Substituting
n
n in 4 indicates that around 15 samples would be needed either side of the intervention to reliably detect a 3 kWh/d
change at a site in Alice Springs. In the case of Alice Springs, this is problematic, because most sites have fewer than 15
pre‑intervention energy observations (i.e. fewer than 3 to 4 years of NEM13 data).
Missing demographic information
Where possible, intervention sites were matched with demographically similar control sites. This was only possible for Cities
in which demographic information was provided. Where demographic information was missing, it was necessary to average
across all sites over each of the interval dates. This effectively results in a single control site profile for the entire trial period,
and violates a key facet of a traditional BACI design – the ability to compare like with like.
Modelling approach detail

The specifics of the modelling approach are outlined in Appendix A.
Effectiveness of the modelling effort

Significant effort was expended in applying sophisticated statistical techniques to the data provided. However, the output
of this modelling effort was considered to be of limited use in commenting on the effect of the trial. This was largely a
function of the quality and duration of the data; generally, there were insufficient pre-intervention energy readings to draw
conclusions with any statistical confidence.
As a result, where results are discussed in any detail below, the discussion largely focuses on the output of the high-level
BACI analysis, rather than the modelling work. Exceptions are for CPP and DLC, which have more useful modelling results.
6.4 Intervention analysis results

The amount of energy consumed and saved is referred to in units of kWh throughout this document. For better
understanding of the magnitude of energy saved or consumed, Table 88 shows energy consumed when air-conditioning
systems and clothes dryers of different sizes [35] are used for a certain period of time.

Table 88: Energy consumed by air-conditioning systems and clothes dryers
SYSTEM SIZE POWER (KW) AVERAGE USE
Split air conditioner Small 2.5 4 hr – 10 kWh

Medium 6 4 hr – 24 kWh
Large (and ducted) 12 4 hr – 48 kWh
Dryer Medium 4 1 hr – 4 kWh
6.4.1 Summary of BACI Results

Table 89 summarises the results of the BACI analysis. This shows the change in average daily consumption per household.
The changes represented in green show a reduction in daily energy consumption following an intervention, and red shows
an increase. Results are only included if the final sample sizes were greater than 10014.
Table 89: Summary of Before–After Control–Impact (BACI) results for Cities and interventions
HEA SHW IHD PV INSULATION
CHANGE HEA CHANGE SHW CHANGE IHD CHANGE PV CHANGE INSULATION
SOLAR CITY DAYS (KWH/D) SITES (KWH/D) SITES (KWH/D) SITES (KWH/D) SITES (KWH/D) SITES
Adelaide 90 –0.9 147 – – – – – – – –

365 –0.2 114 – – – – – – – –
Alice Springs 90 –1.9 813 –1.7 301 –3.8 313 +1.0 167 – –
365 +0.2 572 –1.6 213 –0.8 279 +1.7 144 – –
Blacktown 90 +0.9 1364 – – +4.1 368 –1.1 428 –1.6 119
365 –0.4 548 – – –0.4 321 –1.0 422 –3.0 128
Central Victoria 90 –0.1 1233 – – – – –3.3 225 – –
365 –0.7 225 – – – – – – – –
Perth 90 –0.4 1393 –0.7 240 +0.2 211 – – – –
365 – – – – – – – – – –
Townsville 90 –1.9 556 – – –3.1 235 – – – –
365 –5.4 553 – – –1.8 202 – – – –
Note: BACI = Before–After Control–Impact; HEA = home energy audit; IHD = in-home display; PV = photovoltaic; SHW = solar hot water
6.4.2 Summary Of Modelling Results

As discussed in Section 6.3.2, CSIRO does not consider that the output of the modelling work is useful in commenting on the
specific effect of an intervention (except in the case of CPP and DLC). Once appropriate filtering was applied to datasets for
the other interventions, the sample sizes were usually of insufficient size to draw any meaningful conclusions.
Adelaide, Alice Springs and Townsville are not reported; models were fitted but the resulting site counts after filtering were
too few to include.
Table 90 summarises the modelling results for Blacktown, Central Victoria and Perth, excluding CPP and DLC. Where a result
is reported, it gives the number of sites with a significant change, and the median percentage change in consumption for
those sites. For example, for the Blacktown HEA 90-day summary, 115 sites had a significant increase, and the median size
of that change was 29.5 per cent. Site counts reported are post-filtering. Results are only reported if the site count post-
filtering is greater than 100.
14 The choice of 100 was a compromise between a desire for some degree of statistical validity, and an effort to not exclude too many trials from the report. Ideally,
sample sizes would be higher than this if the aim is to generalise to the broader community.
125
Table 90: Summary of home energy audit and photovoltaic modelling results
HOME ENERGY AUDIT PHOTOVOLTAIC
INCREASE DECREASE
MATCHED (NO. SITES / % (NO. SITES / %
SOLAR CITY CONTROLS? DAYS SITE COUNT CHANGE) CHANGE) SITE COUNT INCREASE DECREASE
Blacktown Yes 90 215 115 / 29.5 49 / 18.1 148 70 / 57.4 30 / 33.9

365 214 36 / 64.6 80 / 33.3 148 48 /52.1 18 / 43.9
Central Victoria Yes 90 104 28 / 26.7 36 / 31
Perth No 90 154 42 / 41 59 / 22.5
6.4.3 Controls
This subsection illustrates the control data available for each City. Two chart types are presented.
The first chart for each City shows:

• average daily NEM12 consumption of all control sites
• average NEM13 consumption
• a third series (the mean-control series), which is an average of these two time-series, weighted by the number of sites in each
• a dotted line showing a linear trend for the combined control series, which indicates whether City consumption
generally increased or decreased over the trial.
NEM12 and the combined mean data are shown in these charts as a seven-day moving average, so that daily variation does
not obscure the general trend. All other analysis uses raw data only.
The mean-control series has a direct effect on the results of the analysis. If the controls are well selected, changes in the
mean-control should capture the external factors that influence households in the City, including all factors that influence
the intervention sites.
The second chart for each City shows the number of NEM12 and NEM13 control sites over time. These numbers are used in
weighting the consumption means shown in the preceding chart. It is also important that the number of control sites remain
relatively constant throughout the trial. Otherwise, fluctuations in consumption may not be attributable to real external
effects, but could just be due to sites entering or leaving the control group.

Adelaide
Adelaide controls exhibit a declining trend in energy consumption over the trial (Figure 6-1). The majority of the sites in the
database have NEM13 energy data with a roughly constant number of sites from 2009–2012. There are a small number of
NEM12 controls that increase in number over the course of the program. Pronounced summer and winter peaks can be
clearly seen in most years.
Adelaide Control Site Consumption

Average energy per day (kWh/day)
30
20
10
0
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Day
Mean combined Consumption Mean NEM12 Comsumption Mean NEM13 Consumption
Adelaide Control Site Counts
150
100
Site Count
50
0
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Day
NEM12 Control Sites NEM13 Control Sites
Figure 6-1: Adelaide Solar City control site energy consumption (top) and site counts (bottom)
127
Alice Springs
Alice Springs controls show a flat trend in energy consumption over the trial (Figure 6-2). Almost all of the sites in the
database have NEM13 energy data, with a negligible amount of NEM12 control data for 2012 having very little effect on the
mean combined consumption series. Interestingly, there is very little obvious seasonal variation in the consumption shown
here. The number of control sites fluctuates somewhat over the trial.
Alice Springs Control Site Consumption

40
20
0
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Day
Alice Springs Control Site Counts
100
Site Count
50
0
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Day
Figure 6-2: Alice Solar City control site energy consumption (top) and site counts (bottom)

Blacktown
Blacktown controls show a slightly decreasing trend in energy consumption over the trial (Figure 6-3). Almost all of the
sites have NEM13 energy data for the first year of the trial, after which almost all data is NEM12, though a small number
of NEM13 sites remain. A regular winter peak is clearly visible from 2006–2010, as is a smaller summer peak in most years.
The large fluctuations in NEM13 consumption from 2007 onwards are an artefact of the small number of remaining sites,
and do not detrimentally influence the magnitude of the mean-control. The number of control sites remains constant from
mid‑2007 to 2010.
Blacktown Control Site Consumption

40
20
0
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Day
Blacktown Control Site Counts

400
300
Site Count
200
100
0
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Day
Figure 6-3: Blacktown Solar City control site energy consumption (top) and site counts (bottom)
129
Central Victoria
Central Victoria controls show a decreasing trend in energy consumption over the trial (Figure 6-4). Almost all of the sites
have NEM13 energy data for the first two to three years of the program, after which almost all sites move to NEM12. A
regular winter peak is clearly visible. A possible, though very short, summer peak is visible in the higher-frequency NEM12
data during 2011. The total number of control sites remains roughly constant over the trial.
Central Victoria Control Site Consumption

30
20
10
0
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Day
Central Victoria Control Site Counts

600
400
Site Count
200
0
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Day
Figure 6-4: Central Victoria Solar City control site energy consumption (top) and site counts (bottom)
Moreland
Moreland did not supply control site data, limiting the analysis that can be performed.

Perth
Perth controls show an increasing trend in energy consumption over the trial (Figure 6-5). Almost all of the sites have
NEM13 energy data for the whole trial period. No NEM12 control data were available for Perth. Regular winter and summer
peaks are clearly visible. The total number of control sites remains constant for the whole trial.
Perth Control Site Consumption

20
15
10
0
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Day
Perth Control Site Counts
15000
10000
Site Count
5000
0
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Day
Figure 6-5: Perth Solar City control site energy consumption (top) and site counts (bottom)
131
Townsville
Townsville controls show an increasing trend in energy consumption over the trial (Figure 6-6). A small number of NEM12
controls were supplied from the town of Ayr, south of Townsville. However, the majority of the control data were in a
NEM13-like format, but with readings aligned around monthly intervals rather than actual meter read dates. This is what
causes the regular steps in consumption. Summer peaks are obvious only in 2011 and 2012. Due to the large number of
NEM13 sites, the Ayr controls do not make a significant contribution to the mean-control series. The total number of control
sites only remains roughly constant between mid-2010 to 2012.
Townsville Control Site Consumption

40
30
20
10
0
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Day
Townsville Control Site Counts
15000
Site Count
10000
5000
0
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Day
Figure 6-6: Townsville Solar City control site energy consumption (top) and site counts (bottom)

6.4.4 Explanation of Analysis Charts
Two main chart types are used to illustrate BACI results in the following subsections. It is important to understand their
subtleties to interpret the results. Figure 6-7 uses the Adelaide 90-day HEA BACI results as an example to illustrate the main
chart features.
Figure 6-7: Whole intervention example Before–After Control–Impact (BACI) results chart
This type of chart summarises the pre and post-intervention average daily consumption for all sites involved in the trial at
each City. For interventions where sufficient data is available, two graphs are shown for both 90 and 365 days before and
after the intervention dates.
Key pieces of information conveyed by this chart type include the:

