HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 6d. Receive the Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan, Fleet Electrification Roadmap, and Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Roadmap Item 6d
Department: Administration
Cost Center: 1005
For Agenda of: 5/2/2023
Placement: Consent
Estimated Time: N/A
FROM: Greg Hermann, Deputy City Manager
Prepared By: Chris Read, Sustainability Manager
SUBJECT: RECEIVE THE CARBON NEUTRAL CITY FACILITIES PLAN, FLEET
ELECTRIFICATION ROADMAP, AND THE ELECTRIC VEHICLE
INFRASTRUCTURE ROADMAP
RECOMMENDATION
Receive and file the Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan, the Fleet Electrification
Roadmap, and the Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Roadmap.
POLICY CONTEXT
Land Use Element of the General Plan Policy 9.4 – Climate Action Plan - The City
shall maintain and implement its Climate Action Plan to reduce community and
municipal GHG emissions consistent with State laws and objectives.
Resolution No. 11159 (2020 Series) adopted the Climate Action Plan for
Community Recovery with the goal of community carbon neutrality by 2035 a nd a
sub-goal of carbon-neutral municipal operation by 2030.
Resolution No. 11263 (2021 Series) adopted the Lead by Example Plan which
operationalizes the municipal operations sub-goal and includes sector specific
goals to eliminate fossil fuel use in buildings, facilities, equipment, and vehicles.
Resolution No. 11381 (2022 Series) adopted the 2023-27 Climate Action Work
Program, which reaffirmed the communitywide and municipal climate action goals.
DISCUSSION
Background
In 2021, Council adopted Lead by Example: A Plan for Carbon Neutral City Operations.
The plan lays out specific tasks required to achieve Council’s goal of carbon-neutral
municipal operations by 2030. The goal includes sector-specific work in the area of
building and facility energy use (electricity and natural gas), fleet vehicles, solid and
organic waste, land conservation and management, and employee commute. Figure 1
provides Building, Facility, and Fleet goals and objectives.1
1 On April 18, 2023, City Council adopted Resolution No. 11414 (2023 series), which authorizes the City
Manager and Community Development Director to administratively suspend enforcement of it’s all elect ric-
new building requirements as it seeks additional information about a recent court ruling on the topic. The
ruling does not affect the City’s ability to manage its own buildings and fleet .
Page 43 of 349
Item 6d
Figure 1. Lead by Example Buildings, Facilities, and Fleet Goals and Objectives
In the first Lead by Example work plan period, which coincided with the 2021-23 Financial
Plan, the City pursued early “no regrets” actions including the first purchase of light duty
electric vehicles, LED lighting retrofits, procurement of electric buses, installation of a
battery backup system at the Water Treatment Plant, introduction of green waste bins to
City office spaces, and a pilot application of compost to Johnson Ranch for purposes of
carbon sequestration, among many others.
Concurrent with these actions, the City has also been completing strategic plans to
identify specific steps required to achieve Lead by Example’s goals.2 Funded through the
2021-23 CIP and operational budget, and supplemented with grant funding from Central
Coast Community Energy, the City spent the last 18 months completing strategic planning
roadmaps that provide direction for action through 2030 in the two largest emissions
sectors in the City’s operations: energy use in buildings and facilities (42% of total
emissions) and fleet (41% of total emissions).
Key Findings
The intent of this Report is to inform Council that building and fleet decarbonization work
is progressing and to provide a condensed summary of key findings from each roadmap.
Attachments A-C provide the full list of findings and supportin g analysis. Key findings
identified by the technical consulting team include:3
2 The enabling Lead by Example actions for these strategic plans are Energy 1.1 complete Energy Master
Plan to develop the approach to decarbonization, comprehensive energy management, and efficiency
across buildings and facilities; and Fleet 1.4 Advocate to Central Coast Community Energy (3CE) to fund
a fleet electrification plan to advance the goal and objectives of the Fleet sector.
3 The roadmaps were authored by a technical consulting team that includes Glumac, Optony Inc., and
EcoShift Consulting. Glumac has recently completed similar building and facility decarbonization planning
for for the entire University of California system, and Optony has completed fleet planning work for agencies
throughout the Bay Area.
Page 44 of 349
Item 6d
Facility and Building Electrification Roadmap
The City of SLO’s municipal facilities are well maintained and efficient. The City
has established best practices around preventative maintenance and has invested
in various energy efficiency projects to limit the City’s environmental impact and
reduce operational costs.
The most significant use of natural gas is at the SLO Swim Center which comprises
approximately 69% of the use in the studied facilities.4
Including emissions from electricity in the baseline year, five facilities contributed
77% of total greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions; the SLO Swim Center alone
contributed 51% of the total facility related GHG emissions.
By using existing Federal funding and City funds in the 2023-25 Financial Plan,
along with a dedicated amount of approximately $78,000 in 2025-26, $765,000 in
2026-27, and $550,000 per year for fiscal years 2025-27 through 2030-31, the City
can achieve its building electrification goals, but will require additional external
grant funding.
The project team designated the SLO Swim Center, City Hall, and Fire Station 1
as “priority facilities”. The priority projects include supplemental heat pump pool
heating, heat pump mechanical systems, heat pump domestic hot water, LED
lighting upgrades, and improvements to support an eventual microgrid.
Fleet Electrification Roadmap
A total of 211 out of 325 vehicles provided by the City were studied for
electrification.5 Of this subset, 76% can be readily replaced with equivalent electric
vehicles that are currently commercially available, predominantly sedans, SUVs,
and pickup trucks.
Vehicle range is not a barrier to vehicle electrification for the City of San Luis
Obispo. For 100% of the vehicles assessed, the recommended EV option could
satisfy 100% of the existing vehicle’s historical driving behavior.
Including known incentives and rebates, electrifying the subset of these vehicles
coming due for replacement from 2022 to 2030 will save approximately $900,000
in total cost of ownership, a 6% savings relative to purchasing and operating fossil
fuel vehicles.
Availability of medium- and heavy-duty electric vehicles is a challenge limiting the
City’s ability to electrify its entire fleet.
The Fleet Electrification Roadmap notes that Police Department fleet vehicles
account for 24% of the City’s total fleet assets and 36% of total fleet emissions and
are therefore a key opportunity for emissions reduction. While near term
opportunities exist for potential transition of administration vehicles, patrol vehicles
have specific operational needs associated with vehicle performance and
associated charging infrastructure and will not be a target for transitioning to all -
electric in the near term.
4 Note that the study does not include Utilities Enterprise Fund facilities (the Water Resource Recover
Facility and Water Treatment Plant.)
5 This amount excludes non-street legal assets (trailers, generators, etc.), vehicles that are already electric,
and certain heavy-duty vehicles such as fire engines.
Page 45 of 349
Item 6d
The electric vehicle market is highly dynamic. While purchase prices and
recommended vehicle models included in this report have high levels of certainty
through 2025, supply chain and manufacturer delays are already impacting
procurement timelines.
Fleet Charging Infrastructure
Three sites were identified by the City as priority sites that will support a majority
of vehicle electrification over the next two decades. Those priority sites are the
Corp Yard, 919 Palm Parking Garage, and Fire Station 1, which currently serve as
domicile facilities for the majority of the fleet.
Analysis suggests that across all sites 31 Level 2 ports and 6 Level 3 ports would
be required by 2025 and an incremental 37 Level 2 ports and 15 Level 3 ports by
2030.
Including known incentives, the installation of recommended charging
infrastructure is estimated to cost approximately $2.8 million through 2030.
Although the City has programmed investments for this work in its Capital
Improvement Program, the City will require additional outside grants and rebates
to achieve its infrastructure needs.
The City could research alternative project development approaches, such as a
third-party owner and operator models, to reduce capital cost requirements.
Next Steps
The key findings and detailed roadmaps provided in Attachments A -C show that the
technology exists to make substantial progress toward Council’s Lead by Example
buildings, facilities, and fleet goals. The roadmaps provide recommended implementation
scenarios and staff is already completing early tasks.
Although the final roadmaps provided in this Report are being presented to Council after
the April 17, 2023, Strategic Budget Direction item, the roadmaps were substantially
complete in early calendar year 2023 and directly informed the 2023-25 budget
development process. Examples of projects in the proposed 2023 -25 Financial Plan
include design work for an electric heat pump water heater for the SLO Swim Center and
installation of electric vehicle chargers for City fleet.
Deliverables provided for the roadmaps also include workbooks that allow staff to change
the procurement scenarios based on resources available in any given year. Staff will use
these tools to keep on track as it progresses toward the target year of 2030. As directed
by the Lead by Example plan, staff will return to Council in early 2024 with a report on
implementation progress.
Previous Council or Advisory Body Action
December 2022 – Council adopts Climate Action Plan Volume 3: 2023-2027
Work Plan, which reaffirms and readopts the Lead by Example goal of carbon-
neutral municipal operations by 2030.
July 2021 – Council adopts Lead by Example: A Plan for Carbon Neutral
Municipal Operations
Page 46 of 349
Item 6d
June 2021 – Council adopts the 2021-23 Financial Plan, which includes tasks to
complete planning documents provided in this report.
Public Engagement
As a municipal operations document, the City primarily engaged internally, working with
the Fleet Manager, Deputy Director for Maintenance Operations, and Facility
Maintenance Supervisor to ensure that the reports reflected conditions on the ground.
The City has also connected with other facilities departments including the City of Santa
Cruz and the San Luis Coastal Unified School District to learn and share findings.
CONCURRENCE
Public Works and Administration concur with this report.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The California Environmental Quality Act does not apply to the recommended action in
this report, because the action does not constitute a “Project” under CEQA Guidelines
Sec. 15378.
FISCAL IMPACT
Budgeted: Yes Budget Year: 2022-23
Funding Identified: Yes
Fiscal Analysis:
Funding
Sources
Total Budget
Available
Current
Funding
Request
Remaining
Balance
Annual
Ongoing
Cost
General Fund $120,000 $0 $0 $0
State
Federal
Fees
Other: $70,000
Total $190,000 $0 $0 $0
Roadmap funds ($190,000) were included in the 2021-23 Financial Plan ($120,000) and
through a Central Coast Community Energy Grant ($70,000).6 Funds to implement
projects identified in the roadmaps will be included in the proposed 2023-25 Financial
Plan and through 2027-28 in the five-year Capital Improvement Program. Receiving and
filing this report does not commit Council to the funding amounts contained in the
roadmaps.
6 The $120,000 from the 2021-23 Financial Plan includes $100,000 for Capital Improvement Project #103
entitled “City Facility Energy Infrastructure Plan” and a one-time operational resource of $20,000 for a
project entitled “Microgrid Feasibility Study.”
Page 47 of 349
Item 6d
ALTERNATIVES
Council could decide not to receive and file the reports. This action is not
recommended by staff because the reports provide a clear framework for achieving
Council’s goals.
ATTACHMENTS
A - Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan
B - Fleet Electrification Roadmap
C - Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Roadmap
Page 48 of 349
1
PRESENTED BY
CARBON NEUTRAL CITY
FACILITIES PLAN
March 2022
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
Page 49 of 349
2
Ta ble of Contents
1. Executive Summary _________________________________________________ 3
2. Background Information _____________________________________________ 9
2.1 City of San Luis Obispo ....................................................................................................... 9
2.2 Project Background ........................................................................................................... 11
3. City Facilities _____________________________________________________ 13
3.1 Existing Conditions ........................................................................................................... 13
3.2 Energy Use & GHG emissions ........................................................................................... 17
4. Building Decarbonization ___________________________________________ 19
4.1 Projects and Recommendations ........................................................................................ 19
4.2 Building Decarbonization Projects ...................................................................................... 21
4.3 Results ............................................................................................................................. 29
4.3 High Priority Projects ......................................................................................................... 30
5. Renewable Energy _________________________________________________ 41
5.1 Solar PV ........................................................................................................................... 41
5.2 Fire Station 1 Microgrid ........................................................ Error! Bookmark not defined.
6. Definitions _______________________________________________________ 56
7. Appendix ________________________________________________________ 58
Building Energy Assessments ................................................................................................. 58
CESA Training Materials ......................................................................................................... 58
Page 50 of 349
3 Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan
1 . EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
CARBON NEUTRAL FACILITIES PLAN
In 2020, the City of San Luis Obispo (SLO) took a bold
step in support of mitigating the impacts of climate
change by adopting the Climate Action Plan for
Community Recovery (CAP). This plan put forth a goal
to engage in projects and initiatives that contribute
positively towards achieving community carbon
neutrality by 2035 and municipal operations carbon
neutrality by 2030.
The Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan (CNCFP)
provides an implementation roadmap and strategic
decarbonization framework for the City to achieve the
goal of carbon neutral municipal operations. The
recommended strategies will reduce the City’s GHG
emissions and impact on climate change, hedge
against variable energy cost in the future, and improve
city resilience of emergency operations during a public
safety power shutoff (PSPF). The CNCFP enables the
City of SLO to Lead by Example and to inspire
community members to take action to reduce
greenhouse gas emissions in their own homes and businesses.
The CNCFP provides a comprehensive analysis of the City’s existing facilities and fleet of vehicles to
identify key actions and projects that can reduce SLO’s carbon emissions and annual utility bills.
Specific strategies identified for the City include energy efficiency, building electrification, solar PV,
microgrids and clean energy procurement. The fleet electrification roadmap is provided under the City
Fleet Electrification Plan. The Consultant Team included energy, engineering and sustainability
experts from Glumac, EcoShift (Blue Strike Environmental) and Optony.
EXISTING CONDITIONS
This carbon neutrality plan focuses on buildings maintained through the General Fund and does not
include water and wastewater treatment buildings and infrastructure. Based on assessment of utility
bills for the covered facilities over the last several years, the City consumes approximately 2,600,000
kWh of electricity and 90,000 therms of natural gas annually, resulting in 1,068 metric tons of carbon
dioxide equivalent emissions (MTCO2e).
The City of San Luis Obispo’s municipal facilities are well maintained and efficient facilities. The City
has established best practices around preventative maintenance and has invested in various energy
efficiency projects to limit the City’s environmental impact and reduce operational costs. The facilities
and maintenance team has proactively converted fluorescent lighting fixtures to LED over time at
buildings across the City.
Energy
Efficiency
Building
Electrification
Electric
Vehicles
Solar PV
Microgrids
Clean Energy
Procurement
Carbon
Neutral City
Facilities
Plan
Figure 1 : City of SLO Carbon Neutral Strateg ies
Page 51 of 349
4 Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan
The majority of San Luis Obispo’s buildings utilize natural gas for space and domestic hot watery
systems. Converting these existing fossil fuel heating systems to all-electric alternatives will be
important strategy for the City to achieve carbon neutrality. The most significant use of natural gas is
at the SLO Swim Center which comprises approximately 69% of the City’s use, within General Fund
facilities. Figure 2 shows a breakdown in GHG emissions of city owned facilities based on utility use
and emissions factors in 2019. This year was selected as the baseline year in the CNCFP since it
represented typical operation before the impacts of COVID 19 on City operations. The top 5 facilities
contributed 77% of GHG emissions, with the SLO Swim Center alone contributed 42% of the total
facility related GHG emissions.
Figure 2 : City of San Luis Obispo Facilities GHG Emissions
The SLO Swim Center, Fire Station 1 & 911 Dispatch Center, and City Hall were designated as “priority
facilities” for the City to move forward with implementing building decarbonization projects in the
immediate short term. These facilities generally had the highest natural gas use within the General
Fund facilities. The priority projects include heat pump mechanical systems, heat pump domestic hot
water, heat pump pool heating, LED lighting upgrades, and solar PV + microgrid. This will serve as an
example and foundation for future electrification and efficiency projects with the City of San Luis
Obispo, both at City owned facilities and within the greater local community.
SLO Swim Center
42%
Corporation Yard
9%
Police Station
7%
City Hall
7%
911 Dispatch Center
5%
836 Pacific Parking
5%
Fire Station 1
4%
Other Buildings
21%
Page 52 of 349
5 Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan
DECARBONIZATION STRATEGIES
Through building audits and meetings with facilities staff, various decarbonization projects and
strategies were identified throughout the City. As electrical grids become cleaner in coming years and
eventually move away from fossil fuels, the key driver in building decarbonization will be the elimination
of natural gas systems in buildings. The following table includes recommended projects and potential
impacts for the City of San Luis Obispo in four categories: Building Decarbonization, Renewable
Energy, Microgrids and Electric Vehicles.
Table 1 : City of San Luis Obispo Carbon Reduction Strateg ies
Strategies Recommendations &
Approach Projects Impact
Building
Decarbonization
Electrify all city buildings
by 2030 and continue to
invest in energy efficiency
upgrades
• LED Lighting Retrofits
• Heat Pump Water Heaters
• Space Heating Electrification
• Swim Center Electrification
• Induction Cooking
Fossil Fuel Free Buildings
Eliminate natural gas use to
reduce total building energy
by 40% and emissions by
360 MTE annually
Renewable
Energy
Implement priority solar PV
projects by 2024 and
procure 3CE Prime 100%
clean power as soon as
possible. Continue
exploring other locations
for solar PV
• Phase 1 Solar Installations
o Swim Center
o Bus Yard
o Fire Station 1
• 3CE Prime “Opt-up” Power
100% Clean Electricity
Produce 1,400,000 kWh
onsite with 832kW of solar
PV to offset around 50% of
electricity for City Facilities
Microgrids
Develop a clean energy
microgrid at Fire Station 1
and 911 Dispatch Center
• 131 kW solar PV
• 63 kW | 511 kWh BESS
• 300 kW backup diesel
generator (existing)
Resilient City Services
Provide at least 6 hours
during an outage without
reliance of diesel generators
Electric
Vehicles1
Transition all light duty
vehicles to a fully electric
fleet by 2030
• Near Term (2023-2025)
• Mid Term (2026-2030)
• Long Term (2030-2040)
All Electric Vehicles
Reduce gasoline and diesel
by 77,000 gallons and
emissions by 849 MTE
annually
1 Refer to the City of SLO Fleet Electrification reports for additional information.
Page 53 of 349
6 Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan
SCENARIO PLANNING
The project team evaluated various implementation scenarios to inform the City of San Luis Obispo ’s
facility decarbonization investment strategy and timeline. The analysis was provided using the Climate
and Energy Scenario Analysis (CESA) tool which quantifies the financial and environmental impacts
from various combination of energy and carbon mitigation measures. The following implementation
scenarios were evaluated for the City of San Luis Obispo.
