My comment is in response to the following found in Other Information:
"The cost-benefit analysis for the below scenario (electricity and natural gas utilities implement Green Button DMD and CMD through a multi-integrated approach) concluded a net societal benefit: • Combined DMD and CMD Implementation: the results show that implementing both DMD and CMD is more cost-effective, providing greater benefits than DMD alone.
• Electricity and Natural Gas Utility Implementation: the most cost-effective option is to implement Green Button for electricity and natural gas only.
o Including water is also cost-effective from a societal level when combined with electricity and natural gas, but this is primarily because the benefits from implementing Green Button for electricity and natural gas outweigh the costs of implementing Green Button for water. The costs outweigh the benefits when considering water on its own.
• Multi-integrated (hosted) platforms: both single- and multi-integrated hosted options are equally cost-effective when implementing for electricity and natural gas utilities."
John Molnar Response:
Water should be included at this stage:
1) There are lots of funds available from CCAP.
2) Water use (and peak water use) affect our energy system as water and wastewater treatment are highly energy intensive, therefore renders the argument provided moot “the benefits from implementing Green Button for electricity and natural gas outweigh the costs of implementing Green Button for water.”
3) The capital deferral of being able to grow without having to expand Ontario’s water resources is irresponsible fiscal policy.
4) If there is no way water will be included at this point, there should be a hard requirement that the equipment/hardware and software are all compatible to upgrade to include for water if the ratepayer would like to pay for it at a reasonable cost to the ratepayer.
[Original Comment ID: 212100]
Submitted February 15, 2018 3:01 PM