• average change in energy consumption following the intervention date in
–– control sites
–– intervention sites
• controlled change in energy consumption following the intervention date (chart subtitle)
• number of control and intervention sites available for analysis.
The pair of bars on the right-hand side of the chart show the average consumption of all intervention sites before (red) and
after (blue) the intervention. They also show the number of sites analysed. A difference between these two right-hand bars
indicates an uncontrolled change in consumption around the date of the interventions.
The pair of bars on the left shows the average consumption of all the available control sites over the same period. A
difference between these two control bars should indicate that an external effect caused a change in energy consumption
in the controls around the date of the interventions, but the change was not a result of the interventions themselves. These
external effects could include seasonal and weather-related influences or changing energy prices and perceptions.
If the ‘before’ control and intervention site consumptions do not match, this is a strong indication that the control sites are
not going to adequately control for external effects. This could mean that external influences on the control sites do not
influence the intervention sites to the same degree.
133
In summary, the key message this type of chart conveys is whether there was a controlled change that may be attributable
to an effect caused by the intervention. If we assume that effects influencing the controls also influence the intervention
sites to an equal degree, and that there are no other influences which affect one group but not the other, then we can
express the controlled change in consumption as:
( ) (
∆E = i post − i pre − c post − c pre )
where
∆E is the controlled change in daily intervention site energy after the intervention date
i post is the average intervention site energy after the interventions
i pre is the average intervention site energy before the interventions
c post is the average control site energy after the interventions
c pre is the average control site energy before the interventions.

As discussed in Section 4.3.1, however, the assumptions underlying this approach are likely to be invalid in many of the
cases presented in this report due to problems with the control groups.
∆E is shown in the subtitle of this type of chart, and indicates the average change of the intervention site energy
consumption relative to the control site consumption.
Figure 6-8 shows an example of the second type of chart shown in this subsection: the per-site BACI results.
Figure 6-8: Per-site example Before–After Control–Impact (BACI) results chart

The type of chart shown in Figure 6-8 summarises controlled change in average daily consumption for each site involved in
a City’s trial. For some interventions, where sufficient data is available, two graphs are shown with all sites for both 90 and
365 days before and after the intervention dates.
Key pieces of information conveyed by this chart type include:

• The number of sites that increased/decreased their energy consumption
• Whether more sites decreased consumption, rather than increased consumption
• Pre-intervention consumption versus subsequent post-intervention change.
Each vertical bar shows the change in average daily energy consumption at a site after the intervention date, controlled
with respect to the change in control site consumption. A negative bar indicates that a site’s controlled consumption has
decreased (a desirable outcome), whereas a positive bar indicates an increase in consumption (an undesirable outcome).
Bars for sites are sorted from lowest on the left to highest on the right to make it easier to see the distribution of changes.
The vertical blue dotted line (the ‘50% of sites point’) is drawn at the centre of the chart, indicating the divide between the
lower and upper 50 per cent of the sites in this trial. The vertical red dotted (the ‘zero change point’) line indicates the site
with the change closest to zero.
If the zero change point (red) is to the right of the 50% of sites point (blue), then more sites decreased their energy
consumption than increased their consumption. An effective intervention would typically be expected to show the red line
further to the right of the blue line than an ineffective intervention.
The number of sites that increased/decreased consumption, and the average magnitude of this change, are also shown in
the chart’s subtitle numerically. Note that these numbers are not directly comparable to the whole intervention average
consumption figures (shown in Figure 6-77) if sites have missing consumption data. Small differences between the per-site
and overall results are acceptable, whereas a large difference will indicate a concentration of intervention dates around a
period in which the control data is missing values or is primarily made up of unrepresentative sites.
The colour of the vertical bars indicates a site’s average pre-intervention consumption (see the scale to the right of the chart
for magnitude). Generally:
• red indicates high initial consumption
• blue indicates low consumption
• green indicates moderate consumption.
These colours are an indicator of consumption relative to the other sites in the sample, not to overall City trends. For
example, in this chart we can observe that sites with a post-intervention:
• decrease in consumption (left) had a medium to high pre-intervention consumption (the larger bars are mostly coloured
green or red)
• increase in consumption (right) generally had a lower pre-intervention consumption (more blue bars).
6.4.5 Results
Key points for understanding the following discussions of results are given below.
• The terms ‘trial sites’ or ‘intervention sites’ refer to the sites at which Solar Cities interventions were recorded to have
taken place.
• The terms ‘control group’, ‘control sites’, or simply ‘controls’ refers to energy data from a selection of sites chosen
specifically by the Cities to act as experiment controls for their trials. Ideally, these sites should experience the same
external non-intervention effects influencing home energy (electrical) consumption as the trial sites.
• The term ‘controlled change’ or ‘controlled increase/decrease’ refers to the change in energy consumption at the trial
sites with respect to the change in consumption at the control sites. It is the primary measure by which an intervention’s
effect is assessed in the BACI analysis.
• If more than 50 per cent of sites decreased their consumption, this does not necessarily indicate an overall decrease,
because the individual magnitude of decrease at each site must also be taken into account. Per-site results are shown
135
to give a deeper understanding of how individual sites behaved during the intervention period, but do not give a good
overall summary of an intervention’s effect as a whole.
Three results are reported for each intervention:

1. A ‘90 day’ result. This includes all participants for whom there was energy data for 90 days either side of the conducted
intervention.
2. A ‘365 day’ result. This includes all of the participants for whom there was energy data for 365 days either side of the
conducted intervention.
3. A ‘90/365’ day result. This is the 90-day result for just those participants who had energy data for 365 days either side of
the conducted intervention. This was done so that the subset of sites in both short and long-term results were identical,
and therefore, comparable to each other. This generally resulted in a much smaller sample, hence the decision to
include the result from 1.
Home energy audit
Introduction
This section presents the results from the analysis of home energy audit interventions.
Table 91 summarises average controlled change in energy consumption for both 90 and 365 days of energy consumption
before and after interventions, where sufficient data was available, as well as number of intervention sites used for analysis.
Refer to Section 3 for further information about the way in which home energy audits were deployed in each City.
Table 91: Summary of home energy audit results

CONTROLLED
UNCONTROLLED CONTROLLED PERCENTAGE
SOLAR CITY DAYS TRIAL SITES CHANGE (KWH/D) CHANGE (KWH/D) CHANGE (%)
Adelaide 90 147 –0.7 –0.9 –5.4

90/365 105 –0.9 –1.1 –6.0
365 105 –0.8 –0.2 –1.1
Alice Springs 90 813 –0.3 –1.9 –8.6
90/365 572 –0.5 –2.1 –9.3
365 572 –0.4 +0.2 +0.9
Blacktown 90 1364 –3.9 +0.9 +4.3
90/365 530 –3.3 +1.5 +6.9
365 530 –0.7 –0.4 –2.2
Central Victoria 90 1233 1.1 –0.1 –0.6
90/365 225 –1.0 –2.2 –13
365 225 –1.7 –0.7 –3.6
Moreland 90 144 –0.9 – –
Perth 90 1393 –0.5 –0.4 –2.2
90/365 89 –3.5 –3.3 –19
365 89 –1.9 –1.0 –5.9
Townsville 90 556 –1.3 –1.9 –9.3
90/365 553 –1.4 –2.0 –9.9
365 553 –3.0 –5.4 –25

Adelaide
BACI results
Key results from the BACI analysis of this intervention include:
Short-term only (analysis of all sites available to maximise sample size; Figure 6-9)
• Short-term decrease of 0.9 kWh/d (5.4 per cent)
–– 56 per cent of trial sites decreased their consumption
Short vs long term (analysis of the same subset of sites for short and long term; Figure 6-10)
• Short-term controlled decrease of 1.1 kWh/d (6.0 per cent)
–– 58 per cent of sites decreased their consumption
• Long-term controlled decrease of 0.2 kWh/d (1.1 per cent)
Results summary:
A short term decrease was observed; however, the longer-term change was negligible.
Figure 6-9: Adelaide home energy audit (HEA) short-term only Before–After Control–Impact (BACI) results
137
Figure 6-10: Adelaide home energy audit (HEA) short vs. long-term Before–After Control–Impact (BACI) results

Alice Springs
BACI results
• Long-term controlled increase of 0.2 kWh/d (0.9 per cent)
Results summary:
A short term decrease was observed; however, the longer-term change was negligible.
Figure 6-11: Alice Solar City home energy audit (HEA) short-term only Before–After Control–Impact (BACI) results
139
Figure 6-12: Alice Solar City home energy audit (HEA) short vs. long-term Before–After Control–Impact (BACI) results

Blacktown
BACI results
–– 45 per cent of trial sites increased their consumption
Results summary:
The short-term results are difficult to interpret, because of the large disparity in pre-intervention control group consumption
relative to trial participants’ consumption. The long-term change was negligible.
Figure 6-13: Blacktown home energy audit (HEA) short-term only Before–After Control–Impact (BACI) results
141
Figure 6-14: Blacktown home energy audit (HEA) short vs. long-term Before–After Control–Impact (BACI) results

Central Victoria
BACI results
• Short-term decrease of 2.2 kWh/d (13 per cent)
• Long-term decrease of 0.7 kWh/d (3.6 per cent)
Results summary:
The short-term decrease in energy consumption for sites with more than 365 days of consumption data was quite large
(13 per cent). However, this effect is diminished in the long-term comparison (3.6 per cent), where the number of sites that
decreased their consumption was largely the same as those that increased their consumption.
Figure 6-15: Central Victoria home energy audit (HEA) short-term only Before–After Control–Impact (BACI) results
143
Figure 6-16: Central Victoria home energy audit (HEA) short vs. long-term Before–After Control–Impact (BACI) results

Moreland
BACI results
Moreland were unable to provide controls, so Figure 6-17 shows the before/after change for the 90-day group, which was a
drop of 0.88 kWh/d (8.8 per cent).
Moreland HEA Before/After 90 Days

Post-Intervention Difference = -0.88 kWh/d
10.0
Mean Daily Consumption (kWh/d)
7.5
5.0
2.5
291 sites 291 sites
0.0
Before After
Before / After Intervention Before After
Figure 6-17: Moreland home energy audit (HEA) before/after energy consumption
145
Perth
BACI results
Results summary:
In the large sample, short-term group, there was negligible change. Looking at just those participants with at least 365 days
of consumption data before and after the intervention yields a smaller sample. However, with this smaller group, the change
is much larger: particularly in the short term.
Figure 6-18: Perth home energy audit (HEA) short-term only Before–After Control–Impact (BACI) results