1. Business-as-Usual (BAU)
Continued operation of existing campus systems
2. Scenario I: Baseline Implementation
Implement high priority projects by 2027, all other projects by 2032
Requires carbon offsets to achieve Council’s goals
3. Scenario II: 2030 Carbon Neutrality
Implement high priority projects by 2027, all other projects by 2030 (phased implementation)
4. Scenario III: 2030 Carbon Neutrality (Expedited)
Implement high priority projects by 2027, all other projects by 2030 (early implementation)
5. Scenario IV: 2028 Carbon Neutrality
Implement high priority projects by 2027, all other projects by 2028
The following image shows results of the scenario analysis from the CESA tool. These scenarios were
compared against the City’s goal of being carbon neutral by 2030 and also a Science Based Target2
for Scope 1 and 2 GHG Emissions. Scenarios II, III and IV all meet the City’s carbon reduction goals
and exceed the cumulative emissions reduction required for a science-based target. The option to
procure 100% clean electricity through 3CE3 starting in either 2023 or 2030 was also evaluated.
Figure 3 : City of San Luis Obispo Facilities Scenario GHG Emissions
2 Science-Based Targets Initiative (SBTi) provide GHG emissions targets for organizations that will support reducing
GHG emissions in line with the Paris Agreement goals to limit warming to 1.5°C.
3 Central Cost Clean Energy (3CE) is the local Community Choice Aggregator (CCA)
Page 54 of 349
7 Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan
All of the potential scenarios include transitioning to a fleet of electric vehicles as outlined in the City
of San Luis Obispo Fleet Electrification reports. The remaining emissions after 2030 are from medium
and heavy-duty vehicles that currently have no electric options.
It is recommended that the City of San Luis Obispo pursue an implementation roadmap that targets
fully electrifying all buildings by 2030 as outlined in Scenario II. This scenario includes a strategy to
implement high priority projects with significant GHG emissions reductions as soon as possible, and
phasing other electrification projects between 2027 and 2030. This will meet the City’s carbon
neutrality targets and fits best within the City’s current capital outlay. The resulting outcome will be a
52% reduction in cumulative GHG emissions through 2030 with electricity provided from 3CE Prime.
Table 2 : City of San Luis Obispo Facility Decarbonization Scenarios – GHG Emissions & Investment
Cumulative GHG Emissions Building Decarbonization Projects
Scenario 2021-2030
[MTE]
Reduction
[%]
Implementation
[years]
Avg Investment
[$ / yr]
Baseline 18,903
Business as Usual (BAU) 15,490 18% - -
Scenario I 11,992 37% 2025-2032 $530,000
Scenario II + 3CE Prime 9,116 52% 2025-2030 $700,000
Scenario III + 3CE Prime 8,873 53% 2025-2030 $675,000
Scenario IV + 3CE Prime 8,167 57% 2025-2028 $1,000,000
Scenarios III and IV offer a more expedited pathway for the City to be carbon neutral and should be
considered if additional funding and project management resources become available. Additional
funding sources could include the general fund or other external sources through the Inflation
Reduction Action (IRA) and grant programs.
Figure 4 : City of San Luis Obispo Facility Decarbonization Scenarios - Cumulative GHG Emissions
18%
37%
52%53%57%
39%42%45%
Science Based Target
0
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
14,000
16,000
18,000
20,000
Baseline BAU Scenario I Scenario II Scenario III Scenario IVGHG Emissions 2021-2030 [MTE]Scenario Emissions 3CE Prime starting 2023
Page 55 of 349
8 Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan
RECOMMENDATIONS
It is recommended that the City moves forward with the implementation roadmap that targets fully
electrifying all buildings by 2030, as outlined in Scenario II. This includes high priority projects with
significant GHG emissions reductions as soon as possible and phasing other electrification projects
over time. The following framework can be used to guide future capital planning efforts within the City.
Table 3 : City of San Luis Obispo - Facilities Decarbonization Framework
1. Increase and Expedite Building Decarbonization Investments
1A. Implement high priority building electrification project by 2027
$1.5M required – facilities include City Hall, Swim Center and Fire Station 1
1B. Complete LED retrofits at all City facilities by 2024
$0.25M required – phased implemented through CIP process
1C. Complete other building electrification and energy efficiency projects by 2031
$2.0M required – budget $700k per year from 2028-2030 (75% internal, 25% external)
2. Generate or Procure 100% Clean Electricity
2A. Implement priority solar projects in 2023 and 2024
Power Purchase Agreement (PPA) – no capital required, paid through operational savings
2B. Develop Fire Station 1 and Dispatch Center microgrid by 2025, pending grant funding
$0.650M for battery energy storage (BESS) and microgrid controls – currently pursuing grant funding
2C. Procure 100% Clean Electricity through 3CE starting in 2023
$20k annual cost for carbon free electricity – reduce City emissions by 521 MTE
2D. Solicit proposal for sites with low priority solar projects
Power Purchase Agreement (PPA) – no capital required, paid through operational savings
3. Transition City Fleet to Electric Vehicles
3A. Implement EV charging infrastructure projects, phased through 2030
$5.2M required – $1.7M between 2023-2025 and $3.5M between 2026-2030
3B. Phased procurement of electric vehicles for all suitable vehicles by 2030
$0.5M premium for EVs between 2023-2025 – EV is anticipated to have a lower total cost of ownership
(TCO)
4. Establish Carbon Neutral Facility Management Policies
4A. Develop a staffing and implementation strategy, including new delivery options
Review options including additional staff, outsourced Project Management / Construction Management
services, design-build
3B. Establish standards for new construction design and ongoing maintenance
Performance requirements, no new natural gas equipment replacement policy
Recommendations provided in the CNCFP report are based on best available information and results should not be
construed as absolute. The project deliverables were developed as a dynamic resource for SLO which will allow the
City to adjust and adapt over time. It is recommended that SLO continually tracks their progress towards carbon
neutrality on an annual basis and updates their CNCFP every four years, as outlined in the Lead by Example plan.
Page 56 of 349
9 Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan
2. BACKGROUND INFORMATION
2.1 C ITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
CITY OVERVIEW
San Luis Obispo is located in California’s Central Coast Region. San Luis Obispo is situated just eight
miles from the ocean and is home to California Polytechnic State University. The City owns and
operates a variety of buildings that are critical to a functional and resilience of San Luis Obispo. This
study focuses on buildings maintained through the General Fund and thus does not include water and
wastewater treatment buildings and infrastructure. Figure 5 provides a map of General Fund facilities
that were included in this study.
Figure 5 : City of San Luis Obispo General Fund Facilities
Page 57 of 349
10 Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO POLICY
Several City policies form the basis of the Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan. These include the
Climate Action Plan for Community Recovery, Lead by Example, and the 2021-2023 Financial Plan
and Capital Improvement Plan. The City of San Luis Obispo 2021-23 Goals include climate action
strategies to “proactively address the climate crisis, continue to update and implement the Climate
Action Plan for carbon neutrality, including preservation and enhancement of open space and the
urban forest, alternative and sustainable transportation, and planning and implementation for
resilience.”
CLIMATE ACTION PLAN FOR COMMUNITY RECOVERY
In 2020, the City took a bold step in fighting climate change by adopting the Climate Action Plan for
Community Recovery (CAP). This plan built upon the existing Climate Action Plan established in 2012
and put forth a goal of community carbon neutrality by 2035. The CAP is built upon 6 pillars, which are
shown in the figure below. Pillar 1, Lead by Example is what drives the CNCFP. A plan update was
adopted by City Council in December of 2022 that reaffirms and recommits to these goals.
Figure 6 : Foundational 6 Pillars of the Climate Action Plan for Community Recovery.
Page 58 of 349
11 Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan
LEAD BY EXAMPLE: A PLAN FOR CARBON NEUTRAL MUNICIPAL OPERATIONS
Pillar 1 of the CAP is Lead by Example. This pillar goes one step further than the overall community
carbon neutrality by 2035 goal and defines a goal of carbon neutral government operations by 2030.
This pillar was operationalized as the Lead by Example plan, which was adopted by Council in 2021
and includes more detailed goals for municipal operations including energy use in buildings, city owned
vehicles, and solar power purchase. Through Lead by Example, the City can inspire community
members to take action within their own homes and habits to reduce carbon.
2.2 PROJECT BACKGROUND
In the Winter of 2021, the City engaged a team of consultants, Glumac | Optony | EcoShift, to develop
a Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan (CNCFP) for the existing municipal building stock and vehicle
fleet. The intent of the CNCFP project was to develop a strategic roadmap for decarbonization
measures to not only reduce the City’s Scope 1 & 2 emissions, but also shelter the City from the
variable cost of energy and risk of power shutoffs, adopt new technology and Lead by Example.
Through Leading by Example, the City hopes to inspire community members to take action towards
carbon reduction in their own lives. The findings of this CNCFP will help guide San Luis Obispo’s
energy strategy over the next eight years as the City works toward becoming carbon neutral by 2030.
This engineering study includes a robust assessment of City energy sources, demands, and utilization
to identify clean energy alternatives and strategies to improve the efficiency of building operations.
Through the course of their investigation, the consultant team identified numerous clean energy
projects to reduce GHG emissions.
The CNCFP translated the identified energy efficiency and electrification projects into a planning tool
that supported the development of a strategic roadmap for GHG reductions to achieve carbon
neutrality. To accomplish this, the consultant team developed a custom-built climate and energy
scenario analysis (CESA) tool to inform their recommendations for pursuing various GHG emission
reduction projects. After the site investigation and energy analysis phases of the project were
completed, all the clean energy projects identified across the City were input to the CESA tool.
The CESA tool allows for users to develop multiple clean energy implementation plans to reach the
City’s 2030 carbon neutrality target. As users are developing these prospective implementation
scenarios, the tool continually tracks key metrics such as energy savings, emissions reductions, total
project cost, net present value, etc. The CNCFP team developed multiple potential strategic energy
plan scenarios and conducted a sensitivity analysis in the tool to help shape and guide the
recommendation outlined in this report. The scenario analysis tool was developed to be a dynamic
asset that will be turned over to City of San Luis Obispo’s sustainability department at the conclusion
of the project for their continued analysis and tracking of progress.
The strategic energy recommendations and scenarios developed in the CNCFP report are based on
the best available information provided to the consultant team at this time. The project deliverables
were developed with the intention and ability to be a dynamic resource for San Luis Obispo as the City
navigates towards their 2030 carbon neutrality target. The team understands San Luis Obispo is a
dynamic, growing municipality and needs an energy strategy that is flexible and can adapt to an ever-
changing environment. It is recommended that San Luis Obispo continually tracks their progress
Page 59 of 349
12 Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan
towards carbon neutrality on an annual basis and updates their CNCFP every four years, as outlined
in the Lead by Example plan.
ENERGY UTILITIES
The City of San Luis Obispo’s electricity is served by Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E), and natural gas
is served by Southern California Gas Company (SoCal Gas). The Community Choice Aggregation
(CCA) program in California also allows for the City to purchase electricity from Central Coast Clean
Energy (3CE)4, the local CCA that serves communities in the central coast region from Santa Barbara
to Santa Cruz County. When purchasing electricity from a CCA the power is still physically delivered
to buildings by PG&E’s transmission lines.
In accordance with the California Power Source Disclosure Program5, utilities in California are required
to disclose their electricity power mix and average annual GHG emissions factors. The following tables
provide a summary of the energy generation mix of each electricity option and the average GHG
emissions factor in 2021.
Table 4 : 2021 Electricity Power Mix SCE vs Constellation
PG&E
Base Plan
3CE
Choice
3CE
Prime
CA State
Average
Eligible Renewables 47.7% 38.4% 100.0% 33.6%
Biomass and Biowaste 4.2% 1.6% 0.0% 2.3%
Geothermal 5.2% 7.4% 0.0% 4.8%
Eligible Hydroelectric 1.8% 0.7% 0.0% 1.0%
Solar 25.7% 17.8% 50.0% 14.2%
Wind 10.9% 11.0% 50.0% 11.4%
Coal 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 3.0%
Large Hydroelectric 4.0% 11.8% 0.0% 9.2%
Natural Gas 8.9% 0.0% 0.0% 37.9%
Nuclear 39.3% 0.0% 0.0% 9.3%
Other 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.2%
Unspecified Power 0.0% 49.8% 0.0% 6.8%
GHG Emissions
[lbs Co2e/MWh] 98 494 0 456
The source of electricity has significant impact on GHG emissions from City facilities. The CNCFP
used emissions factors from 3CE Choice, which algins with CA state averages, in this study for the
current electricity supply. 3CE has an adopted policy and is on track to achieve 100 percent carbon
free resources by 2030, which would lower the effective GHG emissions coefficient to 0 lbs
CO2e/MWh. California as a state has committed to having 100% carbon free power by 2045 which
will be required for all utilities. Through 3CE the City of San Luis Obispo has the ability to purchase
100% carbon free electricity now to reduce their GHG emissions and meet their climate action goals.
4 https://3cenergy.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/2021-3CE-Power-Content-Label-1.pdf
5 https://www.energy.ca.gov/programs-and-topics/programs/power-source-disclosure
Page 60 of 349
13 Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan
3. CITY FACILITIES
3.1 EXISTING CONDITIONS
The City of San Luis Obispo operates 31 different properties within the General Fund. This excludes
the water treatment facilities and two historic structures. These buildings vary greatly in use, and
include facilities such as City Hall, SLO Swim Center, four fire stations, a variety of parks, multiple
offices, and community use centers. Buildings vary in age and condition. The Police Station has been
included in this study, but is planned to be demolished and replaced within the planning horizon of this
document.
Primary uses of electricity are lights, plug loads, fans, and cooling. San Luis Obispo’s Facilities
Maintenance team has been proactive in their efforts to convert from older style fluorescent lighting
fixtures to LED alternatives, with several buildings already 100% LED. Electric vehicle plug load is
expected to be an increasing source of electricity load at City Facilities; this topic is addressed
separately in the City Fleet Electrification Plan.
Primary uses of natural gas within San Luis Obispo’s buildings are heating, domestic hot water,
cooking and pool heating. The majority of San Luis Obispo’s buildings have rooftop package units with
direct expansion (DX) cooling and natural gas heat or indoor natural gas furnaces. Larger buildings
such as the Police Station and City Hall have air handling units with natural gas boilers. With the
exception of three facilities, all buildings have natural gas hot water heaters. The Fire Stations, Ludwick
Center, and Senior Center have natural gas cooking equipment. The most significant use of natural
gas is pool heating at SLO Swim Center. The natural gas pool heating boilers and domestic hot water
system at the Swim Center comprise approximately 69% of the City’s natural gas use in General Fund
buildings facilities.
The energy audit process for the CNCFP was a collaborative effort between the City and the consultant
team. Walk through audits were performed at 20 City operated properties. Facilities not included in
the audits included parks with restroom only facilities and low usage historical buildings such as Jack
House and the residence at 610 Monterey. These audits were used to document existing conditions
and identify energy efficiency and electrification projects. The major systems observed during the
audits are described below. Each audit included the following:
> Review of as-built engineering drawings
> Building walkthrough, identifying any issues with HVAC or lighting
> HVAC system identification and operability observed.
> Lighting system observation
> DHW system type observation
> Known building system issues recorded
> Building occupancy schedule and diversity of space types noted
> Identification of potential sources of high energy usage, such as fountains, elevators, large
computer labs, etc.
Page 61 of 349
14 Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan
BUILIDNG SUMMARY
The following table summarizes all City operated buildings included in this study. Building information
was compiled through site assessments, as-built building records and drawings, as well as
conversations with facilities staff. Additional building specific information is provided in the Building
Energy Assessments summaries provided in the Appendix of this report.
Table 5 : City of San Luis Obispo Facilities with major systems identified.
Facility Address HVAC System
Domestic
Hot Water
System
LED
Lighting
Other
Natural
Gas Uses
Art Center 1010 Broad Street
Baseball Stadium 900 Southwood Drive N/A N/A 0%
Bus Yard 29 Prado Road RTU - DX & Natural Gas Natural Gas 90%
City Hall 990 Palm Street VAV AHU – NG Boiler & AC Chiller Natural Gas 100%
Corporation Yard 25 Prado Road Natural Gas Furnace & Split System Natural Gas 70% Cooking,
Car Wash
County/City Library 995 Palm Street Heat Pump Fan Coil N/A N/A
County/City Museum 696 Monterey Street Natural Gas Furnace & DX AC Electric 20%
Fire Station 1 2160 Santa Barbara
Street RTU - DX & Natural Gas Natural Gas 95% Cooking
Fire Station 2 136 North Chorro Natural Gas Furnace & Window AC Natural Gas 15% Cooking
Fire Station 3 1280 Laurel Lane Natural Gas Furnace & Window AC Natural Gas 20% Cooking
Fire Station 4 1395 Madonna Road Natural Gas Furnace & Window AC Natural Gas 20% Cooking
Historic Adobe 466 Dana Street
Jack House 536 Marsh Street
Johnson Park 1020 Southwood Drive N/A N/A 5%
Laguna Lake Golf
Course
11175 Los Osos Valley
Road N/A N/A N/A
Laguna Lake Park 1395 Madonna Road N/A N/A 5%
Little Theater 888 Morro Street RTU - DX & Natural Gas Natural Gas 10%
Meadow Park 2333 Meadow Street Natural Gas Furnace Natural Gas 50%
Mission Plaza Broad and Monterey N/A N/A 35%
Mitchell Park 1415 Santa Rosa St N/A N/A 25%
Parking Structure 842 Palm Street N/A N/A 100%
Parking Structure 836 Pacific Street N/A N/A 90%
Parking Structure &
Office 919 Palm Street Water to Water Heat Pump Electric 90%
Parks and Recreation
Office 1341 Nipomo Natural Gas Furnace & DX AC Natural Gas 30%
Police – Auxiliary
Buildings 1016 Walnut Street Natural Gas Furnace & DX AC Natural Gas 20%
Police Station 1042 Walnut Street VAV AHU – NG Boiler & AC Chiller Natural Gas 15%
Recreation Center 864 Santa Rosa RTU - DX & Natural Gas Natural Gas 40% Cooking
Residence 610 Monterey
Senior Center 1445 Santa Rosa Natural Gas Furnace & Heat Pumps Natural Gas 100% Cooking
SLO Swim Center 900 Southwood Drive RTU - DX & Natural Gas Natural Gas 40% Pool Heat
Throop Field 375 Ferrini Drive N/A N/A 0%
Utilities Offices 879 Morro Street RTU - DX & Natural Gas Electric 40%
911 Dispatch Center 1135 Roundhouse Ave Natural Gas Furnace w/ Cooling Coil Natural Gas 25%
Page 62 of 349
15 Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan
TYPICAL BUILDING SYSTEMS
HVAC SYSTEMS
Each facility has its own space conditioning system with no city
operated central utility plant. Common HVAC equipment types
at these buildings include rooftop packaged units (RTUs),
natural gas furnaces/air handling units and DX cooling
equipment. Two of the larger buildings, City Hall and the Police
Station, are served by variable volume air handling units (VAV
AHUs). The VAV AHU at both facilities has cooling needs
served by an air cooled chiller and heating served by a natural
gas boiler.
