59% of low-income program benefits come from water savings — not electricity
Pennsylvania's Act 129 low-income efficiency programs pass cost-effectiveness tests primarily because of cheap water measures (showerheads, faucet aerators), not because they deliver substantial electric bill reductions. This means participating households may see minimal electric bill impact — and still need CAP subsidies.
Act 129 LI program TRC benefits, PY15
Cost-effectiveness by EDC, PY15 (gross TRC ratio)
59%
Share of low-income program TRC benefits attributed to water savings (low-flow showerheads and faucet aerators) in PY15. Without water benefits, many LI programs would fall below a 1.0 TRC ratio.
$257M
Act 129 statewide spending in PY15. EDC TRC ratios ranged from 1.19 (PPL) to 1.86 (Duquesne Light). Residential share of portfolio declining: 49% (Phase III) → 29% (PY15). Acquisition cost rising: $0.22 → $0.29/kWh.
4.3%
Average electric baseload savings from LIURP jobs — the direct-install measures most similar to Act 129 LI programs. Average bill reduction: $71/year. Gas heating jobs save 14.5% and $220/year.
The two program tracks reinforce each other's weaknesses: Act 129 low-income programs optimize for TRC compliance (cheap water measures) rather than electric bill reduction. CAP programs subsidize the electric bills that Act 129 was supposed to reduce. Neither track independently solves the affordability problem.
Water benefits finding — SWE Phase IV PY15 Annual Report, Section 5 findings. TRC ratios — SWE PY15 Annual Report, cost-effectiveness tables.
Sources: 59% water benefits — SWE PY15 Final Annual Report (Dec 2024), Section 5 findings. TRC ratios by EDC — SWE PY15 Annual Report (Dec 2024), cost-effectiveness tables. Statewide spending ($257.2M) — SWE PY15, Section 2.3. Acquisition cost trend — SWE PY15, Tables 9, 18-20. Residential portfolio share — SWE PY15, Section 5.1.1. LIURP savings — BCS Universal Service Report 2022, LIURP Energy Savings tables (2020 PY evaluations).