Figure 6-19: Perth home energy audit (HEA) short vs. long-term Before–After Control–Impact (BACI) results
147
Townsville
BACI results
The very large disparity in pre-intervention control and participant behaviour for both the short-term effects (Figure 6-20)
and long-term effects (Figure 6-21) makes it difficult to draw any conclusions from the Townsville trial.
Figure 6-20: Townsville home energy audit (HEA) short-term only Before–After Control–Impact (BACI) results

Figure 6-21: Townsville home energy audit (HEA) short vs. long-term Before–After Control–Impact (BACI) results
Summary of home energy audit analysis

The data collected across the Solar Cities HEA trials provides only limited support for the effectiveness of HEA on participant
behaviour, particularly in the longer term, where the change was typically modest.
149
Solar hot water
Introduction
This section presents the results from the analysis of SHW interventions.
Table 92 shows a summary of average controlled change in energy consumption for both 90 and 365 days of energy
consumption before and after interventions, where sufficient data was available, as well as the number of intervention used
for analysis. Refer to Section 3 for further information about the way in which solar how water systems were deployed in
each City.
Table 92: Summary of solar hot water Before–After Control–Impact (BACI) results
UNCONTROLLED CONTROLLED
SAMPLE SIZE (TRIAL CHANGE RESULT CHANGE RESULT PERCENTAGE
DAYS SITES) (KWH/D) (KWH/D) CHANGE (%)
Alice Springs 90 301 –1.5 –1.7 –7.0

90/365 213 –1.4 –1.5 –6.5
365 213 –1.7 –1.6 –6.5
Perth 90 240 –0.7 –0.7 –3.2
90/365 34 0.3 0.3 1.7
365 34 –0.4 0.6 3.1

Alice Springs
BACI results
• Short-term controlled decrease of 1.7 kWh/d (7 per cent)
Results summary:
There was a consistent decrease in energy consumption across the short and long-term comparisons.
Figure 6-22: Alice Springs solar hot water (SHW) short-term-only Before–After Control–Impact (BACI) results
151
Figure 6-23: Alice Springs solar hot water (SHW) short vs. long-term Before–After Control–Impact (BACI) results

Perth
BACI results
Short vs long term (analysis of the same subset of sites for short and long term)
–– Only 34 sites in resulting sample, so result is not included.
Results summary:
The 90-day only analysis suffered from a very large discrepancy between the pre-intervention control and participant
groups. The sample size for the long-term comparison was very small (34), and so was excluded.
Figure 6-24: Perth solar hot water (SHW) short-term-only Before–After Control–Impact (BACI) results
Summary of solar hot water analysis

The results provide some support for the positive impact of solar hot water systems, particularly in Alice Springs.
153
Photovoltaic
Introduction
This section presents the results from the analysis of PV interventions. Table 93 summarises the average controlled change
in energy consumption for both 90 and 365 days of energy consumption before and after interventions, where sufficient
data was available. It also contains the number of intervention and control sites used for analysis. Refer to Section ‎3 for
further information about the way in which PV trials were deployed in each City.
The BACI analysis in this section examines energy consumption (not generation) following the installation of PV arrays on a
household. It is therefore a measure of the intervention’s effect on the behaviour of the participant, rather than the ability
of a PV system to generate power.
Almost all Perth PV sites were provided with net metering data, and no check metering data was made available, meaning
true gross household consumption could not be calculated. For this reason, it is impossible to separate consumption
changes that are the result of behaviour change from changes due to net-metered generation offsets.
Central Victoria also provided net metering for their PV sites, but made check metering data available at a later date,
allowing true gross consumption to be calculated.
Adelaide had only 17 sites in its 90-day dataset, so these results were omitted.
Table 93: Summary of photovoltaic Before–After Control–Impact (BACI) results

CHANGE RESULT CHANGE RESULT PERCENTAGE
SOLAR CITY DAYS TRIAL SITES (KWH/D) (KWH/D) CHANGE (%)
Alice Springs 90 167 1.1 +1.0 +5.1

90/365 144 1.1 +1.1 +5.2
365 144 1.2 +1.7 +8.2
Blacktown 90 428 0.3 –1.1 –5.6
90/365 422 0.3 –1.1 –5.5
365 422 –1.3 –1.0 –5.1
Central Vic 90 225 –1.8 –3.3 –22.6
90/365 – – – –
365 – – – –
Perth 90 93 –4.0 –4.2 –23.4
90/365 23 –2.4 –2.6 –15.1
365 23 –1.5 –0.8 –5.0
Townsville 90 89 2.7 +1.0 +6.2
90/365 78 2.9 +1.2 +6.8
365 78 –1.8 –4.5 –21.2
Orientation and capacity

During the installation of PV arrays as part of the various Solar Cities programs, information about panel orientation, array
capacity and solar cell type was added to the database. This section presents select results showing the relationship of these
parameters to peak production time and average energy produced. Generation baselines with various panel orientations
and array capacities are presented in Figures 6-25 to 6-26.
Figure 6-25 Half-hourly generation and peak generation time versus photovoltaic (PV) panel orientation at each shows
half‑hourly generation of panels facing within a range of ±22.5° of due north, south, east and west for every half-hour
interval. The magnitude shown is the 90th percentile of the distribution of energy consumption at each half-hourly interval.
The 90th percentile is used to give an indication of the upper generation level, while hiding high-generating outliers. Each
subchart is also annotated with the hour of day at which the peak generation occurred, to illustrate the effect of orientation
on peak generation. The mix of panel power ratings varied across Cities, so generation magnitudes are not comparable,
except within the City. Missing subcharts denote orientations for which no information was available in the database.

This peak generation time information is important for matching residential solar generation to peak consumption, by
selecting the panel orientation to maximise generation income or reduce peak demand. As a demonstration of the potential
impact of orientation on generation, Perth Solar Cities peak output was shifted to 10:30 am with east-facing panels and to
1:00 pm with west-facing panels, and in Central Victoria the shift was to 10:00 am (east-facing) and 2:00 pm (west-facing).
Figure 6-25: Half-hourly generation and peak generation time versus photovoltaic (PV) panel orientation at each Solar City
Figure 6-26 shows the average daily generation for each common solar array capacity at each City, presented here to
give some insight into the relationship between location and panel rating. It should be noted that the generation figures
presented do not take into account panel orientation, time of the year or the duration over which data was collected and
therefore care should be exercised in generalising from them. Missing bars denote capacities for which no information was
available in the database.
155
Figure 6-26: Rated array capacity versus average daily generation at each Solar City

Consumption change
Alice Springs
BACI results
Key results from the BACI analysis (Figure 6-27) of this intervention include:
Short-term only (analysis of all sites available to maximise sample size)

• Short-term controlled increase of 1.0 kWh/d (5.1 per cent)
• Long-term controlled increase of 1.7 kWh/d (8.2 per cent)
Results summary:
The results for Alice Springs are difficult to account for. There was a large increase in consumption for many sites after the
PV system was installed, and in many sites, the pre-intervention mean consumption rose from a very low mean before
the intervention to a very high mean afterwards. This result requires further analysis in consultation with the Alice Solar
Cities program to establish whether the result is a true indication of the response to the intervention, or whether there are
problems with the data.
157
Figure 6-27: Alice Springs photovoltaic (PV) Before–After Control–Impact (BACI) charts

Blacktown
BACI results

Results summary:
There was a modest controlled decrease in participant consumption; however, this decrease was accounted for by only
40 per cent of the participants.
159
Figure 6-28: Blacktown photovoltaic (PV) Before–After Control–Impact (BACI) charts

Central Victoria
BACI results

Results summary:
While there is a large controlled decrease in consumption in the short-term results, there is also a very large difference in
pre-intervention consumption between the control and intervention groups. For the long-term result, although the control
and intervention groups have very similar pre-intervention consumptions, the sample size is very small. Therefore, the result
is considered to have limited use for commenting on potential effects of the intervention.
161
Figure 6-29: Central Victoria photovoltaic (PV) Before–After Control–Impact (BACI) charts

Perth
BACI results

Results summary:
As discussed earlier in this section, Perth Solar City was only able to provide net consumption data. Therefore, it is difficult
to apportion the contribution of the intervention to any changes observed.
163
Figure 6-30: Perth photovoltaic (PV) Before–After Control–Impact (BACI) charts

Townsville
BACI results

Results summary:
It is difficult to draw any conclusions based on the Townsville data, because the discrepancy between the pre-intervention
control and participant data is very large: particularly in the case of the long-term result.
165
Figure 6-31: Townsville photovoltaic (PV) Before–After Control–Impact (BACI) chart
Summary of photovoltaic analysis

The Solar Cities PV trials provide very limited support for PV installations having a positive impact on behaviour that reduce
energy consumption following the installation of PV arrays on a household. This does not address, however, the net impact
on the grid of PV installations.

In-home display
Introduction
This section presents the results from the analysis of IHD interventions.
Table 94 summarises the average controlled change in energy consumption for both 90 and 365 days of energy consumption
before and after IHD interventions, where sufficient data was available. It also shows the number of intervention sites used
for analysis. Refer to Section 3 for further information about the way IHD trials were deployed in each City.
Most IHD intervention sites also had various other interventions, including PV, TOU and CPP. Results in this section may
include effects resulting from these interventions, as well as any effect from the IHD itself. See Section 3.5.2 for details.
Activation/pairing dates for IHDs were not necessarily reliable. Some Cities were not able to identify that the system was
activated, and if so, whether it was used and for how long. As a result, the confidence in the IHD results presented in this
section is low.
Table 94: Summary of in-home display Before–After Control–Impact (BACI) results

CONTROLLED
UNCONTROLLED CONTROLLED PERCENTAGE
SOLAR CITY DAYS TRIAL SITES CHANGE (KWH/D) CHANGE (KWH/D) CHANGE (%)
Alice Springs 90 313 –5.0 –3.8 –14.4

90/365 279 –5.3 –4.1 –15
365 279 –0.9 –0.8 –3.1
Blacktown 90 368 –1.8 +4.1 +19.4
90/365 321 –1.9 +4.0 +18
365 321 –0.9 –0.4 –2.2
Perth 90 211 –1.2 +0.2 +0.9
90/365 91 –0.5 +0.8 +5.0
365 91 –2.6 –1.5 –8.5
Townsville 90 235 –2.6 –3.1 –14
90/365 202 –3.1 –3.5 –16
365 202 –1.4 –1.8 –8.3
167
Alice Springs
BACI results

• Short-term controlled decrease of 4.1 kWh/d (15 per cent)
Results summary:
The discrepancy between the pre-intervention control and trial participant consumption makes it difficult to draw any
conclusions from the Alice Springs result.