DOMESTIC HOT WATER
With the exception of three facilities, all building domestic hot
water needs are served by natural gas water heaters. Most
water heaters appear to be in good condition with no early
retirement expected.
Figure 7 : Rooftop Unit (RTU) with Dx
Cooling + N atural G as Heating – Ludwick
Recreation Center.
Figure 8 : Typical natural gas water
heater at City Hall
Page 63 of 349
16 Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan
LIGHTING
The City has been proactive in its efforts to replace older style fixtures with LED alternatives. While
most buildings still have some amount of LED lighting, the transition to LED has begun in many
buildings. The Swim Center, Santa Rosa Park, Damon Garcia Sports Complex and Baseball Stadium
have outdoor sport lighting systems. Of the four facilities, only the Swim Center has been upgraded
to LED sport lighting.
MISCELLANEOUS SYSTEMS
Several buildings are outfitted with natural gas cooking equipment.
These buildings include the fire stations, Corp Yard, Senior Center
and Recreation Center. SLO Swim Center has natural gas pool
heating equipment.
Figure 9 : Natural gas boiler for
pool heat at SLO Swim Center
Page 64 of 349
17 Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan
3.2 ENERGY USE & GHG EMISSIONS
The City of San Luis Obispo purchases power through PG&E and natural gas through SoCalGas.
Energy data was collected through a variety of sources, including CC-LEAP, Energy Star Portfolio
Manager, and City utility bill records. Because of the a-typical usage patterns for much of the Covid
19 pandemic, a judgment call was made for each building regarding whether data from 2019, 2020 or
2021 should be used as representative. For buildings in which only partial data was available, data for
missing months was projected based on building type, expected load profile, and historical data.
SLO Swim Center is the highest energy consuming facility and accounts for nearly 70% of the City’s
natural gas usage and over 40% of the total energy use at general fund facilities. Natural gas demands
are primarily driven by pool heating equipment, domestic hot water systems for the showers, and the
constant volume heating units serving the Bath House building. Electricity usage is driven primarily by
pool pumps and associated equipment. The City has taken steps towards reducing electricity at the
pool by turning down the pool pumps overnight and installing LED underwater and sport lighting on
the pool deck.
Table 6 : City Facility Energy Use, Ordered Largest to Smallest
Facility
Electricity
Usage - kwh
Natural Gas
Usage - therm Total Mbtu
Total Energy
Usage
SLO Swim Center 391,561 68,902 8,227 43.6%
Corporation Yard 246,671 8,493 1,692 9.0%
Police Station 231,060 6,324 1,421 7.5%
City Hall 233,788 4,936 1,292 6.8%
911 Dispatch Center 250,760 426 899 4.8%
836 Pacific Parking Structure 246,166 - 841 4.5%
Fire Station 1 153,351 1,553 679 3.6%
919 Palm Parking Structure and Office 160,342 - 548 2.9%
842 Palm Parking Structure 122,372 - 418 2.2%
Fire Station 3 41,708 2,237 366 1.9%
Bus Yard 61,175 1,364 345 1.8%
Ludwick Community/Recreation Center 52,422 659 245 1.3%
Fire Station 4 35,946 1,183 241 1.3%
Fire Station 2 40,343 1,025 240 1.3%
Little Theater 57,689 129 210 1.1%
Parks and Recreation Office 32,580 968 208 1.1%
Senior Center 22,855 1,011 179 0.9%
Utilities Offices 26,027 757 165 0.9%
Laguna Lake Park 38,456 - 131 0.7%
Baseball Stadium 38,244 - 131 0.7%
Laguna Lake Golf Course 28,116 - 96 0.5%
County/City Library (shared facility 24,102 - 82 0.4%
County/City Museum (shared facility)12,415 254 68 0.4%
Art Center 16,415 - 56 0.3%
Meadow Park 10,535 43 40 0.2%
Police – Auxiliary Buildings 10,390 - 35 0.2%
Jack House 4,339 2 15 0.1%
Johnson Park 806 - 3 0.0%
Historic Adobe - - - 0.0%
Mission Plaza - - - 0.0%
Mitchell Park - - - 0.0%
Residence - - - 0.0%
Throop Field - - - 0.0%
Total 2,590,634 100,266 18,874
Page 65 of 349
18 Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan
Carbon emissions have been calculated based on building electricity and natural gas usage an d
applying eGRID and Energy Star Portfolio Manager emissions factors. Emissions track electricity and
gas usage – the more energy a building uses the higher the emissions. As electrical grids become
cleaner in coming years and eventually move away from fossil fuels, the key driver in building
decarbonization will be the elimination of natural gas systems in buildings.
Figure 10: City Facilities Energy Emissions Breakdown – 2019 Baseline
Annual emissions associated with the City’s building stock are driven primarily by the Swim Center
electricity and natural gas usage. The next three drivers of city emissions are Corporation Yard, Police
Station, and City Hall. The Police Station is planned to be demolished and rebuilt before 2030, and as
such has been excluded from the carbon emissions reduction analysis.
Figure 11: GHG Emissions of Top 10 C arbon I ntensive City Facilities
532.5535.0
Natural Gas Emission
[Metric ton CO2]
Electricity Emission
[Metric ton CO2]
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
GHG Emissions [MTE]Natural Gas Emissions Electricity Emissions
Page 66 of 349
19 Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan
4. B U ILDING D ECARBONIZATION
4.1 PROJECTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
SUMMARY OF STRATEGIES
The carbon neutrality plan provided an assessment of existing building conditions and energy use to
identify building decarbonization measures across all city owned facilities. Building projects were
grouped into the following categories. Additional information for specific measures is outlined in
sections below.
LED Lighting Retrofit
Retrofit of existing light fixtures with LED sources or installation of new LED fixtures with
modern lighting controls. Potential savings of 50-70% of lighting electricity use.
Electrification – HVAC Systems
Convert existing natural gas heating system including rooftop units (RTUs) and furnaces
to an all-electric heat pump heating system. Potential savings of 60-80% for heating energy
use (kBtu).
Electrification – Domestic Hot Water Heaters
Convert existing natural gas water heaters to electric heat pump water heaters. Potential
energy savings of 70-80% for water heating energy use (kBtu).
Electrification – Process Gas Equipment
Specialty electrification projects include replacement of gas equipment such as kitchen
stoves/ovens and clothes dryers with electric alternatives.
Electrification – Pool Heating
Provide supplemental heat pumps to provide pool heating at the SLO Swim Center.
Potential energy savings of 60-70% (kBtu) for converting to heat pumps.
BUILDING APPLICATION
Outlined below are all the buildings audited and applicable building decarbonization measures to each
building. For each EEM, calculations were completed to provide an estimated energy savings. Results
from these calculations for each building are outlined in the Energy Audit Summary Reports provided
in the Appendix.
Page 67 of 349
20 Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan
Table 7 : Decarbonization Measures at City Facilities
City Building LED Lighting Hydronic Heat Pumps Heat Pump RTUw Split System Heat Pumps Heat Pump Water Heater Electric Clothing Dryers Electric Induction Cooking Heat Pump Pool Heating Art Center
Baseball Stadium Y
Bus Yard Y Y
City Hall Y Y
Corporation Yard Y Y Y Y Y
County/City Library (shared facility Y
County/City Museum (shared facility) Y Y
Fire Station 1 Y Y Y Y
Fire Station 2 Y Y Y Y Y
Fire Station 3 Y Y Y Y Y
Fire Station 4 Y Y Y Y Y
Historic Adobe
Jack House
Johnson Park Y
Laguna Lake Golf Course
Laguna Lake Park Y
Little Theater Y Y Y
Meadow Park Y Y Y
Mission Plaza Y
Mitchell Park Y
842 Palm Parking Structure
836 Pacific Parking Structure Y
919 Palm Parking Structure and Office
Parks and Recreation Office Y Y Y
Police – Auxiliary Buildings Y Y Y
Police Station
Ludwick Community/Recreation Center Y Y Y Y
Residence
Senior Center Y Y Y
SLO Swim Center Y Y Y Y
Throop Field
Utilities Offices Y Y
911 Dispatch Center Y Y Y Y
Page 68 of 349
21 Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan
4 .2 BUILDING DECARBONIZATION PROJECTS
Energy efficiency and electrification projects were identified based on building use and current system
types. Efficiency projects include those which do not involve fuel switching from natural gas to
electricity. LED lighting upgrades fall in the efficiency category. Electrification projects involve
switching a natural gas using technology to an electric alternative. Replacing natural gas furnaces with
electric heat pumps would fall in the electrification category. Summaries of the various efficiency and
electrification projects are below.
LED LIGHTING UPGRADES
EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The City’s Facilities team has retrofitted non-LED lighting fixtures (T5, T8, CFL) with new LED bulbs
either partially or fully at many City facilities. These efforts should continue at the remaining buildings
that have not been fully retrofitted.
PROJECT SUMMARY:
Interior fluorescent lamps and all exterior lamps should be replaced with equivalent LED lamps.
Fluorescent T8 and T5 lamps can be replaced with linear LED lamps in the same fixture, or a complete
fixture replacement may be chosen for aesthetic reasons. Similarly, screw and plug-in CFL bulbs can
be replaced directly by equivalent LED lamps. If controls are also required to be upgraded, then
replacing the entire fixture may be the best option because many LED fixtures have advanced
occupancy and daylighting controls fully integrated dimming capabilities.
Projects were identified based on feedback from facilities staff on what buildings have been fully
converted to LED fixtures.
ENERGY SAVINGS:
Energy savings are typically 50% to 70% when fluorescent lamps are replaced by LEDs. For example,
a typical T8 bulb uses 32W per bulb plus 10% to 15% additional energy by the ballast, versus 16W for
an equivalent LED lamp. Additional cooling energy savings is also possible by reducing the heat load
added the space from lighting fixtures. Energy savings were calculated based on existing lighting
fixtures, proposed replacements and estimated space utilization.
COST CONSIDERATIONS:
LED lighting retrofit costs were estimated based on specific building fixtures. The average construction
was generally estimated to be roughly $2.00 per square foot. This assumed that LED bulbs are
installed by City staff in existing fixtures. If the City replaces the entire fixture and upgrades lighting
controls the installation cost will be higher.
LED lighting retrofits result in additional operational and maintenance cost savings as fixtures have a
longer expected useful life and do not need to be replaced as frequently.
Page 69 of 349
22 Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan
HYDRONIC AIR TO WATER HEAT PUMPS
EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The space conditioning needs of San Luis Obispo City Hall are currently served by a natural gas boiler
and air-cooled chiller. The air-cooled chiller was recently installed in 2017 and is in excellent working
condition. The natural gas boiler was installed in 1996 and is reaching the end of its useful life.
PROJECT SUMMARY:
There is opportunity to take a major step towards building electrification at City Hall by replacing the
natural gas boiler with an all-electric air to water heat pump (AWHP) system. Refer to High Priority
Project summaries for additional project specific information. With enough ventilation air it is possible
to locate the new AWHP within the existing mechanical room, however, the project team recommends
installing the AWHP on a concrete pad outdoors adjacent to City Hall and Little Theater.
A primary consideration for the building operations
team is the heating hot water (HHW) supply
temperature reset necessary with the new system.
The existing system was designed for a non-
condensing boiler, requiring 180°F supply water.
AWHP function at lower supply water temperatures,
with a max of 149°F with a max set point ideally below
140°F or less. It has been shown that many variable
air volume (VAV) box coils and air handling unit coils
function are still capable of providing 90°F supply air
temperature at lower hot water temperatures. The hot
water reset should be tested and verified through a
commissioning process as part of the AWHP
installation.
Heat pumps are less efficient at low load conditions. To reduce equipment cycling at low loads, the
City may consider installing a buffer tank. The project team recommends providing space for a future
buffer tank, with necessity determined by design engineer. The AWHP will have a primary pump and
needs to be piped with a decoupler bridge to HHW distribution pumps (similar to a primary secondary
arrangement). Building BMS needs to enable the AWHP and run pumps.
ENERGY SAVINGS:
Energy savings from replacement of local building natural gas boilers with AWHP have been
calculated assuming the efficiency of existing boilers is 80-85% and the coefficient of performance of
AWHP units is generally between 2.5 and 4.0, varying based on weather conditions.
COST CONSIDERATIONS:
The cost of the AWHP is just one factor to consider when evaluating the replacement of natural gas
heating hot water boilers. The installation cost may vary widely between buildings depending upon the
cost to remove the existing boilers, the scope of necessary modifications to heating hot water piping,
and any upgrades that may be needed to the building’s electrical system. It is estimated that AWHPs
will have a construction cost of $450 per MBH of heating.
Figure 12: AERMEC Heat Pump Unit
Page 70 of 349
23 Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan
HEAT PUMP ROOFTOP UNITS
EXISTING CONDITIONS:
Many buildings in San Luis Obispo are heated and cooled via constant volume packaged rooftop units.
These buildings include Bus Yard, Fire Station 1, Little Theater, Recreation Center, SLO Swim Center
and Utilities Offices. Units are outfitted with natural gas heat and often a direct-expansion (DX)
refrdidgerant cooling coil.
PROJECT SUMMARY:
Rooftop units (RTUs) with natural gas furnaces should be replaced with new high performance heat
pump RTUs. The efficiency of older units is significantly worse than modern heat pump units. Typical
cooling efficiency for existing RTUs is a SEER between 8.5-10, whereas for a new heat pump unit the
expected cooling efficiency is up to 16 SEER. Existing RTUs have a heating efficiency around 80%,
or a COP of 0.8. Heat pump RTUs have a heating efficiency between 2.5-4 COP.
Heat pump RTUs can usually be installed in the same location as the existing RTUs, but may require
a curb adaptor in some instances. Converting from natural gas furnaces to electric heat pumps will not
necessarily add electrical load if the existing RTUs have cooling. The electrical load is dependent on
the equipment size and should be assessed on an individual unit basis. Existing RTUs should be
replaced at the end of their expected life with the electric heat pump alternative. Early retirement of
some good condition RTUs may be necessary to meet city decarbonization goals.
Figure 13: Packaged H eat P ump Rooftop U nit (RTU ).
ENERGY SAVINGS:
Energy savings of replacing natural gas furnaces in RTUs with heat pumps were calculated using the
building energy models. Heat pump efficiency has coefficient of performance (COP) between 2.5 and
4.0, varying based on weather conditions, compared to 80% with existing furnaces.
COST CONSIDERATIONS:
Heat pump RTUs are a slight premium compared to existing natural gas fired units, roughly 10% more
expensive for equipment costs. It is estimated that new heat pump RTUs will have a construction cost
of $4,000 per ton of cooling.
Page 71 of 349
24 Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan
HEAT PUMP SPLIT SYSTEMS
EXISTING CONDITIONS:
Most buildings in San Luis Obispo are heated and cooled via forced air natural gas furnaces. These
furnaces are often outfitted with a DX cooling coil as well. Buildings with natural gas furnaces include
Fire Stations 2, 3, and 4, as well as Corporation Yard, County/City Museum, Meadow Park, Parks and
Recreation Offices, and several others.
PROJECT SUMMARY:
Natural gas furnace systems should be converted to a heat pump split system. In buildings with
recently replaced furnaces, it is possible to reuse the existing furnace as an air handling unit and
replace the heating/cooling coils with a coil served by an outdoor heat pump unit. For older units it is
recommended to replace the furnace entirely with a fan coil unit with coil served by an outdoor heat
pump. Many buildings with existing furnaces have outdoor condensing units.
Typical cooling efficiency of new heat pump units is between 13-19 SEER, while the older units have
a typical efficiency around 10 SEER. In heating mode new heat pump systems will have a typical
efficiency between 2-3.5 COP, compared to a n efficiency around 85-90%, or 0.85-0.9 COP.
Converting from natural gas furnaces to electric heat pumps will add electrical load to buildings. Added
load shall be verified by design engineer and compared to available electrical capacity.
The new outdoor heat pump may be installed on the equipment pad/location previously occupied by
the condensing unit. Indoor fan coil may be placed in similar equipment location to the existing
furnaces in either vertical or horizontal orientation. Basis of design units would be York HMH7.
ENERGY SAVINGS:
Energy savings of replacing natural gas furnaces with split system heat pumps were calculated using
the building energy models. Heat pump efficiency has coefficient of performance (COP) between 2.5
and 4.0, varying based on weather conditions, compared to 80% with existing furnaces.
COST CONSIDERATIONS:
Heat pump RTUs are a slight premium compared to existing natural-gas fired units, roughly 10% more
expensive for equipment costs. It is estimated that new heat pump split systems will have a
construction cost of $3,900 per ton of cooling. Facilities with needed electrical upgrades will
experience a higher estimated cost.
Figure 14: Outdoor H eat P ump Unit Figure 15: Indoor Ventilation U nit
Page 72 of 349
25 Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan
HEAT PUMP WATER HEATERS
EXISTING CONDITIONS:
Tank natural gas water heaters are standard at most City of San Luis Obispo buildings. Several
buildings have instantaneous natural gas water heaters. At the individual building level water heaters
are not typically a significant source of greenhouse gas emissions, but on aggregate they represent a
significant portion of natural gas emissions.
PROJECT SUMMARY:
Natural gas hot water heaters should be electrified with air to water heat
pump hot water heaters. Typical efficiency of a gas water heater is
between 80%-90%, whereas a heat pump water heater will have
efficiency between 2.5-4 COP, greatly increasing efficiency and
eliminating reliance on natural gas. In some locations with very little
domestic hot water load it may make sense to electrify using instant hot
electric resistance hot water heaters.
Electric resistance water heaters and heat pump water heaters will add
electrical load to buildings. Water heaters represent a relatively low
portion of building energy usage, and it is unlikely there will be issues with
insufficient building electrical capacity. Small commercial heat pump
water heaters are similarly sized to small commercial natural gas water
heaters, and in most cases can be installed in the same location, with a
confirmation of airflow circulation for operation of an AWHP in that
location.
The best solution for electrification will depend upon the water demand in
the building, current hot water system and distribution, and any space
constraints since a heat pump water heater does have minimum space
requirements for installation.
ENERGY SAVINGS:
The typical efficiency of a gas water heater is between 80%-90%, whereas a heat pump water heater
will have efficiency between 3-4 COP, greatly increasing efficiency and eliminating reliance on natural
gas. Energy savings have been calculated assuming natural gas water heaters have a uniform energy
factor (UEF) of 0.7 (the UEF accounts for stand-by energy losses) and new hybrid AWHP have a UEF
of 2.8.
COST CONSIDERATIONS:
It was assumed that all water heaters would be replaced with heat pump units to provide more
conservative cost budgets. It is estimated that new 100-gallon heat pump water heater will have a
construction cost of $16,000 per 100-gallon water heater and $9,000 per 60-gallon water heater.
Figure 16: H ybrid E lectric
H eat P ump W ater H eater -
AO Smith Voltex
Page 73 of 349
26 Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan
ELECTRIC INDUCTION COOKING
EXISTING CONDITIONS:
Fire stations, Ludwick Recreation Center, Senior Center and Corp Yard all have natural gas cooking
equipment.
PROJECT SUMMARY:
Natural gas cooking appliances such as stovetops and ovens will
need to be replaced with equivalent appliances that use electricity.
Cooking equipment has a relatively long equipment life, so cooking
equipment may need to be retired before end of life to meet
decarbonization goals.
ENERGY SAVINGS
Energy savings were estimated based on calculated cooking natural
gas demand and estimated equipment efficiency. Natural gas stoves
have a typical efficiency around 40%. If gas ranges have pilot lights,
that efficiency drops to as low as 20%6. Induction cooking has an
efficiency around 80%7.
COST CONSIDERATIONS
The upfront cost to purchase and operate electric appliances is slightly more expensive than gas
appliances and often requires significant electrical upgrades. Costs were estimated on a project-by-
project basis. Various incentives are available through the CA Foodservice Instant Rebates Program8.
6 https://www.greenbuildingadvisor.com/article/efficient-cooking
7 https://www.aceee.org/files/proceedings/2014/data/papers/9-702.pdf
8 https://www.caenergywise.com/instant-rebates/
Figure 17: Electric Commercial Oven
Page 74 of 349
27 Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan
HEAT PUMP POOL HEATERS
EXISTING CONDITIONS
Competition pool heating at SLO Swim Center is currently served by two Lochinvar natural gas boilers.
The natural gas boilers were installed in 2012 and are in excellent working condition. Natural gas
usage at SLO Swim Center accounts for approximately 42% of the city’s carbon emissions.
PROJECT SUMMARY
There is opportunity to take a major step towards building electrification and decarbonization by
shifting load off the natural gas boilers with an electric air to water heat pump (AWHP) system. The
natural gas boilers would remain functional for peak heating days and resiliency purposes, with
approximately 75% of the total pool heating load (competition and therapy pool) shifted onto the AWHP
system.
Boilers serving the competition pool should be electrified using a modular 1250 MBH air to water heat
pump (AWHP) and associated piping and controls. The AWHP would be installed upstream of the
existing heat exchanger (HX) and shift load off the natural gas boilers. Natural gas boilers would
remain functional during peak conditions only and serve as a fully redundant back up. Hot water
temperatures of the heating side HX loop would need to be reset from 145°F to 125 -130°F.
Temperatures on pool side HX loop would remain. The project team recommends installing the AWHP
on a concrete pad outdoors adjacent to the existing mechanical room housing the competition pool
equipment.
A primary consideration for the building operations team is the integration and tie in with existing pool
heating loop and equipment. The AWHP will be installed outside the existing mechanical room,
meaning that the unit will have to be piped back to the main loop. While the recommendation is to
integrate with the existing loop with no additional heat exchanger, there is an option to install a second
heat exchanger and heating loop to provide the primary means of pool heat. Feasibility of both options
is to be analyzed and verified by the design engineer.
An additional consideration is the operating temperature of the mechanical side (not pool side) of the
HX. Standard AWHP function at lower supply water temperatures, with a max of 130°F and
recommended max set point of 120°F or less (higher temperature options are available, but they are
more expensive). The hot water reset is not anticipated to be a major concern for the Swim Center so
long as the pool side temperature is maintained, however, it will require monitoring by the operations
team to verify.
Phase 2 and 3 electrification at the Swim Center involve electrifying the therapy p ool heating system
and removing the peaking natural gas boiler at the competition pool. These phases will likely require
in an upgrade to the facilities electrical service.
ENERGY SAVINGS:
Pool heating energy was estimated using metered data. Energy savings were estimated by assuming
pool natural gas boilers have 80% efficiency and new AWHP have a COP of 4-5 to produce 115F
supply hot water.
COST CONSIDERATIONS:
It is estimated that heat pump pool heaters will have a construction cost of $450 per MBH of heating.
Page 75 of 349
28 Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan
ELECTRIC CLOTHING DRYERS
Several San Luis Obispo facilities have natural gas clothing dryers. It has been confirmed that Fire
Station 1 has a natural gas dryer and it is assumed that dryers at the other fire stations and Corp Yard
are also natural gas, though this needs to be verified by the city. There are many commercially
available electric clothing dryers. Design engineer is to verify that added electrical load is permissible
with current building electrical service.
Page 76 of 349
29 Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan
4.3 RESULTS
Energy savings associated with each measure are captured within the CESA tool and reported for
reach building in the Appendix of this report. The following chart shows the cumulative energy use and
savings by implementing the recommended strategies. San Luis Obispo can reduce energy use in city
facility by 41% by 2030 through building decarbonization measures and will see a 67% reduction with
the proposed solar PV projections, procured through a power purchase agreement (PPA).
Figure 18: Total Energy Use (MMBTU) and Energy S aving s (%) from Building Decarbonization
Projects
3%4%4%
13%
39%41%
67%
72%
0
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
14,000
16,000
18,000
20,000
Total Energy (MMBTU)Electricity Natural Gas
Page 77 of 349
30 Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan
4.3 HIGH PRIORITY PROJECTS
CITY HALL ELECTRIFICATION
Project Name: Heating Hot Water Electrification
Building: City Hall
Preliminary Budget: $450,000
Project Type: Deferred Maintenance, Electrification
Project Summary: The space conditioning needs of San Luis Obispo City Hall are currently
served by a natural gas boiler and air-cooled chiller. The air-cooled chiller
was recently installed 2017 and is in excellent working condition. The natural
gas boiler was installed in 1996 and is reaching the end of its useful life.
There is opportunity to take a major step towards building electrification by
replacing the natural gas boiler with an all-electric air to water heat pump
(AWHP) system.
Recommendations: The project team recommends replacing the existing 760 MBH boiler with
one (1) 600 MBH air to water heat pump. With enough ventilation air it is
possible to locate the new AWHP within the existing mechanical room,
however, the project team recommends installing the AWHP on a concrete
pad outdoors adjacent to City Hall and Little Theater. With the AWHP
system heating hot water supply temperatures will be reset from 180°F to
140°F. Temperature resets should be tested on VAV box and AHU coils to
ensure existing coils are functional at 140°F.
Key Considerations: A primary consideration for the building operations team is the heating hot
water (HHW) supply temperature reset necessary with the new system. The
existing system was designed for a non-condensing boiler, requiring 180°F
supply water. AWHPs function at lower supply water temperatures, with a
max of 149°F and recommended max set point of 140°F or less. It has been
shown that many VAV box coils and air handling unit coils function just as
well at 140°F or below and are still capable of providing 90°F supply air
temperature. The hot water reset is not anticipated to be a major concern for
City Hall, however, it will require monitoring by the operations team to
verify.
Heat pumps are less efficient at low load conditions. To reduce equipment
cycling at low loads the City of San Luis Obispo may consider installing a
buffer tank. The project team recommends providing space for a future
buffer tank, with necessity determined by design engineer.
City Hall has a 120/208V electrical service. While electrical capacity is not
expected to be an issue, the design engineer will need to verify with AWHP
manufacturer the availability of 208V equipment.
The AWHP will have a primary pump and needs to be piped with a
decoupler bridge to HHW distribution pumps (similar to a primary secondary
arrangement). Building BMS needs to enable the AWHP and run pumps.
Page 78 of 349
31 Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan
Next Steps: 1. Provide a Schematic Design to very verify required equipment capacity,
size of mechanical pad and available space adjacent to City Hall.
Provide a full detailed cost estimate.
2. Review HHW temperature reset with coils of concern.
CONCEPTUAL LAYOUT
The AWHP can be installed outside of the City Hall and connected through the existing boiler room
EQUIPMENT SPECIFICATION
The AERMEC NYK air-to-water heat pump (AWHP) unit was used for budgeting. A 120/208V unit can
provided with a factory installed transformer.
Page 79 of 349
32 Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan
EXISTING CONDITIONS
The building has a 1200A service at 120/208V and has spare capacity according to plans from the 1996
Seismic and HVAC Upgrades project – this should be verified. The electrical services and main switch
board was upgrades from 800A in 1996.
The existing boiler was installed in 1996 and is nearing the end of it’s expected useful life.
Page 80 of 349
33 Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan
SWIM CENTER ELECTRIFICATION
Project Name: Pool Heater Electrification – Phase 1
Preliminary Budget: $750,000
Project Type: Electrification
Project Summary: The competition pool heating needs of San Luis Obispo Swim Center are
currently served by two Lochinvar natural gas boilers. The natural gas boilers
were installed in 2012 and are in excellent working condition. Natural gas
usage at SLO Swim Center accounts for approximately 42% of the city’s
carbon emissions. There is opportunity to take a major step towards building
electrification and decarbonization by shifting load off the natural gas boilers
with an electric air to water heat pump (AWHP) system. The natural gas
boilers would remain functional for peak heating days and resiliency
purposes, with approximately 75% of the total pool heating load (competition
and therapy pool) shifted onto the AWHP system.
Recommendations: The project team recommends installing a modular 1250 MBH AWHP, piping,
and controls to serve the competition pool. The AWHP would be installed
upstream of the existing heat exchanger (HX) and shift load off the natural
gas boilers. Natural gas boilers would remain functional during peak
conditions only and serve as a fully redundant back up. Hot water
temperatures of the heating side HX loop would need to be reset from 145°F
to 125-130°F. Temperatures on pool side HX loop would remain. The project
team recommends installing the AWHP on a concrete pad outdoors adjacent
to the existing mechanical room housing the competition pool equipment.
Key Considerations: A primary consideration for the building operations team is the integration and
tie in with existing pool heating loop and equipment. The AWHP will be
installed outside the existing mechanical room, meaning that the unit will have
to be piped back to the main loop. While the recommendation is to integrate
with the existing loop with no additional heat exchanger, there is an option to
install a second heat exchanger and heating loop to provide the primary
means of pool heat. Feasibility of both options is to be analyzed and verified
by the design engineer.
An additional consideration is the operating temperature of the mechanical
side (not pool side) of the HX. Standard AWHP function at lower supply water
temperatures, with a max of 130°F and recommended max set point of 120°F
or less (higher temperature options are available, but they are more
expensive). The hot water reset is not anticipated to be a major concern for
the Swim Center so long as the pool side temperature is maintained, however,
it will require monitoring by the operations team to verify.
SLO Swim Center has a 277/480V 400 amp electrical service. AWHP
standard configurations are designed for 480V.
Page 81 of 349
34 Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan
Next Steps: 1. Provide a Schematic Design to very verify required equipment capacity,
feasibility of integration with existing heating loop, size of mechanical pad
and available space adjacent to SLO Swim Center. Provide a full detailed
cost estimate.
2. Review electrical system capacity and verify upgraded service for Phase
1 is not necessary.
CONCEPTUAL LAYOUT
The AWHP can be installed outside of the mechanical room likely in the equipment yard and connected
to the existing hot water distribution through the mechanical room. A high-level system schematic is
shown below.
Page 82 of 349
35 Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan
EQUIPMENT SPECIFICATION
An AERMEC NRP air-to-water heat pump (AWHP) unit was used for budgeting.
Page 83 of 349
36 Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan
EXISTING CONDITIONS
The mechanical building has a 400A service at 277/480V and has spare capacity according to plans from
the 2013 Pool Heater Replacement drawings. This should be verified with onsite conditions.
Page 84 of 349
37 Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan
The pool includes two natural gas boilers which are both in good working condition.
Page 85 of 349
38 Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan
FIRE STATION ELECTRIFICATION
PROJECT SUMMARY
Project Name: Building Electrification – HVAC, Domestic Hot Water, Cooking
Building: Fire Station 1 and 911 Dispatch Center
Preliminary Budget: $318,000
Project Type: Electrification, General Maintenance
Project Summary: There is opportunity to take a major step towards city decarbonization with
the electrification of building heating, domestic hot water and cooking
systems at Fire Station 1 and 911 Dispatch Center. The building heating
systems are nearing the end of useful life and can be replaced with heat
pump options. Similarly, natural gas water heaters can be replaced by heat
pump options. Electric induction ranges can be used in place of traditional
natural gas ranges.
Recommendations:
Fire Station 1: The building heating needs of Fire Station 1 are currently
served by seven natural gas/DX rooftop units. The natural gas rooftop units
were installed in 2021 and are nearing the end of their useful life. It is
recommended to replace these units with seven 5-ton packaged heat pump
units capable of providing heating and cooling with no natural gas. Basis of
design units would be Carrier Weather Maker with heat pump heating.
Design to confirm if supplemental electric resistance is required. Domestic
hot water is served by a tank type natural gas water heater. This heater will
be replaced by a heat pump option. Basis of design would be AO Smith
HPTU. Cooking is currently served by a natural gas range. Proposed
replacement option is an electric induction range—manufacturer to be
decided by SLO team. Any electrical upgrades should be coordinated with
the microgrid and EV Charging projects
911 Dispatch Center: The building heating needs of 911 Dispatch are
currently served by four natural gas forced air furnaces. Cooling is provided
by cooling coils served by an outdoor condensing unit. It is recommended to
replace these units with four air source heat pump units. Heat pump units
include an outdoor condensing unit and indoor fan coil type unit. Fan coil
may be placed in similar equipment location in either vertical or horizontal
orientation. Basis of design units would be York HMH7. Domestic hot water
is served by a tank type natural gas water heater. This heater will be
replaced by a heat pump option. Basis of design would be AO Smith HPTU.
Cooking is currently served by a natural gas range. Proposed replacement
option is an electric induction range—manufacturer to be decided by SLO
team. In addition to these electrification measures it is recommended that
the SLO team complete conversion of lighting to LED at 911 Dispatch. It is
estimated that the building is currently 10% LED.
Page 86 of 349
39 Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan
Key Considerations: Replacement heat pump options will be installed outdoors. Both 911
Dispatch and Fire Station 1 have outdoor condensing units currently in
place. Heat pump units can be installed in similar location.
While electrical capacity at Fire Station 1 and 911 Dispatch are not expected
to be an issue, the design engineer will need to verify.
Next Steps: 1. Provide a Schematic Design to very verify required equipment
capacities.
2. Review electrical system capacity and verify upgraded service is not
necessary.
EQUIPMENT SPECIFICATION
Fire Station 1: Carrier Weather Maker Heat Pump RTU
Page 87 of 349
40 Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan
911 Dispatch Center: York HMH7 with Indoor York JHET Air Handler
Page 88 of 349
41 Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan
5 . RENEWABLE ENERGY
5 .1 SOLAR PV
Solar photovoltaics (PV) systems were identified as the best on-site renewable energy system for the
City of San Luis Obispo to generate renewable energy. Increasing solar photovoltaics within the City
will help reduce the resilience of energy systems within San Luis Obispo and help to reduce utility
costs for the City.
PRIORITY SOLAR LOCATIONS
The City of San Luis Obispo has been engaged with ForeFront Solar to provide solar systems at three
locations throughout the city. Collectively the solar PV arrays will provide 42% of the electricity required
at General Fund facilities, after being fully electrified. The projects will be delivered through a power
purchase agreement (PPA) which will finance the systems and use utility bill savings to cover the cost
of the system. The following shows the proposed cumulative cost savings from the proposed systems.
Figure 19: ForeFront Solar Proposal - PPA Procurement
ADDITIONAL SOLAR LOCATIONS
The following locations can also be considered in a second phase. There locations could
accommodate solar PV systems and would be less cost effective compared to the priority sites.
Facility Solar PV Capacity
[kW]
Year 1 Generation
[kWh]
Annual Offset
[%]
City Hall 80 123,000 53%
Fire Station 2 30 49,500 +100%
Fire Station 3 31 51,150 +100%
Fire Station 4 26 42,900 +100%
Page 89 of 349
42 Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan
SWIM CENTER
Figure 20: SLO Swim Center Solar PV Layout
SYSTEM INFORMATION
• 409.5 kW-DC PV
• 687,763 kWh Year 1 production
• 87% offset of future load
• EVCS included
• 600A service upgrade required
• Requires PG&E IX App
• PPA Rate: $0.1664
• PPA Escalator: 0%
• Pre-Solar Utility Bill: $196,039
• Year 1 Savings: $39,131
• 20 Year Savings: $2,272,149
• Assumes 2.7% Annual Utility Rate Energy Increases
• Assumes 5% Utility Demand Rate Increases
Page 90 of 349
43 Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan
BUS YARD
Figure 21: Bus Yard Solar PV Layout
SYSTEM INFORMATION
• 295.6 kW-DC PV
• 510,186 kWh Year 1 production
• 13% offset of existing load (assumes NEM-A benefitting City’s B-19 meter)
• No service upgrade required
• Currently waiting on PG&E transformer upgrade
• Tentatively planned for March 2023
• PPA Rate: $0.1787
• PPA Escalator: 0%
• Pre-Solar Utility Bill: $878,366
• Year 1 Savings: ($3,166)
• 20 Year Savings: $695,085
• Assumes 2.7% Annual Utility Rate Energy Increases
• Assumes 5% Utility Demand Rate Increases
Page 91 of 349
44 Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan
FIRE STATION 1
Figure 22: Fire Station 1 Solar PV Layout
SYSTEM INFORMATION
• 131 kW-DC PV
• 221,685 kWh Year 1 production
• 55% offset of both meters
• Assumes EV energy consumption of 98,400 kWh
• No service upgrade required
• Requires PG&E IX App
• Solar only, resiliency ready
• No BESS, microgrid
• PPA Rate: $0.1994
• PPA Escalator: 0%
• Pre-Solar Utility Bill: $109,248
• Year 1 Savings: $6,400
• 20 Year Savings: $491,186
• Assumes 2.7% Annual Utility Rate Energy Increases
• Assumes 5% Utility Demand Rate Increases
Page 92 of 349
45 Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan
5 .2 FIRE S TATION 1 MICROGRID
MICROGRIDS
Establishing microgrids at critical facilities within the City of SLO will improve the resilience of the City
during an emergency when there is a loss of power. A microgrid can integrate various distributed
energy resources and be optimized around lowering real time carbon emissions and utility costs, thus
supporting the City’s resilience, sustainability, and financial goals. A feasibility study was provided to
assess developing a microgrid at the Fire Station 1 and 911 Dispatch Center campus which is an
emergency facility that is critical for the resilience of the City and County of San Luis Obispo.