Figure 6-32: Alice Springs in-home display (IHD) Before–After Control–Impact (BACI) charts
169
Blacktown
BACI results

• Short-term controlled increase of 4.1kWh/d (19.4 per cent)
Results summary:
The very large difference in consumption between the pre-intervention control and intervention groups makes it difficult to
interpret Blacktown’s result.

Figure 6-33: Blacktown in-home display (IHD) Before–After Control–Impact (BACI) charts
171
Perth
BACI results

Results summary:
In the short term, little change was observed. In the long term, the majority of sites decreased their consumption. The
long‑term result, however, is based on a relatively small sample (91 sites).

Figure 6-34: Perth in-home display (IHD) Before–After Control–Impact (BACI) charts
173
Townsville
BACI results

Results summary:
The very large discrepancy between the pre-intervention control and intervention groups makes it very difficult to interpret
Townsville’s result.

Figure 6-35: Townsville in-home display (IHD) Before–After Control–Impact (BACI) charts
Summary of in-home display analysis

For most Solar Cities, the observed result appeared to be more a function of poor controls than actual observable change.
175
Critical peak pricing
Introduction
Critical peak pricing (CPP) trials were conducted by Blacktown and Adelaide. However, Adelaide was unable to supply
correct CPP event records before this report was written.
Blacktown
Figure 6-36, Figure 6-37 and Figure 6-38 show median consumption across the day for the control and participant groups for
spring, summer and winter, respectively. The columns in blue highlight the part of the day when the elevated pricing was in effect.
Figure 6-36: Blacktown critical peak pricing spring consumption data – control vs participants
Figure 6-36 shows a clear difference in median consumption relative to the control group during CPP events conducted
during spring. The drop in consumption over the peak period relative to controls was 1.08 kWh: a drop of 23.3 per cent.
Figure 6-37: Blacktown critical peak pricing summer consumption data – control vs participants

during summer. The drop in consumption over the peak period relative to controls was 2.99 kWh: a drop of 42.1 per cent.
Figure 6-38: Blacktown critical peak pricing winter consumption data – control vs participants
during winter. The difference in consumption over the peak period relative to controls was 3.05 kWh: a difference of
46.5 per cent.
Modelling was conducted on subset of the CPP participants (from postcode 2148) to examine the specific effect of CPP on
individual sites: in particular, to see whether load is shifted from the high-cost period to the low-cost period, or whether
general consumption decreases.
Pseudo-control sites were created for the analysis by looking at the behaviour of CPP sites on days where no CPP event was
called, and were matched with intervention sites by temperature. The sites used in the comparison are therefore ‘pseudo’
controls, because the data actually comes from participants on non-CPP days. At each intervention site (household) for each
intervention day, the maximum temperature is matched to all non-intervention days at the same household with the same
maximum temperature. Thus, each intervention day had multiple controls. This was repeated for all intervention days.
Two models were fitted. The first used the logarithm of consumption. The second used the explanatory variables
intervention/control indicator as a factor, temperature, mean/max humidity, and an interaction between temperature and
the control indicator.For CPP, the intervention households were expected to shift their consumption away from the higher-
cost period by either simply reducing consumption during this period, or by shifting that consumption to the low-cost
period. Therefore, two models were developed: one for the total consumption during the peak-cost period, and the other
for the total consumption for the low-cost period. This tested whether consumption decreased during the peak-cost period
relative to the pseudo-control, and whether consumption increased during the low-cost periods for the intervention days.
Figure 6-39 shows evidence of both consumption reduction during the high-cost period, as well as a reduction in overall
consumption. Figure 6-40 shows the effect of the CPP event on those hours of the day covered by the high-cost period, and
demonstrates that it is most evident during the later hours of the CPP period.
177
Peak Period Non-Peak Period
60 60
50 50
Consumption (kWh)
Consumption (kWh)
40 40
30 30
20 20
10 10
0 0
0 1 0 1
Control Intervention Control Intervention
Figure 6-39: Consumption change for different cost periods
Peak Period – CPP Intervention Peak Period – No Intervention
3.0 3.0
2.5 2.5
Consumption (kWh)
Consumption (kWh)
2.0 2.0
1.5 1.5
1.0 1.0
0.5 0.5
0.0 0.0
13 14 15 16 17 18 19 13 14 15 16 17 18 19
Hour Of Day Hour Of Day
Figure 6-40: Impact of critical peak pricing (CPP) on daily load profile
Summary of critical peak pricing analysis

Blacktown CPP had a clear effect on participants that matched the intent of the program: particularly in summer and winter,
when median energy savings relative to control were more than 40 per cent. Load was significantly reduced during the
higher-cost period. In particular, load was reduced during the later hours of the higher-cost period, when demand among
the control group was at its highest.

Direct load control
Introduction
This section presents the results from the analysis of DLC interventions. Refer to Section 3 for further information about the
way the direct load control intervention was deployed in each Solar City.
Blacktown and Perth provided data on DLC trials. Townsville also conducted a DLC trial, but was unable to provide data on
when those trials took place.
Blacktown
Figure 6-41 shows the median daily load profile for control sites during the DLC trials. Participants appeared to use more
electricity during the DLC periods relative to controls. It seems unlikely that this is a genuine indication of the effect of the
DLC trial itself. More detailed examination is required to determine whether this was a result of an unrepresentative control
group, or an error in processing the data.
Figure 6-41: Blacktown direct load control profile – controls vs participants
Perth
Figure 6-42 shows the load profile for DLC participants during DLC events. There were insufficient NEM12 records for control
groups during the DLC event window to compare trial participants with control groups.
To gain a deeper understanding of the effect of DLC in Perth, CSIRO applied a similar technique to that applied to the
Blacktown CPP trial, by using days on which intervention sites did not participate in a DLC event as a pseudo-control for
comparison purposes. Figure 6-43 shows the difference in consumption during DLC events times compared with non-
DLC days. There is a trend of reduced consumption for those trials conducted later in the day (5:00 pm–8:00 pm), when the
average saving was 0.31 kWh or 26 per cent.
179
Figure 6-42: Perth direct load control (DLC) participant consumption profile
During DLC Intervention No DLC Intervention
3 3
Consumption (kWh)
Consumption (kWh)
2 2
1 1
0 0
13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
Hour Of Day Hour Of Day
Figure 6-43: Comparison of direct load control (DLC) event profiles with ‘Control’ days
Summary of direct load control analysis

Results for Blacktown DLC were inconclusive. However, the Perth results showed a significant effect as a result of DLC:
particularly when DLC was exercised later in the day, where there was a 26 per cent decrease in energy consumed.

Time-of-use tariff
Introduction
This section presents the results from the analysis of time-of-use tariff interventions.Refer to Section 3 for further
information about the way in which the time-of-use tariff trial was deployed in each City.
Only Blacktown is considered below. Adelaide did not provide pre-intervention NEM12 information, and Perth had
insufficient sites with 365 days of pre-intervention NEM12 data for analysis. Without NEM12 data for the previous season, it
is difficult to evaluate the effect of the tariff on the daily pattern of consumption.
Blacktown
Figure 6-44 shows the median daily load profile for Blacktown sites on the seasonal time-of-use tariff. The data was collected
from the period the tariff was in operation (November to March) for the year before the introduction of the tariff, and the
first year the tariff was introduced. There is very little difference in consumption between the two periods, indicating that
the tariff had minimal effect on their behaviour.
Blacktown Prior To Introduction of Time Of Use Blacktown After The Introduction of Time Of Use
Summer Period Nov/07 – Mar/08 Summer Period Nov/08 – Mar/09
0.5 0.5
0.4 0.4
Median Consumption (kWh)
0.3 0.3
Peak Period Peak Period
FALSE FALSE
TRUE TRUE
0.2 0.2
0.1 0.1
0 0
Time Of Day Time Of Day
Figure 6-44: Pre and post-time-of-use daily load profile – participants
Figure 6-45 shows the same arrangement for control group for the periods before and after the introduction of the tariff.
Again, there was very little difference between the two profiles.
Blacktown Controls Blacktown Controls

Summer Period Nov/07 – Mar/08 Summer Period Nov/08 – Mar/09
0.5 0.5
0.4 0.4
0.3 0.3
Peak Period Peak Period
FALSE FALSE
TRUE TRUE
0.2 0.2
0.1 0.1
0 0
Time Of Day Time Of Day
Figure 6-45: Pre and post-time-of-use daily load profile – controls
Summary of time-of-use tariff analysis

It is difficult to draw any meaningful conclusions from the Solar Cities time-of-use data. Only one City presented sufficient data
for a minimal summary analysis, and there was little noticeable difference in behaviour between controls and participants.
181
Insulation – retrofit
Introduction
This section presents the results from the analysis of insulation retrofit interventions. Table 95 summarises the average
controlled change in energy consumption for both 90 and 365 days before and after interventions, where sufficient data
was available. It also shows the number of intervention and control sites used for analysis. Refer to Section 3 for further
information about the way in which retrofit measures were deployed in each Solar City.
Table 95: Summary of insulation Before–After Control–Impact (BACI) results

CHANGE RESULT CHANGE RESULT PERCENTAGE
SOLAR CITY DAYS TRIAL SITES (KWH/D) (KWH/D) CHANGE (%)
Blacktown 90 119 –2.9 –1.6 –8.8

90/365 118 –3.0 –1.8 –9.3
365 118 –2.1 –3.0 –16.3

Blacktown
BACI results

Results summary:
This result is difficult to interpret, because of a large difference between the pre-intervention control and treatment groups.
183
Figure 6-46: Blacktown insulation Before–After Control–Impact (BACI) charts

7 Conclusion
This report aimed to evaluate, where possible, the effectiveness of the various trials conducted by the Solar Cities programs
in reducing residential electricity consumption. CSIRO encountered repeated difficulties in extracting statistically sound data
sets to work with from the data provided. This was largely attributable to a lack of focus on statistical rigour at the outset
of the program, and the inherent difficulty in applying such methods to programs of the size and scope of Solar Cities. As
a result, aspects of conventional experimental design, such as random assignment to intervention and control conditions,
were not conducted. Further, control data for the analysis was often poorly matched to the intervention group, evidenced
by disparate pre-intervention energy consumption.
Caution, therefore, should be exercised in considering the reported results as being supportive (or not) of the effect of the
trials on participant behaviour. In particular, CSIRO does not make any claim of statistical significance, unless it is explicitly
mentioned in the result. The reported results should be interpreted as an observation of the behaviour of the participants
over the life of the trial, and not necessarily an account of a causal relationship between interventions and changes in
participant behaviour.
With these caveats in mind, Table 96 shows the average change in consumption for each City, for each trial, and the number
of participant sites used to calculate that average. The reported change is in kilowatt-hours (kWh) per day, with a negative
value indicating a reduction in household consumption and a positive value indicating an increase.
Table 96: Summary of results for Cities and interventions (excluding critical peak pricing and direct load control)
SHW IHD INSULATION
HEA CHANGE HEA CHANGE SHW CHANGE IHD PV CHANGE PV CHANGE INSULATION
DAYS (KWH/D) SITES (KWH/D) SITES (KWH/D) SITES (KWH/D) SITES (KWH/D) SITES
Adelaide 90 –0.9 147 – – – – – – – –