Figure 23: Microgrid System Diagram
BACKGROUND & SUMMARY
The City owned parcel is home to both Fire Station 1, located at 2160 Santa Barbara Ave, and the
911 Dispatch Center, located at 1135 Roundhouse St. With both facilities having separate Pacific Gas
& Electric (PG&E) meters, the total business-as-usual (BAU) consumption across all campus facilities
is approximately 390,000 kWh per year. The site space available for solar PV and BESS is limited due
to things like available parking areas, roof type and age, parcel size, flow of traffic for large emergency
apparatuses, etc. Much of the current site electricity consumption can be met with a solar PV carport
system, as was previously contracted with ForeFront Power (“ForeFront”), though a bit larger than
originally discussed. This newly proposed 131 kW-DC solar PV carport system should offset
approximately 55% of the anticipated near-future annual electricity consumption at campus facilities
and save an estimated $491,186 over the course of the 20-year PPA term.
A BESS can be used to meet most, or all of the resilience needs of the site, though PG&E will limit the
capacity of the BESS to meeting current demand of the site. In addition, the existing building electrical
service has a remaining capacity of approximately 200 kW, which limits the amount of combined on-
Page 93 of 349
46 Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan
site PV and BESS capacity unless pursuing a potentially costly service upgrade. Typically, a BESS
has benefits over a generator because it can be used to reduce utility demand charges as well as
electricity costs during peak times, whereas a generator is only used during utility outages.
With a utility rate switch, the BESS would provide $14,918 in additional bill savings as well as reduce
CO2 emissions by approximately 1,116 pounds per year as compared to the existing diesel generator
utilization. In anticipation of future Public Safety Power Shutoff (PSPS) events and worsening natural
disasters, the proposed 63 kW / 511 kWh BESS microgrid would provide 6 hours’ worth of
noninterrupted back-up power to the Fire Station 1 and 911 Dispatch Center campus 88% of the year.
For the BESS to work with the PV and grid to reduce demand and affiliated charges for both meters,
the interconnection would have to be upstream of the feeder split from the generator. However, since
the sites have relatively low and non-peaky demand profiles, the opportunity for demand savings is
reduced, To avoid interconnection complexity, the BESS is sized sizing and complexity can be reduced
by focusing on resiliency in coordination with the generator and just the Fire Station 1 meter.
Based on the significant upfront cost as well as guidance from the City regarding the ForeFront PPA,
we recommend a short-term hold on proceeding with a BESS microgrid until additional state and/or
federal funding is available. In the immediate term, we recommend proceeding with the solar PPA with
ForeFront with design for future BESS microgrid. Based upon the time constraints related to NEM2.0
availability and supply chain constraints related to procurement, Optony recommends that the City
proceed with PV-only at the Fire Station 1 and 911 Dispatch Center campus at the present time with
the intent to have the future BESS fully or partially funded by external sources in the near future. Since
said future BESS would benefit the site and City from an environmental, resilience, and gross financial
perspective, the City should plan to submit applications for any and all future grant opportunities.
Additionally, the City should coordinate with ForeFront to ensure that the solar installation at the Fire
Station 1 and 911 Dispatch Center campus is as ready as possible to be "plug-and-play" with a future
on-site BESS development. The City should also note that, since PV installation with a PPA wo uld
result in ownership of the solar remaining with ForeFront, a future PV-tied BESS microgrid retrofit
would almost certainly have to receive the approval of ForeFront, and possibly may have to be built
and interconnected by them. We recommend continuing conversations with the ForeFront team
regarding the eventual inclusion of a battery and how that will impact the existing PPA terms.
SITE DESIGN & KEY ASSUMPTIONS
As seen in Figure 24, the proposed solar PV design consists of a 131 kW-DC carport array located
above the parcel’s southernmost parking lot. This PV system is anticipated to produce approximately
221,685 kWh in Year 1. Dependent on future funding opportunities, the proposed BESS for integration
into the existing microgrid ready PV system is 63 kW / 511 kWh, which is recommended to be installed
near the existing generator and switchgear on the north side of the mechanic facility and will not trigger
a utility service upgrade. By utilizing all available space at the Fire Station 1 and 911 Dispatch Center
campus to develop rooftop and parking lot carport arrays, PV generation can be maximized to account
for most if not all of the current and future annual electricity consumption on site. This further decreases
the amount of annual GHG emissions from the use of non-renewable energy as well as can be paired
with a battery microgrid to provide resilience to the campus and additional demand savings through
peak shaving and energy arbitrage. Upon site condition review and evaluation of available space,
ForeFront found that the limited and broken-up spaces of rooftop solar would not be financially
beneficial to include in a PPA. The most efficient build would be single, medium sized carport array,
Page 94 of 349
47 Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan
which in turn keeps PV and BESS sizing below an electrical capacity number that would necessitate
a utility service upgrade.
Figure 24: Proposed Solar PV Design
In addition to the constraints on the site, the City already holds solar development contracts with
ForeFront, which allows the project to benefit from rapid action. By working with ForeFront to install a
solar system that has microgrid ready components, the City can maximize savings in anticipation of
the future installation of a BESS. Solar and battery installation pricing continues to increase with
ongoing supply-chain constraints as well as the quickly approaching NEM2.0 application deadline of
mid-April 2023. Below are key assumptions used in the analysis of the proposed solar PV and BESS
microgrid:
KEY ASSUMPTIONS
The analysis provided in this report is as an illustration of the potential financial, resilience, and
environmental benefits of solar PV and battery energy storage systems. The assumptions and price
points used in the financial modeling are based on current local market conditions within PG&E
territory, as of March 1, 2023. Certain laws, regulations, tax incentives, rebates, programs and third-
party provided information that is subject and anticipated to change over time.
• Proposed Microgrid Ready PV System Size: 131 kW-DC
• Proposed BESS: 63 kW / 511 kWh
• BESS Max Depth of Discharge: 50%
• Assumed BESS Price: $800 per kWh
• Assumed BESS O&M Price: $20 per kW
• Assumed Incentives: 30% base ITC + 10% adder
• Utility Electricity & Demand Rates: B-10 (Fire Station 1); B-19 (911 Dispatch Center)
• Utility Electricity Cost Escalation Rate: 3%9
• PV Panel Degradation Rate: 0.5% per year
9 This may vary depending on release of PG&E rates.
Page 95 of 349
48 Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan
• BESS Degradation Rate: 3% per year
• Discount Rate: 3%
OWNERSHIP STRUCTURES
A high-level description of each applicable financial structure is provided below. These descriptions
provide useful background for the financial analysis presented and can be used by the City to inform
consideration of future projects. In general, the Direct Purchase financing structure provides the
greatest long-term savings for entities eligible for incentives but in turn requires a significant initia l
project investment and ongoing O&M associated costs for the lifespan of the systems. A third-party
ownership option typically provides the greatest savings for tax-exempt entities and is thus appealing
for local governments, but the expansion of entities eligible for the Investment Tax Credit (IRA) as part
of the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) of 2022 makes cash purchase typically more desirable.
DIRECT PURCHASE
The City would use existing cash reserves, grant funding, or a loan to purchase the system ou tright.
Under this scenario, the site owner is responsible for all ownership concerns, including O&M, regular
system cleaning, insurance, and monitoring of system production. This requires a significant up-front
capital expenditure and ongoing operational costs but can often result in higher total savings than
other ownership and financing structures. Usually, public agencies cannot take advantage of tax credit
benefits, but the recently passed IRA is an exception for both solar and storage installations a nd
extends eligibility of the ITC.
THIRD-PARTY OWNERSHIP – POWER PURCHASE AGREEMENT
This structure enables site owners to receive electricity from a solar PV system at no upfront costs
and allows the tax incentives (i.e., ITC) for solar installations to be monetized by the third-party. The
City would enter a contract of typically 20 years with a third-party to purchase all energy produced by
a solar PV system installed on the property in question. This third-party would own the solar PV system
and be fully responsible for all ownership costs, including financing, O&M, insurance, and system
output. The site host pays a fixed rate for the electricity produced by the solar array for the duration of
the contract.
In PPAs that include a storage system, the simplest approach is to spread the additional cost of the
storage system across the energy produced by the solar array and discharged by the battery and
increase the fixed rate for electricity. PPAs typically include a yearly price escalator between 0-3%.
The value of this escalator relative to the rate at which utility prices increase will affect the savings in
future years. Monthly payments may be lower than current or projected utility bills starting on day one,
resulting in immediate savings. It is important to note that, if the City moves forward with a project,
final pricing will be offered by developers and are subject to the assumptions utilized in the analysis.
INCENTIVES
As part of the recently passed IRA, the City is anticipated to be eligible for the full ITC base amount.
The ITC is a federal tax credit for up to 30% that allows for significant cash-flow benefits and can lead
to lower pricing for the installation of solar PV and battery energy storage via a direct reimbursement
from the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). There are also additional ITCs, often referred to as adders,
available for projects that meet specific requirements surrounding the use of domestic content or being
located in an IRS defined energy community and/or low-income areas that have the potential to
increase the base 30% ITC amount by 10%-20% per adder. The energy storage configuration in this
analysis assumes that the battery is restricted to only charging from on-site solar energy and therefore
Page 96 of 349
49 Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan
is eligible to claim the full 100% ITC value. It is important to be aware of the time-sensitive nature of
this tax credit, which is scheduled to step down beginning 2033.
The City may also be eligible for the anticipated Microgrid Incentive Program through PG&E. This
program is intended to fund clean energy microgrids to support critical infrastructure facilities that keep
communities safe.10 The CPUC approved $200M with the anticipated launch date in 2023. The Grants
Management department of the California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services11 may have an/or
release grants surrounding battery storage as well as California Grants Portal.12
MICROGRID MODELING
RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT
Based on the proposed battery microgrid design and the historical energy consumption of the shared
campus, the 63 kW/ 511kWh BESS would provide a 24-hour full ride-through (assuming NO load-
shedding) in approximately 18% of annual grid outages. Modeling shows that a 6-hour ride-through,
again without any load-shedding, would be possible in 100% of situations and a 12-hour ride-through
possible in 83%. This assumes that the BESS remaining charge is limited to 50%. This ensures the
battery has enough capacity at any given time to provide at least 6 hours’ worth of backup power in
the event of an outage or PSPS event. When accounting for the existing on-site 300 kW diesel
generator that can provide additional back-up support to guarantee a full 24-hour ride through during
extenuating circumstances and acknowledging that a larger battery capacity would require a costly
utility service upgrade to the existing electrical switchgear, the solution that appears to best fit the
constraints substantially is the system size developed in coordination between ForeFront and Optony
and presented as the proposed BESS.
Figure 25: Available Microgrid Hours During Grid Outage
10 https://www.pge.com/en_US/safety/emergency-preparedness/natural-disaster/wildfires/microgrid-incentive-
program.page?WT.mc_id=Vanity_mipworkshops
11 https://www.caloes.ca.gov/office-of-the-director/policy-administration/finance-administration/grants-management/
12 https://www.grants.ca.gov/
Page 97 of 349
50 Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
With the consideration of the City’s community-wide Climate Action Plan goal of carbon neutrality by
2035, the environmental impacts of the proposed solar PV and BESS microgrid have been analyzed.
The current PG&E energy mix used to power the Fire Station 1 and 911 Dispatch Center campus is
estimated to produce approximately 332,726 pounds of CO2 per year per kWh of electricity.13 In the
long term, the City's participation with Central Coast Community Energy (CCCE) will cut out most or
all of those carbon dioxide emissions. However, use of the generator, while infrequent as depicted in
Figure 3, will create some additional emissions. The PV will generate clean, local energy, whilst the
BESS will take the place of most if not all of the associated generator emissions, rendering the
generator use unnecessary except in the most long-lasting emergency situations.
By supplementing the utilization of the onsite 300 kW
diesel generator with solar PV and BESS, the City can
reduce the amount of CO2 emissions from burning
fossil fuels. The City is estimated to reduce CO2
emissions by 496 pounds for every hour the generator
does not need to run.14 This assumes the generator
utilizes an average of 22.1 gallons of diesel per hour,
based on specifications of similar makes and models
on the market.15 Considering the average outage
length in the given area is approximately 2 hours3 and
interruptions occur approximately 1.125 per year, the
City would reduce its annual greenhouse gas (GHG)
emissions by approximately 1,116 pounds.
FINANCIAL MODELING
Among facility reliability options, BESS is a more beneficial option than a diesel generator because, in
addition to significantly lower GHG emissions, the BESS can also operate to reduce utility demand
(power needed instantaneously from the electrical grid) and can shift energy needs from higher-priced
periods of the day to lower-priced periods, through energy arbitrage. In many cases, the electrical bill
savings from demand shaving and energy arbitrage can produce a compelling payback period for
BESS. With the addition of a BESS, the City would experience an additional $15,000 in utility bill
savings. There is widespread anticipation that grants from state and federal sources will become
available in the near future, enabling the City's resilience goals to be met through over-arching
infrastructure hardening, rather than having to be met through localized spending from the City's
general fund. Additionally, the federal government's Investment Tax Credit could enable 30% or more
of the future costs of a BESS installation to be compensated back to the City or credited to a future
developer. The following analysis was provided for a cash purchase of the BESS systems. Please
refer to Table 9 for key financial inputs and metrics and Table 10 for the associated pro forma.
13 https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=74&t=11
14 https://www.epa.gov/energy/greenhouse-gases-equivalencies-calculator-calculations-and-references
15 https://www.generac.com/Industrial/products/diesel-generators/configured/300kw-diesel-generator
Figure 26: PG&E Power Outages
Page 98 of 349
51 Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan
Table 8 : Key Financial Inputs & Metrics – Cash Purchase
Key Financial Metrics Key Inputs
BESS Cost per kWh $800 Bill Savings Year 1 $14,918 BESS Degradation 3%
Upfront Payment $408,800 25-Year Bill Savings $472,009 Discount Rate 3%
25-year O&M Cost $45,939 25-Year IRR 4% Payback Period 17 years
Total Project Costs $454,739 25-Year ROI 40%
Total Incentives $163,520 25-Year NPV $32,548
Net Payments $291,29
Table 9 : Cash Purchase Pro Forma
Years Project Costs O&M Direct Pay - ITC Electric Bill Savings Total Cash Flow Cumulative Cash Flow
Upfront (408,800)$ -$ -$ -$ (408,800)$ (408,800)$
1 -$ (1,260)$ 163,520$ 14,918$ 177,178$ (231,622)$
2 -$ (1,298)$ -$ 14,825$ 13,527$ (218,095)$
3 -$ (1,337)$ -$ 14,713$ 13,376$ (204,719)$
4 -$ (1,377)$ -$ 14,582$ 13,205$ (191,513)$
5 -$ (1,418)$ -$ 14,429$ 13,011$ (178,503)$
6 -$ (1,461)$ -$ 14,254$ 12,793$ (165,709)$
7 -$ (1,505)$ -$ 14,054$ 12,549$ (153,160)$
8 -$ (1,550)$ -$ 13,831$ 12,281$ (140,878)$
9 -$ (1,596)$ -$ 13,581$ 11,985$ (128,893)$
10 -$ (1,644)$ -$ 13,304$ 11,660$ (117,233)$
11 -$ (1,693)$ -$ 20,256$ 18,563$ (98,671)$
12 -$ (1,744)$ -$ 20,137$ 18,393$ (80,278)$
13 -$ (1,796)$ -$ 19,994$ 18,198$ (62,080)$
14 -$ (1,850)$ -$ 19,823$ 17,973$ (44,108)$
15 -$ (1,906)$ -$ 19,624$ 17,718$ (26,390)$
16 -$ (1,963)$ -$ 19,395$ 17,432$ (8,958)$
17 -$ (2,022)$ -$ 19,135$ 17,113$ 8,155$
18 -$ (2,083)$ -$ 18,842$ 16,759$ 24,915$
19 -$ (2,145)$ -$ 18,514$ 16,369$ 41,284$
20 -$ (2,209)$ -$ 18,150$ 15,941$ 57,224$
21 -$ (2,276)$ -$ 27,501$ 25,225$ 82,450$
22 -$ (2,344)$ -$ 27,350$ 25,006$ 107,456$
23 -$ (2,414)$ -$ 27,165$ 24,751$ 132,206$
24 -$ (2,487)$ -$ 26,945$ 24,458$ 156,665$
25 -$ (2,561)$ -$ 26,687$ 24,126$ 180,790$
Total (408,800)$ (45,939)$ 163,520$ 472,009$ 180,790$ -$
Page 99 of 349
52 Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan
RATE STRUCTURE ANALYSIS
With the consideration of the PG&E-CCCE 3Cchoice program, the City would experience further bill
savings in the form of reduced energy and demand charges by switching from the current rate
schedules on both meters to B-19 Option S (voluntary). The tables below display a representation of
estimated current and new electric bills for the Fire Station 1 and 911 Dispatch Center campus after
the installation of a PV and BESS microgrid. The analysis is based on the most current rates (updated
March 1st, 2023) under the facility’s existing PG&E/CCCE commercial tariffs, B-10 and B-19, and
anticipated switch to B-19 Option S. According to the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC),
customers taking service under NEM 2.0 may add battery storage to existing PV systems without
altering their status.16
Table 10: Comparison of Current and New Electricity Bills
Site Current Charges New Charges
(w/o rate change)
New Charges
(w/ rate change)
Fire Station 1 $31,837 $12,194 $10,402
911 Dispatch Center $49,453 $27,858 $24,429
Table 12: Current Fire Station 1 Electric Bill (PG&E/CCCE B -10)
16 https://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/PublishedDocs/Efile/G000/M498/K526/498526033.PDF
Page 100 of 349
53 Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan
Table 13: Current 911 Dispatch Center Electric Bill (PG&E/CCCE B -19)
Table 1411: New Fire Station 1 Electric Bill (PG&E/CCCE B -10)
Page 101 of 349
54 Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan
Table 15: New Fire Station 1 Electric Bill (PG&E/CCCE B -19 Option S)
Table 126 : New 911 Dispatch Center Electric Bill (PG&E/CCCE B -19)
Page 102 of 349
55 Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan
Table 137 : New 911 Dispatch Center Electric Bill (PG&E/CCCE B -19 Option S)
Page 103 of 349
56 Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan
6 . DEFINITIONS
Air Conditioning (AC) Typical term for building heating and cooling equipment.
Air Cooled Chiller (AC Chiller) A piece of mechanical equipment that cools water (chilled water) by
rejecting heat to air.
Air to Water Heat Pump (AWHP) A piece of mechanical equipment that transfers heat from outside
air to water for the purpose of building heat or domestic hot water heat. Air to water heat pumps may
also run in the opposite cycle and reject heat from a water based system to outside air for the purpose
of cooling a building.
Building Management System (BMS) A building control system that monitors various systems in a
building.