365 –0.2 114 – – – – – – – –
Alice Springs 90 –1.9 813 –1.7 301 –3.8 313 +1.0 167 – –
365 +0.2 572 –1.6 213 –0.8 279 +1.7 144 – –
Blacktown 90 +0.9 1364 – – +4.1 368 –1.1 428 –1.6 119
365 –0.4 548 – – –0.4 321 –1.0 422 –3.0 128
Central 90 –0.1 1233 – – – – –3.3 225 – –
Victoria 365 –0.7 225 – – – – – – – –
Perth 90 –0.4 1393 –0.7 240 +0.2 211 – – – –
365 – – – – – – – – – –
Townsville 90 –1.9 556 – – –3.1 235 – – – –
365 –5.4 553 – – –1.8 202 – – – –
Note: HEA= home energy assessments; SHW= solar hot water units; IHD= in-home display; PV= photovoltaic
Table 97 shows the results for trials in which the emphasis was on shifting demand, rather than reducing consumption. The
figure given is the percentage reduction in consumption during the critical peak pricing or direct load control event.
Table 97: Critical peak pricing (CPP) and direct load control (DLC) results
CPP CHANGE (%) DLC CHANGE (%)
Blacktown –40 –
Perth – –26
Throughout the course of CSIRO’s engagement with the Department, results were released by the Solar Cities themselves
concerning the progress and success of the various trials. It was apparent that the data provided to CSIRO was often a
subset of the data used by the Cities in their own analyses. Where there are differences in the results presented in this
report and those presented by the Cities themselves, CSIRO expects they are attributable to differences in the source data
used to conduct the analysis, different approaches to the filtering of the data used for analysis, and differences in statistical
methods used.
185
7.1 Key results
Of the results presented in this report, most confidence surrounds the efforts to manage peak demand. In particular, the
results for critical peak pricing (CPP) and direct load control (DLC) were encouraging in terms of their effect on consumption
during peak periods, and further work in this area is recommended. Other suggestions for research questions that future
programs might consider are presented in Section 7.2.
In general, the key observation to be drawn from this analysis is that without a strong commitment to careful trial design
and thorough data collection it is difficult to generate statistically meaningful results. Recommendations for future programs
are presented in Section 7.3.
7.2 Future work

During the analysis of the Solar Cities data, a number of future lines of enquiry were identified as potentially beneficial for
further investigation. Table 98 shows a list of the more attractive research questions that CSIRO suggests future programs
could consider.
Table 98: Research questions future programs could consider
INTERVENTION FUTURE ENQUIRY
Home energy audit (HEA) Does the effectiveness of an audit differ if it is run by a trained auditor versus a self-guided audit?
What is the effect of the duration of the audit?
Does follow up or regular contact alter the long-term effects of the audit?
Does an individual’s motivation for pursuing an HEA relate to its effect?
In-home display (IHD) Do different IHD units affect behaviour differently?
Does delivering the content via a smart phone, tablet or personal computer affect behaviour in the same
manner as a dedicated unit?
What individual differences in participants affect the extent to which an IHD is an effective tool for
behaviour change (e.g. the effect of different attitudes to climate change)?
Does communicating the status of network (e.g. when the network is under heavy load) affect the
behaviour of the residents?
Time of use Would tariff regimes tailored to different types of resident be more effective in reducing consumption
than a one-size-fits-all?
Critical peak pricing (CPP) A broader study that addresses the effects of CPP would be worthwhile in different cities, climates, and
existing price regimes.
Does the method of CPP notification, or the time at which it is conveyed relative to the CPP event, affect
behaviour?
What is the relationship of current peak pricing schemes to the actual load on the network?
Is there any benefit to making the peak period flexible in time?
Direct load control What value is there in more advanced load control schemes? For example, is there any value in allowing
a participant to set a price that dictates when or whether they will participate in the load event?
Photovoltaic (PV) What effect do different funding models have on behaviour and uptake? For example, is there a
difference in behaviour when the resident owns the PV system, versus when owner hosts the system on
their roof, but the utility retains ownership?
Solar hot water (SHW) Are SHW systems correctly sized?
Do different SHW technologies affect household energy consumption differently?
7.3 Program recommendations

The following broad recommendations are made to help future programs produce evidence-based findings to support
government policy discussions. The recommendations are grouped under three topics:
1. Trial design
2. Data management
3. Program domestics.

Trial design
CSIRO recommends that the Department establish and conduct future programs of this nature with greater consideration
for statistically sound experimental design and trial conduct from the outset. This will translate into more effort being
expended in the initial planning stages of a program and interventions, with the benefit of capturing more comprehensive
and meaningful data for analysis in the end.
A potential strategy to achieve this goal would be to apportion some of the program resources to the conduct of strict
experimental trials in areas that demonstrate early promise in the program. In the case of the Solar Cities program,
this would allow the Department to satisfy its obligations to the Australian Government’s Clean Energy Future funding
requirements.
In practice, this means designing the intervention trials around the:

• policy questions being asked
• interventions being pursued
• expected available data.
The benefits of running the program using a more rigorous experimental design include the ability to:
• easily differentiate the effects of multiple interventions on a single site
• see which groups, based on demographic characteristics, respond best to which interventions
• detect changes in trends and investigate the cause throughout the life of the program
• report in detail on the progress and insights discovered by the program.
At the heart of this is random selection and assignment of representative members of the population to participant and
control groups of suitable size. This will ensure that the effects of interventions are detected, confounding factors are
controlled for, and that any findings are broadly applicable to the general population.
Data management
CSIRO recommends that the Department give a greater emphasis to program data management. To do this, a new program
would need to do the following.
1. Appoint an experienced full-time program data manager, who is supported by local database administrators and
analysts.
2. Develop a database schema in consultation with the participant organisations with consistent naming of tables and
columns, and enforced allowable data types and constraints.
3. Establish a rigorous database management process to adapt to inevitable changes in the conduct of the interventions.
4. Where possible, automatically collect, collate and analyse the experimental data at regular short intervals along the
program’s life.
5. Provide immediate feedback to the participant/organisation when inputting data using before-and-after graphs, creating
summary tables and calculating basic statistics around their data.
Program domestics
CSIRO recommends that the Department not underestimate the required level of interaction and oversight of the
participating organisations to achieve a program goal of collecting quality data. This translates to running regular program
health checks (e.g. weekly/monthly/bi-monthly) with the participant organisations, using progress reports that detail the
actions taken and results gained. Further, we recommended that milestone payments be based on satisfaction with data
collection, to demonstrate the importance of the data to the program and to encourage the participants to stay on top of
the data aspects of their trials.
187
8 References
[1] Department of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency, “Solar Cities – Catalyst for Change,” 2011.
[2] Department of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency, “Australian National Greenhouse Accounts – Quarterly Update
of Australia’s National Greenhouse Gas Inventory,” 2012.
[3] Commonwealth of Australia, “Australian National Greenhouse Accounts – Quarterly Update of Australia’s National
Greenhouse Gas Inventory,” 2012.
[4] Geoscience Australia, “Australian Energy Resource Assessment,” 2010.
[5] Commonwealth of Australia, “Solar Cities – Programme Guidelines,” 2005.
[6] Adelaide Solar City, “Adelaide Solar City Overview Factsheet,” no. October 2012. 2012.
[7] D. De Bortoli, “Influencing Consumer Behaviour through Pricing Signals,” no. October, pp. 23–25, 2012.
[8] S. Grantham, “Alice Solar City – Literature Review,” 2010.
[9] Central Victoria Solar City, “Central Victoria Solar City Annual Report 2011-12.” 2012.
[10] Western Power, “Perth Solar City Annual Report,” 2011.
[11] Western Power, “Perth Solar City Annual Report 2012,” 2012.
[12] Townsville Solar City, “Townsville Queensland Solar City – Annual Report 2011,” Dec. 2011.
[13] Department of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency, “Solar Homes and Communities Plan.” [Online]. Available:
http://www.climatechange.gov.au/what-you-need-to-know/renewable-energy/solar-homes.aspx.
[14] A. Macintosh and D. Wilkinson, “The Australian Government’s solar PV rebate program,” no. 21, 2010.
[15] Australian Government – Clean Energy Regulator, “Clean Energy Regulator – Renewable Energy Target.” [Online].
Available: http://ret.cleanenergyregulator.gov.au/.
[16] Department of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency, “Home Insulation Safety Plan.” [Online]. Available:
http://climatechange.gov.au/hisp.
[17] Australian National Audit Office, “Home Insulation Program – Audit Report,” no. 12, 2010.
[18] Department of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency, “Renewable Energy Bonus Scheme – Solar Hot Water Rebate.”
[Online]. Available: http://www.climatechange.gov.au/en/government/initiatives/solar-hot-water.aspx.
[19] Department of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency, “Green Loans and Green Start programs.” .
[20] State Government Victoria, “Victorian Energy Efficiency Target.” [Online]. Available: https://www.veet.vic.gov.au/
Public/Public.aspx?id=Home.
[21] Queensland Government – Department of Energy and Water Supply, “Solar Bonus Scheme.” [Online]. Available:
http://www.cleanenergy.qld.gov.au/demand-side/solar-bonus-scheme.htm?utm_source=CLEANEENERGY&utm_
medium=301&utm_campaign=redirection.
[22] NSW Government – Trade & Investment, “Solar Bonus Scheme.” [Online]. Available: http://www.trade.nsw.gov.au/
energy/sustainable/renewable/solar/solar-scheme/solar-bonus-scheme.
[23] State Government Victoria – Department of Primary Industries, “Victorian Feed-in Tariff Schemes.” [Online].
Available: http://www.dpi.vic.gov.au/energy/environment-and-community/victorian-feed-in-tariff-schemes.
[24] Queensland Government – Department of Energy and Water Supply, “Queensland Government Solar Hot Water
Rebate.” [Online]. Available: http://www.cleanenergy.qld.gov.au/demand-side/solar-hot-water-rebate.htm?utm_
source=CLEANEENERGY&utm_medium=301&utm_campaign=redirection.
[25] Essential Services Commission of South Australia, “Residential Energy Efficiency Scheme (REES).” [Online]. Available:
http://www.escosa.sa.gov.au/residential-energy-efficiency-scheme-rees.aspx.
[26] Department of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency, “Your Home Technical Manual – Fourth Edition,” 2010.
[27] Alice Solar City, “ASC_KeyResults_Reporting_HEAs-EEMs_InterimReportFeb12.” .
[28] Central Victoria Solar City, “Central Victoria Solar City Annual Report 2010-11,” 2011.
[29] “Townsville Queensland Solar City – Annual Report 2011,” Dec. 2011.
[30] Blacktown Solar City, “The Blacktown Solar City Story,” 2012.