Business as Usual (BAU) The business as usual or maintain the status quo case for use in scenario
analysis.
Chilled Water (CHW) Is the means of cooling in a building served by equipment with chilled water
cooling coils.
Climate Energy Scenario Analysis (CESA) A tool for comparing different pathways to carbon
neutrality. Provides metrics about carbon and cost.
Coefficient of Performance (COP) A means of measuring mechanical equipment efficiency. 1 COP
= 100%.
Direct Expansion (DX) A means of cooling air with a refrigerant based coil and compressor system.
Domestic Hot Water (DHW) Hot water used in sinks, showers, pools, etc.
Electric Vehicles (EV) Fully electric vehicles.
Greenhouse Gas (GHG) The bioproduct of combustion based systems. These gases trap heat in the
earth’s atmosphere and warm the earth’s surface.
Heat Exchanger (HX) A mechanical device used to transfer heat from one fluid loop or airstream to
another.
Heating Hot Water (HHW) The means of delivering heat in a building served by a boiler or heat pump
system.
Heating Ventilation and Air Conditioning (HVAC) Industry standard acronym.
Kilowatt Hour (kWH) Energy metric typically used for electricity.
Megawatt Hour (MWH) Energy metric typically used for electricity.
Metric Tons of Carbon Dioxide Equivalent Emissions (MTCO2e or MTE) Metric to quantify
greenhouse gas emissions.
Natural Gas (NG) Fossil fuel based energy typically used for building heat, domestic hot water, and
cooking.
Power Purchase Agreement (PPA) A long term electricity supply agreement typically using solar.
Page 104 of 349
57 Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan
Rooftop Unit (RTU) A packaged mechanical unit that delivers heating and cooling. Units typically run
constant volume and are typically served by natural gas heat and direct expansion cooling.
Seasonal Energy Efficiency Ratio (SEER) Energy efficiency rating typically used for packaged DX
cooling equipment. A ratio of cooling capacity to power input.
Thousand British Thermal Units (MBH) Energy unit typically used for natural gas and heating hot
water.
Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) The overall cost of a product or project over the equipment or
project’s lifespan. Includes direct and indirect costs.
Variable Air Volume Air Handling Unit (VAV AHU) Typical mechanical HVAC unit used in buildings
with multiple zones of usage.
Water to Water Heat Pump (WWHP) A mechanical piece of equipment that transfers heat from one
water source, such as groundwater, to a building side water source.
Page 105 of 349
58 Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan
7. APPENDIX
BUILDING ENERGY ASSESSMENTS
CESA TRAINING MATERIALS
Page 106 of 349
Fleet Electrification Study
Vehicle Report
Page 107 of 349
THIS PAGE WAS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK.
Page 108 of 349
Cover photo by Robert Smrekar on Flickr.
REPORT PREPARED BY:
Optony Inc.
5201 Great America Parkway, Suite 320
Santa Clara, CA 95054
www.OptonyUSA.com
March 2023
Page 109 of 349
THIS PAGE WAS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK.
Page 110 of 349
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS .................................................................................................................................................. 1
LIST OF FIGURES ......................................................................................................................................................... 4
LIST OF TABLES .......................................................................................................................................................... 4
ACRONYMNS ............................................................................................................................................................. 4
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................................... 1
KEY FINDINGS ...................................................................................................................... 1
FLEET COMPOSITION .................................................................................................................................................. 3
DATA SOURCES .................................................................................................................... 3
FLEET COMPOSITION AND CHARACTERISTICS .......................................................................... 3
Summary of Fleet Assets .................................................................................................................................................. 3
VEHICLE CATEGORIZATION .................................................................................................... 6
Studied Fleet ..................................................................................................................................................................... 6
Exclusions ......................................................................................................................................................................... 6
VEHICLE ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY & RESULTS ........................................................................................................... 8
ELECTRIFICATION TIMELINE .................................................................................................. 8
ELECTRIC VEHICLE SELECTION ............................................................................................... 9
Light-duty Vehicle Selection ........................................................................................................................................... 10
Medium- and heavy-Duty vehicles ................................................................................................................................. 11
Analysis Process .............................................................................................................................................................. 12
RANGE SUITABILITY ............................................................................................................. 13
TOTAL COST OF OWNERSHIP (TCO) ANALYSIS ........................................................................ 13
TCO Methodology........................................................................................................................................................... 13
TCO By Department & Electrification Category ............................................................................................................. 14
ESTIMATED CAPITAL BUDGET NEEDS FOR VEHICLE REPLACEMENT ........................................... 20
Discussion of Ownership Models: Owned vs Leased ..................................................................................................... 21
CARBON REDUCTIONS FROM FLEET ELECTRIFICATION ............................................................................................... 22
Other Emissions Reduction Options ............................................................................................................................... 23
NEXT STEPS .............................................................................................................................................................. 24
IMMEDIATE (2023 -2025) ELECTRIFICATION OPTIONS & TOTAL COST OF OWNERSHIP ................ 24
Other Near-Term Vehicle Replacements ....................................................................................................................... 24
APPENDIX A: VEHICLE INCENTIVES ............................................................................................................................ 28
APPENDIX B: FLEET DATABASE & DETAILED TCO ANALYSIS (EXCEL ATTACHMENT) ..................................................... 31
APPENDIX C: COST OF CARBON ABATEMENT CALCULATIONS .................................................................................... 34
Page 111 of 349
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE 1. ENTIRE FLEET – COMPOSITION ........................................................................ 4
FIGURE 2. ENTIRE FLEET – AGE BY MODEL YEAR .............................................................. 4
FIGURE 3: STUDIED FLEET - DETAILED FUEL TYPE ............................................................. 5
FIGURE 4. CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO’S FLEET COMPOSITION & ASSESSMENT APPROACH ...... 7
FIGURE 5. FLEET ELECTRIFICATION TIMELINE ................................................................... 9
FIGURE 6: TCO OF SHORT -TERM VEHICLE PURCHASES (2023 -2025) – “BEST FIT” FOR
ELECTRIFICATION .........................................................................................................15
FIGURE 7: TCO OF SHORT -TERM VEHICLE PURCHASES (2023 -2025) – FULL ELECTRIFICATION
...................................................................................................................................16
FIGURE 8: TCO OF MID -TERM VEHICLE PURCHASES (2026 -2030) – BEST FIT FOR
ELECTRIFICATION .........................................................................................................17
FIGURE 9: TCO OF MID -TERM VEHICLE PURCHASES (2026 -2030) – POTENTIAL
ELECTRIFICATION .........................................................................................................18
FIGURE 10: ESTIMATED CAPITAL BUDGET NEEDS – “BEST FIT” FOR ELECTRIFICATION .........20
FIGURE 11: ESTIMATED CAPITAL BUDGET NEEDS – ALL POTENTIAL ELECTRIFICATION .........20
FIGURE 12: ANNUAL CARBON EMISSIONS OF VEHICLE FLEET BY DEPARTMENT - 2021 .........22
FIGURE 13: EMISSION REDUCTION SCENARIOS THROUGH 2040 ........................................23
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE 1: FLEET SUMMARY BY DEPARTMENT AND ANNUAL MILEAGE DRIVEN ........................ 5
TABLE 2: TCO OF SHORT -TERM VEHICLE PURCHASES (2023 -2025) – “BEST FIT” FOR
ELECTRIFICATION .........................................................................................................15
TABLE 3: TCO OF SHORT -TERM VEHICLE PURCHASES (2023 -2025) – FULL ELECTRIFICATION
...................................................................................................................................16
TABLE 4: TCO OF MID -TERM VEHICLE PURCHASES (2026 -2030) – BEST FIT FOR
ELECTRIFICATION .........................................................................................................17
TABLE 5: TCO OF MID -TERM VEHICLE PURCHASES (2026 -2030) – POTENTIAL
ELECTRIFICATION .........................................................................................................18
TABLE 8: UPFRONT COST & TCO SUMMARY FOR IMMEDIATE VEHICLE ELECTRIFICATION .......24
TABLE 6: INCREMENTAL COST OF CARBON REDUCTION – “BEST FIT” SCENARIO ..................34
TABLE 7: INCREMENTAL COST OF CARBON REDUCTION – POTENTIAL ELECTRIFICATION
SCENARIO ....................................................................................................................35
ACRONYMNS
AC Alternating Current
BEV Battery Electric Vehicle (See also EV & PEV)
DC Direct Current
DCFC Direct Current Fast Charge (DC Fast Charger)
EV Electric Vehicle
EVSE Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment (EV charger)
ICE Internal Combustion Engine
kW Kilowatt
kWh Kilowatt hour
PEV Plug-in Electric Vehicle (See also EV & BEV)
PHEV Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicle
TBD To Be Determined
TCO Total Cost of Ownership
V Volt
ZEV Zero-Emissions Vehicle
Page 112 of 349
1
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FLEET ELECTRIFICATION VEHICLE STUDY
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report provides a systematic assessment of current City of San Luis Obispo-operated vehicles1 with the primary goals
of identifying vehicle electrification opportunities, establishing an electrification timeline based on vehicle replacements
and the City’s mandate for fleet electrification, and determining the costs and emissions benefits of fleet electrification.
The analysis assessed relevant vehicle data in the City’s records including data provided by the City’s Fleet Services
Supervisor. Available data included vehicle makes, models, ages, purchase date and price, fuel type, usage and costs, and
miles travelled. Quantitative data was supplemented by interviews with appropriate City of San Luis Obispo staff to better
understand how vehicles are used and the anticipated future mobility needs of each department.
The purpose of this report is to document the analysis of each fleet asset studied, and include the following research
elements:
1) Fleet baseline summarizing vehicles studied, fleet composition, and categorization of fleet by electrification
potential
2) Appropriate vehicle needs of each department to guide fleet electrification, including a schedule and
recommendation for electrification of each analyzed vehicle, or category of vehicle.
3) Analysis of Total Cost of Ownership and capital budget needs associated with fleet electrification
4) Analysis of potential carbon emissions reductions associated with fleet electrification
KEY FINDINGS
▪ After accounting for non-street legal assets (trailers, generators, etc.) and vehicles that are already electric, 211
out of 325 total vehicles provided by the City were studied for electrification. Of this subset:
o 76% can be replaced with equivalent electric vehicles that are currently commercially available,
predominantly sedans, SUVs, and pickup trucks.
o Most of the remaining vehicles (11% of 211) have potential electric candidates for replacement but
challenges, primarily related to cost-effectiveness or operational requirements, remain.
o About 6% of the vehicles studied do not have a potential candidate for electrification currently available
or announced in the market.
o The remaining 7% of the vehicles studied were requested not to be electrified by the City. This includes
fire engines, four F-550s operated by the Fire Department, an undercover police vehicle, and some
vehicles being phased out of operations.
▪ Electric vehicle range is not a barrier to vehicle electrification for the City of San Luis Obispo. For 100% of the
vehicles assessed, the recommended EV option could satisfy 100% of the existing vehicle’s historical driving
behavior.
▪ 161 of San Luis Obispo’s fleet can be replaced with equivalent electric vehicles that are currently commercially
available and likely to be cost-effective (“Best Fit” for Full Electrification). 64 of the vehicles in this category are in
1 City of San Luis Obispo Transit vehicles were not included in the study.
Page 113 of 349
2
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FLEET ELECTRIFICATION VEHICLE STUDY
the Police or Fire Departments and implementation will need to be phased to avoid compromising department
operations.
▪ At current vehicle costs, excluding incentives, electrifying the subset of these vehicles coming due for replacement
from 2022 to 2030 will cost approximately $2.1 million over the lifespan of the vehicles, approximately a 15%
increase in operating costs. With known incentives and rebates, the City will observe savings of up to $912,174
over the lifespan of the vehicles, approximately a 6% reduction in operating costs. This estimate does not include
the cost of installing and maintaining EV chargers.
▪ Today, incentives available to the City of San Luis Obispo for fleet electrification include Inflation Reduction Act
(IRA) tax credits (up to $7,500 for light duty, and up to $40,000 for medium- and heavy-duty vehicles) and a Central
Coast Community Energy (CCCE) rebate of $5,000 per vehicle. Additional incentives exist for EV charging
infrastructure.
▪ The carbon emissions reductions corresponding with electrification of the City’s “Best Fit” vehicles is an estimated
265 MTCO2 (31%) from 2021 fleet-related emission levels by 2025 and 531 MTCO2 (63%) by 2030. If the City
expands its vehicle electrification efforts to include vehicles that are potentially electrifiable, it can achieve fleet
carbon emissions reductions of 291 MTCO2 (34%) from 2021 levels by 2025 and 643 MTCO2 (76%) by 2030.
▪ Following the replacement schedule detailed in this report, SAN LUIS OBISPO can electrify 47% of its light-duty
vehicles by 2025 and 99% by 2030 (“Best Fit” Electrification Scenario).
▪ Availability of medium- and heavy-duty electric vehicles is a challenge limiting SAN LUIS OBISPO’s ability to
electrify its fleet. None of these vehicles are electrifiable with currently available electric vehicles that do not have
cost-effectiveness or operational concerns. Considering potentially electrifiable vehicles, 10% can be electrified
by 2025 and 48% by 2030. However, to achieve this level of electrification the City will have to address operational
and budget concerns during the purchasing process.
Under the Best Fit Electrification Scenario, vehicles in the Police Department represent the most cost-effective opportunity
for carbon emissions reductions on a capital cost basis, with 36% of total fleet emissions coming from a department that
has only 24% of the City’s total fleet asset. Annual operational cost savings for the Police Department under the Best Fit
scenario are estimated at $139,000.
CHALLENGES OF VEHICLE ELECTRIFICATION PLANNING IN A DYNAMIC MARKET
The electric vehicle market is highly dynamic. Purchase prices and available vehicle models included in
this report have high levels of certainty through 2025, although supply chain and manufacturer delays
may impact procurement. Thereafter, less certainty exists with respect to vehicle purchase prices and
options, however based on Optony’s professional opinion, cost comparable vehicles will be available for
most of the City's needs through the end of the decade as described in detail in this report.
Page 114 of 349
3
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FLEET ELECTRIFICATION VEHICLE STUDY
FLEET COMPOSITION
This section describes the data sources used in this report and summarizes the composition of San Luis Obispo’s municipal
fleet.
DATA SOURCES
The City of San Luis Obispo’s fleet data was gathered from various data sources and a comprehensive database was
compiled for further analysis. The data sources used in this project include the following:
▪ City Fleet Inventory: This database served as the primary data source for the vehicle study. The City’s Fleet
Inventory is an Excel-based database generated using data from AssetWorks, the City’s fleet asset management
software, maintained by the City’s Fleet Services Supervisor that contains information on each vehicle, such as
equipment ID, make, model, year, fuel type, power train, department, odometer reading, purchase year and
purchase price. During the project, this database was updated in collaboration with City staff to remove vehicles
that had been recently retired and add vehicles that had been rec ently purchased but not added to the inventory
prior to project kick-off. Additionally, City staff indicated specific off-road assets that would be upgraded to electric
street-legal assets in the future. The fleet inventory included data on assets besides vehicles (e.g., trailers,
generators) but those items were not included in the study.
▪ National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHSTA) Vehicle Identification Number (VIN) Decoder: To
supplement vehicle information included in the City Fleet Inventory, the NHSTA VIN Decoder, an online software
tool that interprets VINs and provides an extensive list of characteristics corresponding to that VIN, was used to
gather additional vehicle characteristics. Specifically, it was used to gather the Gross Vehicle Weight Rating
(GVWR) and Body Type of each vehicle.
In addition to the above-mentioned data sources, qualitative data was collected through discussions with City Fleet and
Facilities staff, such as vehicle duty cycles and emergency response requirements. In all, the data collection efforts
described above led to the creation of a comprehensive fleet database, attached to this report as Appendix A, which
served as the basis for all further analyses.
FLEET COMPOSITION AND CHARACTERISTICS
SUMMARY OF FLEET ASSETS
This section provides descriptive statistics to understand the current condition and composition of San Luis Obispo’s fleet.
The final fleet database included a total of 325 units, including light-, medium-, and heavy-duty vehicles. After reduction
of the 114 vehicles that will not be electrified, 185 were included in the electrification analysis and are represented in the
figures below.
Figure 1 depicts the breakdown of the fleet by vehicle type. Over half of the analyzed fleet falls under two vehicle
categories: Pickup and Truck. The “Pickup” category includes light- and medium-duty vehicles ranging from smaller pickups
such as the Ford Ranger to larger pickups such as the Ford F-350.
Page 115 of 349
4
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FLEET ELECTRIFICATION VEHICLE STUDY
FIGURE 1 . ENTIRE FLEET – COMPOSITION
Figure 2 shows a count of all vehicles by their model year. Newest model years are shown first, followed by progressively
older model years from left to right.
FIGURE 2 . ENTIRE FLEET – AGE BY MODEL YEAR
Page 116 of 349
5
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FLEET ELECTRIFICATION VEHICLE STUDY
In terms of the powertrain, the large majority (92.8%) of the studied fleet are internal combustion engines (ICE) followed
by hybrids (3.8%) and battery electric vehicles (BEV or EV) (3.3%). Split out by fuel type in
Figure 3, the majority (83.4%) of the fleet use only unleaded gasoline, followed by renewable diesel (12.8%), and electricity
(3.3%).2
FIGURE 3 : STUDIED FLEET - DETAILED FUEL TYPE
Table 1 summarizes the entirety of the City’s fleet and includes the number of assets in each City department, total annual
mileage, and average annual vehicle mileage by department. Among the City’s various departments, the Public Works
Department has the largest fleet with 68 vehicles, followed by Police (51 vehicles) and Utilities (46 vehicles).Error!
Reference source not found. Notably, the Police Department vehicles account for nearly 40% of vehicles miles travelled
by the City fleet but only make up 24% of the fleet.
TABLE 1 : FLEET SUMMARY BY DEPARTMENT AND ANNUAL MILEAGE DRIVEN 3
DEPARTMENT NUMBER OF
ASSETS
% OF TOTAL
ASSETS
TOTAL ANNUAL
MILES TRAVELED
ANNUAL MILES
PER ASSET
% OF TOTAL
ANNUAL MILES
POLICE PATROL 25 12% 304,330 12,173 27%
POLICE ADMIN 26 12% 145,904 5,612 13%
FIRE 28 13% 105,581 3,771 9%
UTILITIES 46 22% 211,767 4,604 18%
PUBLIC WORKS 68 32% 296,888 4,366 26%
IT 3 1% 12,278 4,093 1%
PARKS AND REC 8 4% 44,798 5,600 4%
COMMUNICATIONS 6 3% 21,293 3,549 2%
ADMIN 1 0% 4,842 4,842 0%
2 Based on the fleet composition in 2022 and does not include any changes from expected 2023 replacements, which does include conversion of additional vehicles to
EVs.
3 Total and average annual usage are calculated from lifetime vehicle usage according to the City’s fleet inventory
Page 117 of 349
6
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FLEET ELECTRIFICATION VEHICLE STUDY
TOTAL 211 1,147,681 -
VEHICLE CATEGORIZATION
The fleet inventory provided by the City of San Luis Obispo consists of 325 assets. For this study, the database was further
categorized into the following groups, as depicted in Figure 4 and described below:
STUDIED FLEET
211 vehicles were studied in detail. However, not all of these vehicles can be fully electrified based on currently available
technologies. Therefore, based on the vehicle body type (as will be discussed later), these fleet vehicles were further
categorized into sub-categories:
▪ “Best Fit” for Full Electrification: 161 vehicles that can be fully replaced with an equivalent EV available on the
market today. It is important to note that 64 of the vehicles in this category are in the Police or Fire Departments
and implementation will need to be phased to avoid compromising department operations. Specific
considerations related to vehicle selection for these departments are included under Electric Vehicle Selection.
▪ Potentially Electrifiable: 24 vehicles are potentially electrifiable using EVs available on the market today, but
questions remain around cost-effectiveness, vehicle-specific operational and outfitting requirements and whether
vehicle replacements that are not “like for like” are supported by internal stakeholders . Further analysis by City
staff is needed prior to a purchasing decision being made. This category is further summarized below:
o There are 16 medium-duty single chassis cab that have equivalent EV options available, but options may
not be cost effective based on the current market prices.
o There are 7 vehicles that have potential “like for like” vehicle options but may be cost prohibitive.
Examples include all electric fire engines (e.g., Pierce Volterra Pumper), electric street sweepers (e.g.,
Global M3 Electric Sweeper) and heavy-duty trucks (e.g., Peterbilt 540EV).
o There are 2 vans in the Police Department that, while electric options for the vehicle chassis are available,
have extremely specialized uses (e.g., Crime Scene Investigation and Prisoner Transport) requiring
continued vetting to determine if an EV option is available and suitable.
▪ No Electric Option: 26 vehicles in San Luis Obispo’s fleet have no electric option currently available. This category
includes specialty vehicles like heavy-duty dump trucks that the City converted to renewable diesel in 2017.
EXCLUSIONS
114 units were excluded from the detailed analysis. These exclusions were applied in cases where there was no need for
further study because the asset was already electrified or had been replaced immediately prior to the project. This
category includes units 0804 and 0806 (Toyota Priuses) which are being replaced in 2022 with Chevy Bolts that are already
on order.
Page 118 of 349
7
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FLEET ELECTRIFICATION VEHICLE STUDY
FIGURE 4 . CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO’S FLEET COMPOSITION & ASSESSMENT APPROACH
Page 119 of 349
8
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FLEET ELECTRIFICATION VEHICLE STUDY
VEHICLE ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY & RESULTS
After the initial assessment of the fleet and identification of the studied vehicles, the next step in the analysis was to
analyze the data to identify specific electrification opportunities. The fleet electrification methodology consisted of the
following major steps:
▪ Step 1 - Electrification Timeline: An electrification timeline was established based on expected replacement years
for each vehicle provided by the City Fleet Services Supervisor and incorporated the City’s adopted Climate Action
Plan goal of 100% electric light-duty vehicles and 50% electric medium- and heavy-duty vehicles by 2030.
▪ Step 2 - Electric Vehicle Selection: EV options were identified and selected, either for complete replacement of
vehicles based on the availability of equivalent EVs, or other electrification options such as partial electrification,
powertrain replacement, or renewable diesel.
▪ Step 3 – Range Suitability: Existing vehicle use was analyzed, primarily focused on miles driven to determine
whether each proposed EV replacement has sufficient battery range to meet existing driving behavior.
▪ Step 4 - Total Cost of Ownership Analysis for a Fully Electrified Fleet: Total cost of ownership (TCO) of
conventional ICE vehicle replacements were compared to recommended EV models. This step included comparing
a combination of capital costs (vehicle purchase price) and operating costs over the expected lifespan of the
vehicle for each replacement option.
While the Fleet Electrification Methodology is presented as a linear process, in order to have the highest confidence in its
procurement decisions and to adapt to an evolving market, it is recommended that Step 2 and Step 3 (above) are
completed every-other year concurrent with the Financial Plan and Capital Improvement Program development process
and as the vehicles in the electrification timeline come up for replacement and the City begins implementing fleet
electrification.
ELECTRIFICATION TIMELINE
Figure 5 depicts the electrification timeline and the number of vehicles to be replaced and electrified each year over the
next 19 years. Vehicles are split by the electrification potential categorization described under the Vehicle Categorization
section. All vehicles analyzed are expected to be replaced by 2030.
It is important to note that the City can accelerate or delay this timeline based on available budget, but that delays
require larger investments in later years.
Page 120 of 349
9
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FLEET ELECTRIFICATION VEHICLE STUDY
FIGURE 5 . FLEET ELECTRIFICATION TIMELINE
As electrification options for medium- and heavy-duty vehicles become increasingly available, the number of vehicles
eligible for full electrification will increase. The potential impacts of this trend are demonstrated in Figure 13 under the
Full Electrification Scenario.
ELECTRIC VEHICLE SELECTION
This analysis assigns at least one potential EV option to each existing vehicle in the City’s fleet, while clearly defining which
vehicles had “best fit” options and which had more uncertainty surrounding the suitability of the available EV options. The
following discussion provides additional information on the current and expected market availability of EV options for
various vehicle sizes, giving context to the limitations of the analy ses presented in this report, and future opportunities
that may enable the City to determine a clearer path toward electrification of its medium - and heavy-duty vehicles. A
summary of all vehicles, ICE and Electric, included in the analysis can be found in Appendix B.
Page 121 of 349
10
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FLEET ELECTRIFICATION VEHICLE STUDY
LIGHT -DUTY VEHICLE SELECTION
Sedans, SUVs & Light Duty Vans
As of 2022, there are a range of battery-powered vehicles suitable for municipal fleets currently priced in the range of
$35,000 to $55,000 (not including sales tax) with a range greater than 100 miles. The most common choices are the Tesla
Model Y or Chevrolet Bolt, both of which were considered as potential EVs for San Luis Obispo’s fleet. Other light-duty
electric vehicles available for immediate fleet purchase include the Chevrolet Bolt EUV; Ford Mustang Mach-E; Volkswagen
ID4; Tesla Model 3; Hyundai Ioniq 5 & Kona; and Kia Niro. The EV models selected for inclusion in this analysis prioritized
models and OEMs with which the City is familiar, which are easily purchased through existing procurement contracts and
attempted to standardize across vehicle types in support of the City’s efforts to standardize its fleet at large around
preferred OEMs.
San Luis Obispo also operates 8 light-duty vans, ranging from smaller Ford Transit to Ford T-350s. The 2023 Ford eTransit
is currently available and would be an appropriate replacement vehicle for this group of existing vehicles. An estimated
126 miles of range is more than sufficient for the daily driving needs of the City’s vehicles. Ford is offering three differe nt
vehicle weights of the eTransit, as well as chassis cab and cutaway options, whic h make the eTransit an appropriate option
to replace the larger light-duty vans, as well as potentially a portion of the medium-duty vans in the City’s fleet.
Pickup Trucks
The City fleet includes 80 pickup trucks, mostly Ford Ranger, Ford F-150, Ford F-250, and Ford F-350. When considering
electrification of the smaller pick-up trucks (1/2- and 3/4-ton trucks such as the F-150 and F-250), recent all-electric options
have come to market including the Ford F-150 Lightning and Lordstown Endurance. With 10,000 pounds of towing
capacity, range of 230-300 miles and a price point $60,000 to $75,000, the Ford F-150 Lightning is a promising option for
municipal fleets and was included as the primary option in this analysis.
Alternative pickup trucks that could be appropriate for the fleet once proven are the Rivian R1T (starting at $75,000) and
Lordstown Endurance (starting at $65,000), both of which are available on the market today. Other pickup trucks are also
available or nearing production by companies like Bollinger, Chevrolet, GMC, and Toyota in 2023-2024.
For the 19 larger pickup trucks in San Luis Obispo’s fleet, options remain limited and there are no equivalent all electric
options on the market. The two options deemed to be the best fit were the SEA Electric Ford 450 and the Lightning Motors
Ford 550, chassis conversion options. Considering these two options, there is no perfect path for electrification of these
vehicles. Significant concerns exist related to a chassis conversion option like Lighting Motors, including upfront cost,
warranty/repair issues and availability of parts in the future. 21 of the larger trucks were recommended to be downsized
to a 1/2-ton option at the recommendation of the City’s Fleet Services Supervisor, however, downsizing to a 1/2-ton option
may not be possible across the board due to operational requirements like utility bodies.
There are additional companies besides Lightning Motors that offer EV chassis conversions that can be fitted with a utility
body, such as Motiv Power Systems. Motiv’s E-450 and F-450 options are also larger than the F-250 and F-350s the City
commonly operates today. Any chassis conversion option can require long lead times for ordering and are often
significantly more expensive to purchase.
Page 122 of 349
11
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FLEET ELECTRIFICATION VEHICLE STUDY
Police Department
While admin vehicles in the Police Department can be replaced with standard light -duty options, the unique operational
needs of patrol and special unit vehicles require additional consideration.
Police Departments throughout the country, such as Westport, Connecticut, Bargersville, Indiana and Fremont, California
have deployed electric patrol vehicles, all manufactured by Tesla. The Fremont Police Department reports that their initial
vehicle, a Tesla Model S, has behaved favorably in the role of a patrol vehicle despite not being pursuit-rated, with
considerably less downtime than the Ford Explorer Utility Interceptor models which comprise the majority of th eir patrol
vehicle fleet. Following this success, they purchased and deployed a Model Y in September 2021. Moving forward, the
Model Y is likely to be the most appealing option as it provides a balance between size and purchase price.
However, as mentioned above, while the Tesla vehicles have the performance required in a police application, no models
currently have an official pursuit rating from the Michigan State Police or LA Sheriff’s Department, the two entities in the
Country in charge of testing vehicles for police use. Prior to deployment, Fremont PD had to receive approval from the
City’s Risk Management department since the Tesla vehicle did not have an official pursuit rated designated. In light of
this, another potential model for the Police Department to consider is the Mustang Mach E GT Performance, which
received an official pursuit designation in September 2021 from the Michigan State Police. Similar to the Model Y, the
Mach E is a crossover vehicle that should provide sufficient interior capacity, battery range, and performance at
comparable pricing to Ford vehicles currently purchased.
As it is advantageous for special unit vehicles, such as those used by detectives or in undercover operations, to be a range
of models, the analysis included a range of light -duty electric options matching the body type of the existing vehicles.
However, it is understood that these vehicles must blend in with surrounding traffic and concerns exist that electrifying
these vehicles ahead of the general market may limit this ability. Additionally, the lack of sufficient public fast charging
infrastructure may limit these vehicles’ ability to perform during extended deployments. As such, while a range of EV
options could be suitable, piloting will be required by San Luis Obispo’s police department to determine comfort with
specific models.
Finally, the Police fleet includes 8 motorcycles which have potential for electrification. There are products on the market,
such as the Harley Davidson Live Wire. Zero Motorcycles’ police and security model was tested and determined to be too
small for patrol applications.
MEDI UM- AND HEAVY -DUTY VEHICLES
Medium-duty and heavy-duty electric vehicle offerings are generally limited to OEM options approaching production but
not yet available or semi-custom, electrified or hybrid versions of commercially available vehicle platforms such as the
Ford and Izuzu chassis conversions Motiv, SEA and Lightning. Today’s limited offerings will be augmented by increasingly
numerous commercially available medium- and heavy-duty electrified vehicle platforms by manufacturers like Nikola,
AVEAI, Mitsubishi, Daimler, and Tesla. In effect, numerous zero emission replacement options will be available for a
significant percentage of diesel and gas-powered fleet components before 2030, though the timeline is difficult to
accurately predict beyond manufacturers’ announcements within the next two production years.
Page 123 of 349
12
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FLEET ELECTRIFICATION VEHICLE STUDY
Fire Department
Fire trucks pose a particular challenge for fleet electrification. Stringent performance requirements mean that an EV option
must be purpose built. Per the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) classifications, electric options from fire truck
Types 1-7 were researched. Two potential options for Type 1 fire trucks exist, the Rosenbauer Concept Fire Truck and the
Pierce Volterra Pumper, neither of which are in full production as of writing but are expected by 2023. The Volterra Pumper
is in service with the Town of Madison, Wisconsin4 and the Los Angeles Fire Department entered a Rosenbauer RTX into
service in May 20225. Both vehicles cost on the order of $1.3-1.5 million which is more expensive than SAN LUIS OBISPO’s
existing fire engines with similar capability, although prices seem to be increasing. Purchase records from the City show
that similar vehicles cost the City between $400,000 and $600,000, with a more recent mid-2022 purchase of a $900,000
engine.
No options were found for Types 2-7, although First Priority Group6, a large upfitter of emergency and command center
vehicles primarily operating on the East Coast, offers various emergency response and command center vehicle options
in collaboration with another chassis conversion company Roush Cleantech.
Medium- and Heavy-Duty Trucks & Chassis Cabs
Excluding fire engines and ambulances, the City fleet has 21 vehicles (Class 3 or higher) that range from fire apparatuses
to flatbed trucks to specialty heavy duty vehicles, operating primarily in the Public Works, Fire, and Utilities departments.
While all of the heavy-duty vehicles were identified as having no electric options, here are a limited number of all-electric
options are offered by OEMs and chassis conversion companies. Options included in the analysis offered by OEMs include
the Peterbilt 220EV and 520EV and the Global Environmental Products M3 Electric Sweeper. The purchase price of the EV
options ($700,000) and low mileage of the existing vehicle precludes the EV options from being cost-effective, but the City
could decide to purchase these vehicles, likely using incentive programs such as HVIP discussed in Appendix A, to achieve
emissions reductions. Options included in the analysis from chassis conversion providers include SEA NPR EV, Lightning
Motors Ford F550 and Motiv E450 Utility Truck. Motiv offers two different bodies, a box truck and a work truck, fit on a
Ford E-450 chassis.
Overall, for the City’s heavy-duty municipal fleet vehicle use cases, cost-effective EVs are likely still five-to-ten years away,
even when accounting for incentives.
ANALYSIS PROCE SS
In order to assign EV alternatives to existing vehicles, each existing vehicle was assigned a label based on its Gross Vehicle
Weight Rating and Body Type (e.g., medium duty van). Up to five ICE replacement possibilities and five EV alternatives
were assigned to each vehicle label for analysis and the selected replacements were applied to every vehicle with that
label. Considering all the vehicle type and department specific considerations above, individual vehicles were updated
manually to ensure that only relevant models were included in the comparison and a single model was designated as the
4 https://www.wpr.org/madisons-fire-department-tests-out-fire-truck-runs-electricity
5 https://www.lafd.org/news/lafd-chief-debuts-arrival-first-electric-fire-engine
6 https://www.1fpg.com/electrified
Page 124 of 349
13
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FLEET ELECTRIFICATION VEHICLE STUDY
primary option and used to inform that total cost of ownership and capital budget need calculations completed later in
the analysis.
RANGE SUITABILITY
For every EV option assigned to an existing vehicle during the Vehicle Selection process, the “EV Range Viability” was
calculated, comparing the range and battery capabilities of the EV option to the driving patterns of the existing vehicle .
“EV Range Viability” is determined by doubling the average daily distance driven by each vehicle and confirming the EV
replacement range exceeds the maximum daily distance. All of San Luis Obispo’s “Best Fit” and “Potentially Electrifiable”
vehicle recommendations (211 total assets) boast viable ranges based on the vehicles historical driving, so EV range is not
a major barrier to electrification for the City’s fleet. Most vehicles with EV alternatives falling below 100% of trips within
range have Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicle (PHEV) options that would switch to gas once the battery was depleted, meaning
that while the vehicle could not complete all trips on electric propulsion it would not become stranded on longer trips.
Accounting for Idling, Auxiliary Loads & Vehicle Weight Variations
EVs do not idle in the same way as ICE vehicles, but the equipment requiring idling (e.g., air conditioning) will still creat e
a draw on the battery. A significant portion of the City’s fleet is police vehicles, most of which idle for a larg e percentage
of their daily operations. To account for idling of police vehicles, the daily kWh energy usage was adjusted to reflect the
higher energy needs and was applied directly as a 25% reduction of the battery state -of-charge of the EV based on
operations in police fleets similar in size to San Luis Obispo’s.
The analysis did not require a reduction of the battery state -of-charge due to the added weight of auxiliary equipment
because the City’s police fleet is expected to be almost exclusively replaced by Ford F-150 Lightning Special Service
Vehicles (SSVs), which are designed specifically for police departments and the equipment included by the manufacturer
is accounted for in the vehicle specifications.
TOTAL COST OF OWNERSHIP (TCO) ANALYSIS
TCO MET HODOLOGY
Total cost of ownership (TCO) refers to a calculation of adding capital and operating costs of an asset to determine the
total cost of that asset over its lifespan. As part of the analysis, the TCO for two different scenarios of vehicle replacement
was calculated: (1) an existing vehicle is replaced with an equivalent ICE vehicle and (2) that same existing vehicle is
replaced with the equivalent, or nearly equivalent, EV determined the vehicle selection process. Given the age of some of
the City’s vehicles, the changing availability of vehicle models in the market and to simplify the analysis, a representative
ICE vehicle replacement for each vehicle body type (e.g., Ford Escape for SUV) was used as the equivalent ICE replacement
vehicle to create the scenarios in the TCO analysis. The “Representative ICE Replacement” was determined in collaboration
with the City’s fleet staff. For heavy-duty vehicles, the ICE replacement vehicle was deemed to be identical to the existing
model. It is important to note that the replacement ICE vehicle choice presented here is used to represent the approximate
cost of replacing an existing vehicle with a new ICE vehicle and may not perfectly reflect the City’s actual procurement
choice to replace an existing vehicle.
For both scenarios, the TCO is the sum of the following cost components:
Page 125 of 349
14
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FLEET ELECTRIFICATION VEHICLE STUDY
▪ Total purchase price: The sum of the Manufacturer Suggested Retail Price (MSRP) and any auxiliary equipment.
The MSRPs of the vehicles were discussed with the City of San Luis Obispo to ensure that the actual price paid by
the City (incorporating fleet procurement discounts) of the proposed vehicles were factored into the analysis.
Available incentives from the Inflation Reduction Act and Central Coast Community Energy were included in the
calculation for total purchase price.