[31] H. Koller and M. Gill, “NSMP Business Requirements Work Stream – In Home Display Guidelines,” no. November,
pp. 1–14, 2010.
[32] Office of the Commissioner for Sustainability and the Environment, “Retrofitting buildings to reduce greenhouse gas
emissions,” 2009.
[33] J. Wright, P. Ashworth, and P. Osman, The CSIRO Home Energy Saving Handbook: How to Save Energy, Save Money
and Reduce Your Carbon Footprint. Pan Macmillan Australia Pty, Limited, 2009, p. 228.
[34] E. Smith, “BACI design,” Encyclopedia of Environmetrics, vol. 1, pp. 141–148, 2006.
[35] Department of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency, “E3 – Equipment Energy Efficiency.” [Online]. Available:
http://reg.energyrating.gov.au/comparator/product_types/35/search/.
189
A. Appendix: Modelling methodology
A.1 Objectives of analysis

• To assess the short-term impact of each intervention for every single site.
• To investigate the existence of green-fatigue effect of each intervention in the long run for each single site.
• To gain an understanding of the short-term and long-term effects of each intervention at postcode and City level.
A.2 Assumptions
• Consecutive observations collected in a particular site are independent of each other.
• All the demographic variables are constant throughout the experiment, for instance, the number of occupants remains
constant.
• Correlation between the control and intervention sites does not change significantly in the before and after periods, as it
is assumed that the same external factors apply to both intervention and control groups.
• Assume non-withdrawal for all the participants for the whole trial period, for example, none of the residents will move
out or go travelling for a long period of time.
• If there is no intervention, the impact and control sites track each other, which means their daily consumption values for
the before period will be parallel to each other.
• Residuals are normally distributed.
Perth Modelling Methodology
Data
Energy data: half-hourly data (NEM12) and quarterly data (NEM13). Both types of data are transformed into daily
consumption values: i.e., NEM12 data within a day are summed up, while NEM13 data are divided by the number of days
in a quarter to transform into consumption on daily basis. To assess short-term effects, sites with at least 90 days of
observations on each before and after period will be included, whereas sites that have a minimum number of 365 days of
readings on each pre and post-intervention period will be chosen to explore the long-term effect. For Perth, an intervention
and a control site should have at least 10 data points before and after the intervention to be included in the analysis.
Weather data: in particular, temperature and relative humidity are sourced from the Bureau of Meteorology. To reduce missing
values, the 10 nearest weather stations to a postcode are found and the averages for three-hourly temperatures and relative
humidity across different dates are calculated. Linear interpolation is performed to fill up any missing values. An analysis has
been done to look for the temperature thresholds that trigger households to increase their energy consumption. The results
show that households tend to raise their electricity usage when the temperature reaches 15 °C or lower, as well as 25 °C or
higher. We attempted to use the proportion of time when relative humidity was higher than 40%, of the maximum of relative
humidity in a day, and the average of three-hourly relative humidity in a day, as independent variables in the model. Averages
of relative humidity in a day explain the weather variation better than the other two variables.
Background of the control data:
Perth:
• Assuming that there is no ripple effect from the marketing approach adopted, internal control group is used as control
site. The reason to exclude the external group is because of the geographical and weather differential between the
external and the intervention groups.
• There is limited site information on quarterly data (NEM13) control sites and no site record on half-hourly data (NEM12)
control sites
Since there is insufficient information on the characteristics of each household, matching cannot be done before model
building, resulting in severe violation of BACI design. In other words, we are not able to compare like with like, and the
change in daily energy consumption may be influenced by other factors, rather than just the intervention.

Way to handle the control data:
Perth:
Control sites with an average daily consumption larger than 150 kWh or smaller than 0.2 kWh are excluded. Sites with zero
variance for daily consumption are also excluded. The NEM13 daily consumption values in control sites are averaged across
all sites according to interval dates. As a result, there will be one ‘average control site’, which combines all the NEM13
control data. Since postcode information is not available for the control data, the weather data for this ‘average control site’
is approximated by taking the averages of the weather data across all intervention sites according to the interval dates.
Model:
The generalised additive model for location, scale and shape (GAMLSS) is used to perform Before–After Control–Impact
(BACI) analysis. For Perth, since the ‘average control site’ contains daily energy consumption with zero value (i.e. 0 kWh)
and the distribution for daily energy consumption is right-skewed, zero-adjusted inverse Gaussian distribution with log
link function is chosen. Outliers are removed by only including daily consumption ranging from 0–150 kWh, as it is not
reasonable for a normal household to consume more than 150 kWh of electricity in a day. Owing to the difficulty in fitting
different models to the enormous number of sites, the same type of model is fitted for each site. The model is validated by
checking the consistency of its application across several sites.
Perth models:
Assess the impact of home energy audit (HEA) as single intervention in the short period:
The equation of the model is as follows:
Consumption_total~Month+Day+Interval_date+cos(2*pi*Interval_date/365.25)+
sin(2*pi*Interval_date/365.25)+Temp15+Temp25+Humean+LagTemp15+LagTemp25+LagHumean+Inter*IntCon
Response variable:
Consumption_total: Daily energy consumption value in unit of kilowatt-hour (kWh)
• It is a continuous variable. The daily consumption total for most of the sites show a right-skewed distribution.
Explanatory variables:
Categorical variables:
Month: Represents months of the year, from January to December. January is represented by value of 1; February is
represented by 2, and so on. January is used as a baseline.
Day: Represents days of the week, from Sunday to Saturday. Sunday is represented as 0, Monday as 1, and so on. Sunday is
used as a reference.
Continuous variables:
Interval_date: Shows the daily reading dates for NEM12 data and middle date in a quarter for NEM13 data. They are
converted to Julian dates.
cos(2*pi*interval_date/365.25), sin(2*pi*interval_date/365.25): Fourier series to adjust for cyclical pattern in the data.
Temp15: Proportion of time when the temperature is less than 15 °C in a day and a quarter for NEM12 data and NEM13
data respectively.
Temp25: Proportion of time when the temperature is more than 25 °C in a day and a quarter for NEM12 data and NEM13
data respectively.
Humean: Averages of three-hourly relative humidity in a day and a quarter for NEM12 and NEM13 data, respectively.
LagTemp15: Proportion of time when the previous day’s temperature is less than 15 °C.
191
LagTemp25: Proportion of time when the previous day’s temperature is more than 25 °C.
LagHumean: Averages of three-hourly relative humidity on previous day.
Indicator variables:
Inter: The value of Inter is 1 if the observation is after the intervention event and 0 otherwise. The same intervention date
as the intervention site will be assigned to the ‘average control site’. So, the readings in the ‘average control site’ before the
intervention date will be allocated a value of 1 for variable Inter and 0 otherwise.
IntCon: The value of IntCon is 1 if the observation belongs to the impact site and 0 if the observation is from the control site.
Interaction term:
Inter*IntCon: Shows the effect of the intervention on an impact site as compared to the control site.
Basically, the model to assess the long-term effect has the same explanatory variables as the model above. The only
difference is the interaction term:
Inter*IntCon*Interval_date: Shows the effect of the intervention on an impact site as compared to the control site as time
progresses.
Assess the impact of direct load control (DLC) + HEA as multiple interventions in the short period:
All, but the indicator variables are the same as the model above.
hInt: Observations after the HEA event will be given a value of 1 and 0 otherwise.
dInt: Reading on a day when an DLC event occurred will be given a value of 1, and 0 will be given to the other readings.
Interaction term:
hInt*dInt*IntCon: Indicates the effect of HEA and DLC on an impact site, as compared to the control site.
Assess the impact of insulation + photovoltaic (PV) + DLC + HEA as multiple interventions in the short period:
hInt: Observations after the HEA event will be given a value of 1, and 0 otherwise.
dInt: Reading on a day where there was an DLC event occurred will be given a value of 1 and 0 for the other readings.
ipInt: Since insulation and PV events happened on the same day for all sites, readings after both of the events will be
assigned a value of 1, and 0 otherwise.
Interaction term:
hInt*ipInt*dInt*IntCon: Indicates the effect of insulation, PV, DLC and HEA on an impact site, as compared to the control
site.
Assess the impact of insulation + solar hot water (SHW) + HEA as multiple interventions in the short period:

iInt: Since insulation and SHW events happened on the same day for all sites, readings after both of the events will be
assigned a value of 1, and 0 otherwise.
Interaction term:
hInt*isInt*IntCon: Indicates the effect of HEA, SHW and PV on an impact site, as compared to the control site.
Assess the impact of insulation + SHW+ HEA as multiple interventions in the long term:
The only difference is the interaction term:
hInt*isInt*IntCon*Interval_date: Shows the effect of multiple interventions on an impact site as compared to the control
site as time progresses.
Central Victoria, Alice Springs and Blacktown Modelling Report
DATA
Energy data: half-hourly data (NEM12) and quarterly data (NEM13). Both types of data are transformed into daily
consumption values, i.e. NEM12 data within a day are summed up, while NEM13 data are divided by the number of days in
a quarter to transform into consumption on daily basis.
To assess the short-term effect, sites with at least 90 days of observations on each before and after period will be included.
Sites with a minimum number of 365 days of readings on each pre and post-intervention period will be chosen to explore
the long-term effect. For Central Victoria, an intervention and a control site should have at least 22 data points before and
after the intervention to be included in the analysis. For Alice Springs, an intervention and a control site should have at least
16 data points before and after the intervention to be included. For Blacktown, an intervention and a control site should
have at least 11 data points before and after the intervention to be included.
Background of the control data:
Ideally, a good control site will have the same characteristics as an intervention site. Control sites with an average daily
consumption larger than 150 kWh or smaller than 0.2 kWh are excluded. Sites with zero variance for daily consumption
are also excluded. Since there is demographic information on both quarterly data (NEM13) control sites and half-hourly
data (NEM12) control sites, matching is done before model fitting with the aim to reduce variation. By matching, we can
control for other variables that affect energy consumption, so that the effect of intervention on households’ energy savings
behaviour can be assessed. Alice Springs has only one control site with NEM12 data.
Matching:
If there are at least four control sites in a postcode, four control sites that closely match with an intervention site in the
same postcode are chosen. Therefore, weather data is not required, since control and intervention sites are from the same
area and experience the same weather conditions. An advantage of using multiple control sites, rather than single control
site, is to more accurately account for regional changes that might be misinterpreted as effects of intervention.
Central Victoria:
In total, there are 30 variables; we try to match on 25 variables. The five variables that are left out are English_Level_Code,
Num_Utility_Rooms, Emp_Status_Code, Other_Language_Code and Language_Code.
Alice Springs:
In total, there are 30 variables; we try to match on 26 variables. The four variables that are left out are English_Level_Code,
Emp_Status_Code, Other_Language_Code and Language_Code.
193
Blacktown:
In total, there are 30 variables; we try to match on 24 variables. The six variables that are left out are English_Level_Code,
Emp_Status_Code, Roof_Colour_Code, Num_Offices, Household_Income_Code and Language_Code.
These variables are left out because they either do not correctly represent the characteristics of a household (e.g. Emp_
Status_Code may only indicate the employment status for a resident) or they have incomplete information (e.g. English_
Level_Code for most of the sites are not available).
Model: (The second paragraph is the same as in Perth modelling methodology)
The generalised additive model for location, scale and shape (GAMLSS) is used to perform Before and After Control Impact
(BACI analysis. The distribution for daily energy consumption is right-skewed. Therefore, if an intervention site and its
matched control sites contain daily energy consumption with zero value (i.e. 0 kWh), zero-adjusted inverse Gaussian
distribution with log link function is chosen. On the other hand, if the daily energy consumption values are larger than zero,
gamma distribution with log link function is used. Lognormal distribution has been compared with gamma distribution
by fitting both types of distributions to the first 10 sites (with HEA as a single intervention) with larger than zero daily
consumption values. For Central Victoria, lognormal fits better in 6 out of 10 sites than does gamma distribution. For Alice
Springs, gamma fits better in 7 out of 10 sites than does lognormal distribution. For Blacktown, both of the distributions
provide equally good results. Gamma distribution with log link function is chosen due to ease of interpreting its estimated
coefficient. The lognormal model, since antilogarithmic of the estimated coefficient produces bias, requires a correction of
bias in prediction. In addition, simulation studies by Fu and Moncher (http://www.casact.org/pubs/dpp/dpp04/04dpp149.
pdf) show that the estimation from the gamma model is unbiased and stable.
Outliers are removed by only including daily consumption ranging from 0 kWh to 150 kWh, as it is not reasonable for a
normal household to consume more than 150 kWh of electricity in a day. Owing to the difficulty in fitting different models
to the enormous number of sites, the same type of model is fitted for each site. The model is validated by checking the
consistency of its application across several sites.
Central Victoria models:
Assess the impact of HEA as single intervention in the short period:
Consumption_Total~Month+Day+cos(2*pi*Interval_date/365.25)+
sin(2*pi*Interval_date/365.25)+Interval_date+Material_type_code+Residence_size_code+Num_bathrooms+Roof_type_
code+Residence_type_code+Household_income_code+
Building_age_code+Num_floors+Floor_type_code+Num_bedrooms+Num_living_rooms+Num_offices+Other_language_
code+Education_code+Indigeneous_code+
Residence_status_code+Num_occupant_0_9+Num_occupant_10_17+Num_occupant_18_24+Num_occupant_25_34+Num_
occupant_35_44+Num_occupant_45_54+Num_occupant_55_64+Num_occupant_65+Num_weeks_occupied+Num_utility_
rooms+
Emp_Status_Code+Int*IntCon
Response variable:
Consumption_total: Daily energy consumption value in unit of kWh.
• It is a continuous variable. The daily consumption total for most of the sites shows a right-skewed distribution.

Nominal categorical variables:
Material_Type_Code: BRICVENE, WEABOARD, MIXTURE, OTHER, DBBRICK, TIMBER, RAMEARTH, DBCBST, UNKNOWN, FIBRO
Roof_Type_Code: TILES, METAL, MIXED, CONCRETE, SLATE, OTHER, TIMBER, UNKNOWN
Residence_Type_Code: HOUSDETA, AUFSS, AUFMS, HOUSSEDE, HOUSCOMP, UNKKOWN
Floor_Type_Code: SUSPTIMB, MIXED, CONCSLAB, OTHER, UNKNOWN
Other_language_Code: ENGONLY, ITALIAN, CANTONES, GERMAN, MANDARIN, OTHER, UNKNOWN
Indigenous_Code: AUSBORIG, NOTINDIG, UNKNOWN
Residence_Status_Code: GOVHOUSE, MORTPRIM, OWNPRIM, RENTPRIM, UNKNOWN
Emp_Status_Code: FULLTIME, PARTTIME, RETIRED, SELFEMP, STUDYSEC, STUDYTER, UNEMPLOY, UNKNOWN
Ordinal categorical variables:
Residence_Size_Code: SMALL, MEDIUM, COMPACT, SPACIOUS, LARGE, UNKNOWN
Household_Income_Code: IB20K, IB50K, IB100K, IB150K, IB150KP, UNKNOWN
Building_Age_Code: PRE1950S, 1950S, 1960S, 1970S, 1980S, 1990S, POST2000, UNKOWN
Education_Code: PRIMARY, HSY10, HSY12, TAFE, TERTIARY, OTHER, KNOWN
Num_Bathrooms: Shows the number of bathrooms in a site.
Num_Floors: Indicates number of floors in a house.
Num_Bedrooms: Indicates number of bedrooms in a site.
Num_Living_Rooms: Indicates number of living rooms in a site.
Num_Offices: Indicates number of offices in a site.
Num_Occupant_0_9: Indicates number of residents who are in the age group of 0 to 9.
195
Num_Occupant_65: Indicates number of residents who are in the age group of above 65.
Num_Weeks_Occupied: Indicates the number of weeks in a year when the house was occupied.
Num_Utility_Rooms: Indicates the number of utility rooms in a house.
Int: The value of Int is 1 if the observation is after the intervention event, and 0 otherwise. The intervention date of
the impact site will be the intervention date of all the matched control sites, so readings in the control sites before the
intervention date will be assigned a value of 1 for variable Int, and 0 otherwise.
Interaction term:
Int*IntCon: Shows the effect of the intervention on an impact site as compared to the control site.
Variables in dispersion parameter:
Assess the impact of HEA as single intervention in the long term:
Generally, the model to assess the long-term effect has the same explanatory variables as the model above. The only
Int*IntCon*Interval_date: Shows the effect of the intervention on an impact site as compared to the control site as time
progresses.
Assess the impact of PV + HEA as multiple interventions in the short period:
pInt: Observations after the PV event will be given a value of 1, and 0 otherwise.
Interaction term:
hInt*pInt*IntCon: Indicates the impact of HEA and PV on an impact site, as compared to the control site.
Assess the impact of PV + HEA as multiple interventions in the long term:
hInt*pInt*IntCon*Interval_date: Shows the effect of multiple interventions on an impact site as compared to the control site
as time progresses.
Assess the effect of SHW+ HEA as multiple interventions in the short period:

All, but the indicator variables are the same as the model above,
sInt: Observations after the SHW event will be given a value of 1, and 0 otherwise.
Interaction term:
hInt*sInt*IntCon: Indicates the effect of HEA and SHW on an impact site, as compared to the control site.
Assess the effect of SHW + HEA as multiple interventions in the long term:
hInt*sInt*IntCon*Interval_date: Shows the effect of multiple interventions on an impact site as compared to the control site
as time progresses.
Assess the impact of SHW + HEA + PV as multiple interventions in the short period:
Interaction term:
hInt*sInt*pInt*IntCon: Indicates the effect of HEA, PV and SHW on an impact site, as compared to the control site.
Assess the effect of SHW + HEA + PV as multiple interventions in the long term:
hInt*sInt*pInt*IntCon*Interval_date: Shows the effect of multiple interventions on an impact site as compared to the
control site as time progresses.
Assess the impact of in-home display (IHD) + HEA + PV as multiple interventions in the short period:
yInt: Observations after the IHD event will be given a value of 1, and 0 otherwise.
Interaction term:
hInt*yInt*pInt*IntCon: Indicates the effect of HEA, PV and IHD on an impact site, as compared to the control site.
Assess the effect of IHD + HEA + PV as multiple interventions in the long term:
197
hInt*yInt*pInt*IntCon*Interval_date: Shows the effect of multiple interventions on an impact site as compared to the
Alice Springs models:
Assess the impact of HEA as single intervention in the short period:
code+Residence_type_code+Household_income_code+
Building_age_code+Num_floors+Floor_type_code+Num_bedrooms+Num_living_rooms+Num_offices+Education_
code+Indigeneous_code+Residence_status_code+
Num_occupant_0_9+Num_occupant_10_17+Num_occupant_18_24+
Num_occupant_25_34+Num_occupant_35_44+Num_occupant_45_54+
Num_occupant_55_64+Num_occupant_65+Num_weeks_occupied+Emp_Status_Code+
Int*IntCon
Response variable:
Material_Type_Code: BRICVENE, MIXTURE, OTHER, DBBRICK, TIMBER, RAMEARTH, DBCBST, UNKNOWN, CONCSLAB, FIBRO
Roof_Type_Code: TILES, METAL, MIXED, OTHER, UNKNOWN
Residence_Type_Code: HOUSDETA, AUFSS, AUFMS, HOUSSEDE, HOUSCOMP, UNKNOWN
Floor_Type_Code: SUSPTIMB, MIXED, CONCSLAB, OTHER, UNKNOWN
Other_language_Code: ENGONLY, ITALIAN, CANTONES, GERMAN, MANDARIN, OTHER, UNKNOWN
Indigenous_Code: AUSBORIG, NOTINDIG, INDIGENO, TORRES, UNKNOWN
Residence_Status_Code: OWNPRIM, RENTPRIM
Emp_Status_Code: FULLTIME, PARTTIME, RETIRED, SELFEMP, CASUAL, UNEMPLOY, FTHOMEMA, UNKNOWN
Residence_Size_Code: SMALL, MEDIUM, COMPACT, SPACIOUS, LARGE, UNKNOWN
Household_Income_Code: IB20K, IB50K, IB100K, IB150K, IB150KP, UNKNOWN

Building_Age_Code: PRE1950, 1950S, 1960S, 1970S, 1980S, 1990S, POST2000, UNKOWN
Education_Code: HSUNSPEC, HSY10, HSY12, TAFE, TERTIARY, OTHER, UNKNOWN
Num_Offices: Indicates number of offices in a site.
Interaction term:
Assess the effect of HEA as single intervention in the long term:
199
progresses.
Assess the impact of PV + HEA as multiple interventions in the short period:
Interaction term:
hInt*pInt*IntCon: Indicates the effect of HEA and PV on an impact site, as compared to the control site.
Assess the effect of PV + HEA as multiple interventions in the long term:
as time progresses.
Assess the effect of SHW + HEA as multiple interventions in the short period.
Interaction term:
hInt*sInt*IntCon: Indicates the effect of HEA and SHW on an impact site, as compared to the control site.
Assess the effect of SHW + HEA as multiple interventions in the long term:
hInt*sInt*IntCon*Interval_date: Shows the effect of multiple interventions on an impact site as compared to the control site
as time progresses.
Assess the effect of SHW + HEA + PV as multiple interventions in the short period:

Interaction term:
hInt*sInt*pInt*IntCon: Indicates the impact of HEA, PV and SHW on an impact site, as compared to the control site.
Assess the effect of SHW + HEA + PV as multiple interventions in the long term:
hInt*sInt*pInt*IntCon*Interval_date: Shows the effect of multiple interventions on an impact site as compared to the
Assess the effect of insulation + HEA + PV as multiple interventions in the short period:
iInt: Observations after the insulation event will be given a value of 1, and 0 otherwise.
Interaction term:
hInt*iInt*pInt*IntCon: Indicates the effect of HEA, PV and insulation on an impact site, as compared to the control site.
Assess the effect of insulation + HEA + PV as multiple interventions in the long term:
hInt*iInt*pInt*IntCon*Interval_date: Shows the effect of multiple interventions on an impact site as compared to the
Assess the effect of insulation + HEA as multiple interventions in the short period:
Interaction term:
hInt*iInt*IntCon: Indicates the effect of HEA and insulation on an impact site, as compared to the control site.
Assess the effect of insulation + HEA as multiple interventions in the long term:
201
hInt*iInt *IntCon*Interval_date: Shows the effect of multiple interventions on an impact site as compared to the control site
as time progresses.
Assess the effect of IHD + HEA as multiple interventions in the short period:
Interaction term:
hInt*yInt*IntCon: Indicates the effect of HEA and IHD on an impact site, as compared to the control site.
Assess the effect of IHD + HEA as multiple interventions in the long term:
hInt*yInt *IntCon*Interval_date: Shows the effect of multiple interventions on an impact site as compared to the control
site as time progresses.
Blacktown models:
Assess the effect of HEA as single intervention in the short period:
code+Other_Language_Code+Residence_type_code+
Household_income_code+Building_age_code+Num_floors+Floor_type_code+
Num_bedrooms+Num_living_rooms+Num_offices+Education_code+Indigeneous_code+Residence_status_code+Num_
occupant_0_9+Num_occupant_10_17+Num_occupant_18_24+Num_occupant_25_34+Num_occupant_35_44+Num_
occupant_45_54+
Num_occupant_55_64+Num_occupant_65+Num_weeks_occupied+Emp_Status_Code+Num_Utility _Rooms+Int*IntCon
Response variable:
Material_Type_Code: BRICVENE, MIXTURE, OTHER, DBBRICK, TIMBER, UNKNOWN, FIBRO
Roof_Type_Code: TILES, METAL, OTHER, UNKNOWN

Residence_Type_Code: HOUSDETA, AUFSS, AUFMS, HOUSSEDE, HOUSCOMP
Floor_Type_Code: SUSPTIMB, MIXED, CONCSLAB, UNKNOWN
Other_language_Code: ARABIC, CROATIAN, FILIPINO, FRENCH, GREEK, HINDI, INDONESI, MALTESE, POTUGUESM PUNJABI,
RUSSIAN, SPANISH, TURKISH, VIETNAME, AFRICAN, HUNGARIA, MACEDONI, MALAY, SERBIAN, ENGONLY, ITALIAN,
CANTONES, GERMAN, MANDARIN, OTHER, UNKNOWN
Indigenous_Code: NOTINDIG, INDIGENO, TORRES, UNKNOWN
Residence_Status_Code: OWNPRIM, RENTPRIM, UNKNOWN
Emp_Status_Code: FULLTIME, PARTTIME, RETIRED, CASUAL, UNEMPLOY, FTHOMEMA, UNKNOWN
Residence_Size_Code: SMALL, MEDIUM, COMPACT, LARGE, UNKNOWN
Household_Income_Code: IB30K, IB75K, IB75KP, IB150K, UNKNOWN
Building_Age_Code: PRE1950, 1960S, 1970S, 1980S, 1990S, POST2000, UNKOWN
Education_Code: HSUNSPEC, TAFE, TERTIARY, UNKNOWN
Num_Utility_Rooms: Indicates number of utility rooms in a house.
203
Interaction term:
Assess the effect of HEA as single intervention in the long term:
progresses.
Assess the effect of insulation + HEA as multiple interventions in the short period:
All, but the indicator variables are the same as the model above,
Interaction term:
hInt*iInt*IntCon: Indicates the effect of HEA and insulation on an impact site, as compared to the control site.
Assess the effect of insulation + HEA as multiple interventions in the long term:
hInt*iInt*IntCon*Interval_date: Shows the effect of multiple interventions on an impact site as compared to the control site
as time progresses.
Assess the effect of insulation as single intervention in the short period:
Int: Observations after the insulation event will be given a value of 1, and 0 otherwise.
Interaction term:
Int*IntCon: Indicates the effect of insulation on an impact site, as compared to the control site.
Assess the effect of insulation as single intervention in the long term:

Int*IntCon*Interval_date: Shows the effect of single intervention on an impact site as compared to the control site as time
progresses.
Assess the effect of PV as single intervention in the short period:
Int: Observations after the PV event will be given a value of 1, and 0 otherwise.
Interaction term:
Int*IntCon: Indicates the effect of PV on an impact site, as compared to the control site.
Assess the effect of PV as single intervention in the long term:
progresses.
Assess the effect of PV + HEA as multiple interventions in the short period:
Interaction term:
hInt*pInt*IntCon: Indicates the effect of multiple interventions on an impact site, as compared to the control site.
Assess the effect of PV + HEA as multiple interventions in the long term:
as time progresses.
Assess the effect of SHW as single intervention in the short period:
Int: Observations after the SHW event will be given a value of 1, and 0 otherwise.
Interaction term:
Int*IntCon: Indicates the effect of SHW on an impact site, as compared to the control site.
Assess the effect of SHW as single intervention in the long term:
205
progresses.
Assess the effect of PV + insulation as multiple interventions in the short period:
Interaction term:
iInt*pInt*IntCon: Indicates the effect of multiple interventions on an impact site, as compared to the control site.
Assess the effect of PV + insulation as multiple interventions in the long term:
iInt*pInt*IntCon*Interval_date: Shows the effect of multiple interventions on an impact site as compared to the control site
as time progresses.
Assess the effect of PV + IHD as multiple interventions in the short period:
Interaction term:
yInt*pInt*IntCon: Indicates the effect of multiple interventions on an impact site, as compared to the control site.
Assess the effect of PV + IHD as multiple interventions in the long term:
yInt*pInt*IntCon*Interval_date: Shows the effect of multiple interventions on an impact site as compared to the control site
as time progresses.
Method to examine the short and long-term effects of each intervention at postcode and City level:
Log link function implies multiplicative covariates effect. The averages of the exponential of the estimated coefficients for
each site are taken to provide overall results for each postcode. Exponential terms with an absolute value larger than 5
in assessing short-term effect, and exponential terms with an absolute value larger than 10 in assessing long-term effect,
are excluded. The results for the City are found by taking the averages of the results in all the postcodes. Depending on
the number of sites and number of postcodes, the results may not be good indications of the effect of intervention on the
postcode and thus City level.

B. Appendix: Blacktown critical peak pricing
B.1 Seasonal consumption – control vs. participant
207
B.2 Event day consumption – control vs. participant
209
211
213
215
217
219
221
223
225
227
CONTACT US FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
t 1300 363 400 Dr Saad Sayeef
+61 3 9545 2176 CSIRO Energy Flagship
e enquiries@csiro.au t +61 2 9460 6131
w www.csiro.au e Saad.Sayeef@csiro.au
w www.csiro.au/ETF
YOUR CSIRO Mr Malcolm Thorp

Australia is founding its future on Department of Industry
science and innovation. Its national Director of Solar Cities Team
science agency, CSIRO, is a powerhouse t +61 2 6159 6365
of ideas, technologies and skills for e Malcolm.Thorp@climatechange.gov.au
building prosperity, growth, health and w www.climatechange.gov.au/solarcities
sustainability. It serves governments,
industries, business and communities
accross the nation.

Solar Cities Data Analysis Report1

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Solar Cities Data Analysis Report1

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

ENERGY FLAGSHIP

Solar Cities Data

Copyright and Disclaimer

2 Solar Cities Data Analysis Report

2 Solar Cities overview. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

5 Data summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104

4 Solar Cities Data Analysis Report

B. Appendix: Blacktown critical peak pricing. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 207

6 Solar Cities Data Analysis Report

8 Solar Cities Data Analysis Report

10 Solar Cities Data Analysis Report

Intervention: An activity that is intended to influence a participant’s electricity consumption behaviour.

Trials conducted for the Solar Cities programs included:

12 Solar Cities Data Analysis Report

Adelaide 90 –0.9 147 – – – – – – – –

CFL compact fluorescent light bulb

CPP critical peak pricing

CRT cost-reflective tariff

CSIRO Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation

DLC direct load control

DRED demand response enabling device

GST Goods and services tax

HEA home energy audit

HEC home eco-consultation

IHD in-home display

LED light-emitting diode

LGA local government authority

NEM National Electricity Market

NSW New South Wales

PWC Power & Water Corporation

REC Renewable Energy Certificate

SHW solar hot water

SMS short message service

STC Small-scale Technology Certificate

14 Solar Cities Data Analysis Report

Solar Cities program objectives

The program also aimed to strengthen the government’s ability to [1]:

1.1.1 Australia’s energy challenge: satisfying demand and peak load

Figure 1-1: The seven Solar Cities across Australia

1.2 Solar Cities interventions

Table 3: Residential trials conducted by the Solar Cities

Home energy audits       

16 Solar Cities Data Analysis Report

1.3 Solar Cities data

Each Solar City stores its data in its

Cities upload data to the Solar

Solar Cities Data Warehouse

Figure 1-2: Solar Cities data collection overview

1.4 CSIRO activities

1.5 Report outline

18 Solar Cities Data Analysis Report

Table 4: Responsibilities of Adelaide Solar City Consortium members

Origin Consortium lead

1 Funding figure provided by the Department of Industry

Table 5: Interventions trialled by Adelaide Solar City

Home energy 879 879 0 879 Dec 2007 Jun 2010

2.1.3 City intervention overview

2.1.3.1 Home energy audit

20 Solar Cities Data Analysis Report

2.1.3.4 Solar hot water

2.1.3.5 Time-of-use tariff

2.1.3.6 Critical peak pricing

Peak pricing events were limited to:

2.1.3.7 In-home display/web portal access