▪ Annual fuel cost: This was calculated based on the estimated annual mileage of the studied vehicle. For this
calculation, unleaded gasoline is priced at $4.00 and renewable diesel at $5.45, according to the City’s report on
their fuel prices. Annual fuel cost for EVs was calculated using the cost of electricity at the domicile facility of the
ICE vehicle being replaced. This cost was determined to be $0.26/kWh according to the City’s electricity rate from
PG&E (B19S) and does not include costs from any potential increase in demand charges. The potential impacts of
escalations in fuel costs (liquid fuel and electricity) can be observed in the Fleet Electrification Pro-Forma provided
to San Luis Obispo.
▪ Annual Operations and Maintenance (O&M) cost: The City of San Luis Obispo provided life-to-date maintenance
costs for each vehicle in the fleet. For the TCO comparison, an average cost of $0.06 per mile was used for EVs.
The TCO calculations did not include the cost of Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment (EVSE), as that is being addressed in
the Charging Infrastructure Report. All components included in the TCO calculations were calculated over the expected
lifespan of the existing vehicle, which ranges from 6 to 20 years depending on the vehicle type.
The TCO calculations do not account for the possibility that electric police patrol vehicles could last longer that than th e
6-year lifespan expected of the City’s ICE police patrol vehicles. Initial indications from the City of Fremont’s police patrol
pilot project deploying a Tesla Model S as a pursuit vehicle have indicated that the reduced maintenance needs of EVs will
likely result in an expected lifespan of longer than 6 years. Despite these indications, this assumption is still being proven
through real-world application. Thus, TCO calculations for this project assumed a simple case where both ICE vehicles and
EVs in the Police Department are owned for the same amount of time.
Resale Value
The resale value of the vehicle at the end of its lifecycle was not considered in the TCO analysis and was set to zero for
both ICE vehicles and EVs. Due to the relatively short amount of time that EVs have been on the market, there is not robust
data on the resale value of an EV in use for 10 years. Currently, the City returns revenue earned from sale of retired
vehicles to the vehicle replacement fund (VRF) if the vehicle was originally purchased using general funds. Revenue from
the sale of water, sewer, and parking vehicles is returned to the City’s department-specific enterprise funds.
TCO BY DEPARTMENT & ELECTRIFICATION CATEGORY
To summarize the TCO calculations across the entire fleet, a summary of TCO by department is included below. Given the
large number of vehicles analyzed, detailed TCO calculations for each vehicle are presented in Appendix B.
The following figures summarize the TCO for all expected vehicle electrification purchases by City departments over three
time periods, from short-term (2023-2025), medium-term (2026-2030) and long-term (2031-2040). These figures only
include City departments that are projected to have vehicle replacements in the given period.
Page 126 of 349
15
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FLEET ELECTRIFICATION VEHICLE STUDY
Under each period, there are figures representing two scenarios. The first figure provides a TCO comparison for only the
vehicles included in the Best Fit for Full Electrification category and the second figure provides a TCO comparison for all
vehicles with a potential electrification option. Since this second scenario includes EV options that may not be cost
effective, the TCO of the electric vehicles is generally higher than for the ICE vehicles.
The time periods segment vehicle purchases by purchase year, but the costs displayed include operating costs expected
over the lifetime of the new vehicle stretching from the purchase date through the end of its lifespan. For example, an EV
purchased in 2023 with a 10-year life span realizes annual savings for the City through 2033, compared to the alternative
scenario of purchasing an ICE vehicle. Those savings are aggregated in the figures below. Dollar amounts are provided in
nominal dollars.
FIGURE 6 : TCO O F SHORT -TERM VEHICLE PURCHASES (202 3 -2025) – “BEST FIT” FOR ELECTRIFICATION
TABLE 2 : TCO OF SHORT -TERM VEHICLE PURCHASES (202 3 -2025) – “BEST FIT” FOR ELECTRIFICATION
DEPARTMENT TOTAL EV TCO ($) TOTAL ICE TCO ($) INCENTIVE TOTAL ($)
POLICE $1,124,560 $1,314,269 $214,000
FIRE $242,285 $323,318 $39,500
UTILITIES $811,896 $962,338 $193,000
PUBLIC WORKS $1,695,761 $1,867,344 $417,500
IT $103,741 $116,767 $16,000
PARKS AND REC $165,603 $179,614 $30,500
COMMUNICATIONS $94,891 $119,811 $31,000
ADMIN $- $- $-
TOTAL $4,238,736 $4,883,462 $941,500
Page 127 of 349
16
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FLEET ELECTRIFICATION VEHICLE STUDY
FIGURE 7 : TCO OF SHORT -TERM VEHICLE PURCHASES (202 3 -2025) – POTENTIAL ELECTRIFICATION
TABLE 3 : TCO OF SHORT -TERM VEHICLE PURCHASES (202 3 -2025) – POTENTIAL ELECTRIFICATION
DEPARTMENT TOTAL EV TCO ($) TOTAL ICE TCO ($) INCENTIVE TOTAL ($)
POLICE $1,124,560 $1,314,269 $214,000
FIRE $242,285 $323,318 $39,500
UTILITIES $1,214,812 $1,317,395 $283,000
PUBLIC WORKS $2,304,390 $2,369,253 $552,500
IT $103,741 $116,767 $16,000
PARKS AND REC $165,603 $179,614 $30,500
COMMUNICATIONS $94,891 $119,811 $31,000
ADMIN $- $- $-
TOTAL $5,250,282 $5,740,428 $1,166,500
Page 128 of 349
17
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FLEET ELECTRIFICATION VEHICLE STUDY
FIGURE 8 : TCO OF MID -TERM VEHICLE PURCHASES (2026 -2030) – “BEST FIT ” FOR ELECTRIFICATION
TABLE 4 : TCO OF MID -TERM VEHICLE PURCHASES (2026 -2030) – “BEST FIT ” FOR ELECTRIFICATION
DEPARTMENT TOTAL EV TCO ($) TOTAL ICE TCO ($) INCENTIVE TOTAL ($)
POLICE $1,573,061 $2,099,446 $337,378
FIRE $921,867 $1,430,136 $141,000
UTILITIES $1,044,723 $1,197,615 $225,000
PUBLIC WORKS $1,132,371 $1,260,147 $258,500
IT $49,416 $39,401 $7,000
PARKS AND REC $118,579 $120,137 $29,000
COMMUNICATIONS $108,926 $122,090 $27,000
ADMIN $59,169 $59,843 $14,500
TOTAL $5,008,112 $6,328,816 $1,039,378
Page 129 of 349
18
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FLEET ELECTRIFICATION VEHICLE STUDY
FIGURE 9 : TCO OF MID -TERM VEHICLE PURCHASES (2026 -2030) – POTENTIAL ELECTRIFICATION
TABLE 5 : TCO OF MID -TERM VEHICLE PURCHASES (2026 -2030) – POTENTIAL ELECTRIFICATION
DEPARTMENT TOTAL EV TCO ($) TOTAL ICE TCO ($) INCENTIVE TOTAL ($)
POLICE $2,077,471 $2,530,398 $432,378
FIRE $921,867 $1,430,136 $141,000
UTILITIES $2,190,899 $1,958,113 $495,000
PUBLIC WORKS $2,526,052 $2,271,946 $573,500
IT $49,416 $39,401 $7,000
PARKS AND REC $685,124 $629,024 $164,000
COMMUNICATIONS $108,926 $122,090 $27,000
ADMIN $59,169 $59,843 $14,500
TOTAL $8,618,923 $9,040,951 $1,854,378
When only considering the Best Fit scenario, over the lifespan of the vehicles purchased, near-term electrification is
estimated to increase costs for the City ($100,000 more expensive) without incentives and mid-term electrification has
the potential to save the City about $300,000 without incentives. Under the Potential Electrification scenario, near-term
electrification is estimated to cost the City about $600,000 over the lifetime of the vehicles and mid-term electrification is
expected to cost the City about $1,400,000. The Potential Electrification scenario is more expensive for the City primarily
due to the current cost differences between ICE and EV heavy-duty options, including fire engines. TCO calculations in the
long-term do not include any assumptions for reduced purchase prices of EV models over the next 10 years, which are
Page 130 of 349
19
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FLEET ELECTRIFICATION VEHICLE STUDY
likely to change the financial outlook. There are a few uncertain factors that could impact these savings estimates, as
described below:
▪ If purchased EVs last longer than current ICE vehicles, the estimated savings will increase.
▪ If purchased EVs last less than current ICE vehicles, the estimated savings will decrease.
▪ If it is determined that EV Police pursuit vehicles can consistently outlast the expected 6-year lifespan of ICE pursuit
vehicles, savings in the Police Department could increase significantly.
Overall, falling MSRPs of long-range EVs, lower fuel costs and lower maintenance costs combine to enable EVs to provide
cost savings, as well as emissions reductions, to the City’s fleet. This is particularly true for vehicles with high mileage, such
as the Police Department where high fuel and maintenance costs represent additional room for co st savings.
Page 131 of 349
20
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FLEET ELECTRIFICATION VEHICLE STUDY
ESTIMATED CAPITAL BUDGET NEEDS FOR VEHICLE REPLACEMENT
Despite the potential for TCO savings resulting from vehicle electrification, in most cases, based on current market prices,
replacing an existing vehicle with an electric option will require higher upfront capital costs than replacing the same vehicle
with an ICE option. Figure 10 and Figure 11 include estimated annual capital budget required to purchase EVs for the City’s
fleet. The total size of the green and blue bars combined is the capital cost that would be necessary without incentives;
the blue bar in isolation is the capital cost that will be required with incentives. Savings are observed in the total cost o f
ownership due to fuel and maintenance savings making up the gap between the blue and red bars over the lifetimes of
the vehicles.
FIGURE 10: ESTIMATED CAPITAL BUDGET NEEDS – “BEST FIT” FOR ELECTRIFICATION
FIGURE 11: ESTIMATED CAPITAL BUDGET NEEDS – POTENTIAL ELECTRIFICATION
Page 132 of 349
21
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FLEET ELECTRIFICATION VEHICLE STUDY
It is important to note that the budget needs included in
Figure 11 include EV options that may not yet be in full production or are chassis conversions requiring custom building,
both of which increase purchase costs. For example, the Pierce Volterra Pumper is an all-electric fire engine option that,
while deployed in at least one real-world application in the U.S., has not reached widespread adoption and costs
approximately $1.2 million to purchase. It should be expected that capital budget requirements for models like the
Volterra will fall between now and when the City is required to make replacement decisions in the outer years.
DISCUSSION OF OWNERSHIP MODELS: OWNED VS LEASED
The City traditionally purchases fleet assets and that is the ownership structure that was assumed throughout this analysis.
The City of San Luis Obispo should continue to purchase and own vehicles because it is the most cost -effective approach
for the fleet. Leasing electric vehicles, particularly light-duty options, is an increasingly available ownership model with
the potential to further reduce the burden of vehicle maintenance. Leasing opportunities for municipal fleets are offered
through Sourcewell and the Climate Mayors EV Collaborative.7
There are two common types of leasing: fleet leasing or lease financing. Fleet leasing refers to a contract that enables
vehicle leasing, often a large number of vehicles, that encompasses maintenance costs, fuel c osts and other services. It is
appealing for fleets that do not have in-house maintenance operations and are interested in outsourcing a significant
portion of fleet management. Lease financing refers to a contract that provides a vehicle without fleet ma nagement
services and is similar to the structure of a lease for a personal vehicle. Within lease financing, there are two common
types: closed- and open-ended leases. Closed-ended leases have a set term, after which the City returns the vehicle.
Closed-ended leases enable fleets to phase new vehicle models into their fleet quickly and monthly payments are often
lower than other options, but the City does not retain ownership of the asset at the end of the lease.8 Open-ended leases
7 https://driveevfleets.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/NCL_OneSheet_ClimateMayors.pdf
8 Saving Money with Electric Vehicle Leasing: A Case Study of City Fleets, Electrification Coalition, November 2020
Page 133 of 349
22
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FLEET ELECTRIFICATION VEHICLE STUDY
are essentially a financing mechanism allowing the City to pay down the cost of a vehicle over the term of the lease, often
down to a $1 buy out, enabling the City to maintain ownership of the asset at the end of the lease term.
Historically, a public agency such as the City of San Luis Obispo may have chosen to lease EVs from a 3rd party in order to
realize incentives that were not available to entities that are tax-exempt. As of the time this report is being developed,
the EV rebates available from the federal government through recent bills have been extended to City governments and
other public agencies.
Page 134 of 349
23
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FLEET ELECTRIFICATION VEHICLE STUDY
CARBON REDUCTIONS FROM FLEET ELECTRIFICATION
Figure 12 summarizes total, annual carbon emissions from the City’s fleet by percent contribution of each department. To
account for the impacts of COVID-19 on vehicle use, fuel usage from 2019 and 2021 was used to calculate baseline carbon
emissions. The total carbon emissions associated with the City’s fleet is 845 MTCO2.9
FIGURE 12: ANNUAL CARBON EMISSIONS OF VEHICLE FLEET BY DEPARTMENT - 2021
The expected carbon reductions from fleet electrification are presented below based on the Fleet Replacement and
Electrification Timeline. Figure 13 includes projected carbon reductions under three electrification scenarios matching
those discussed previously in this report.
▪ “Best Fit” for Full Electrification (Current Technology): The first scenario considers the electrification of only
vehicles that can be fully electrified based on current technology (i.e., those vehicles categorized as “Best Fit” for
Full Electrification).
▪ “Potential Electrification” (Current Technology Plus): This scenario considers the electrification of all “Best Fit”
vehicles as well as the Potentially Electrifiable vehicles.
▪ Full Electrification: The final scenario includes all vehicles in the previous scenarios as well as the full electrification
of all vehicles identified as having no electric option currently available in t he market, including full electrification
9 This is calculating emissions of the 211 studied vehicles. Eight vehicles (3745, 5446, 5458, 5470, 8327, 8328, 2827, 7106) did not have fue l usage provided and estimated
annual GHG emissions were calculated based on vehicle mileage.
Page 135 of 349
24
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FLEET ELECTRIFICATION VEHICLE STUDY
of vehicles that are currently only candidates for partial electrification via an ePTO . This is included as a
representative scenario and does not specify vehicle models/technologies used to achieve electrification but
assumes sufficient technology advancement to electrify every vehicle that comes up for replacement through 20 40.
FIGURE 13: EMISSION REDUCTION SCENARIOS THROUGH 2040
By 2030, the Best Fit scenario (blue line), above, represents a 63% reduction in carbon emissions, the Best Fit + Potential
scenario (yellow line) represents a 76% reduction in carbon emissions and the Full Electrification scenario (orange line)
represents an 88% reduction in carbon emissions. Extending the Full Electrification Scenario leads to a 93% reduction in
carbon emissions from the City fleet by 2040.
ERROR! REFERENCE SOURCE NOT FOUND.
While the past few years have witnessed significant growth in the availability and adoption of consumer electric vehicles,
the electromobility industry is in a period of rapid growth. While many additional models are expected to become available
in the next few years, municipal fleets like the City of San Luis Obispo’s are typically comprised of significant numbers of
specialty vehicles including medium and heavy-duty vehicles for which few electric substitutes are currently available from
mass-market suppliers. In cases where electric substitute vehicles will not be commercially available through standard
procurement mechanisms in the near-term, several other options may be worth considering, including:
▪ Partial electrification: One way to reduce emissions on ICE vehicles for which cost -effective EV substitutions are
not available is the electrification of auxiliary loads with stored energy using mobile batteries. Several aerial bucket
Page 136 of 349
25
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FLEET ELECTRIFICATION VEHICLE STUDY
trucks in the Utilities department have been identified as potential candidates. Under this option, traction power
would still be provided by gas or diesel engines, but batteries could be used to reduce idle times, saving fuel and
cutting emissions.
NEXT STEPS
IMMEDIATE (2023-2025) ELECTRIFICATION OPTIONS & TOTAL COST OF OWNERSHIP
A summary of the identified EV alternatives and associated total cost of ownership for immediate vehicle replacements
(2023-2025) is included to guide immediate action by the City of San Luis Obispo. Table 6 summarizes the total upfront
investment and TCO for the ICE and the best fit EV alternative for all vehicles to be replaced for each year. This table also
identifies the total number of vehicles to be electrified, which is consistent with the numbers presented in the
Electrification Timeline. This table only includes vehicles that were identified as a “Best Fit” for Full Electrification. The
number of vehicles to be electrified could be increased if the City confirms feasible models for vehicles in the Potential
Electrification category.
TABLE 6 : UPFRONT C OST & TCO SUMMARY FOR IMMEDIATE VEHICLE ELECTRIFICATION
REPLACEMENT
YEAR
# OF VEHICLES
TO BE
ELECTRIFIED
ICE VEHICLE RECOMMENDED EV ALTERNATIVE
MSRP TCO MSRP TCO
TCO REDUCTION
FROM VEHICLE
ELECTRIFICATION
2023 33 $979,603 $2,090,883 $1,314,722 $1,882,257 $208,626
2024 22 $632,998 $1,390,270 $775,028 $1,160,097 $230,173
2025 15 $448,400 $1,071,686 $587,514 $905,274 $166,412
TOTAL 70 $2,061,001 $4,552,839 $2,677,265 $3,947,628 $605,211
The recommended vehicle replacement timeline detailed in this report aims to ensure the City achieves its goal of reaching
full electrification of light-duty vehicles and 50% electrification of medium- and heavy-duty vehicles by 2030. This is
considered the best-case scenario for the City and may be modified during implementation to account for procurement
challenges and budget limitations. The City may modify the vehicle replacement timeline by editing the replacement year
of each vehicle in the Fleet Electrification Pro Forma, which is a separate Excel-based deliverable.
OTHER NEAR -TERM VEHICLE REPLACEMENTS
About one tenth of the vehicles studied in this analysis do not have a clear electric option currently available in 2023 or
imminently available in 2024 and the City will need to reassess the electrification potential of each of those vehicles as
they come up for replacement. Depending on the vehicle, the City can either pursue an alternative electrification or
emissions reduction option or delay the vehicle replacement and wait for an equivalent EV to become available, even if it
means extending a vehicle’s service life beyond what is optimal.
Page 137 of 349
26
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FLEET ELECTRIFICATION VEHICLE STUDY
In 2023 and 2024 there are 6 vehicles that will come up for replacement that are categorized in the Potential Electrification
or No Electric Options category. For these vehicles, the City can consider the following options to determine the
appropriate course of action.
▪ Option 1 – Reassess the Market: The City can search for available equivalent options to identify any new
models/technologies that have entered the market since the end of 2023.
▪ Option 2 – Vehicle Downsizing: In some cases, the City is already implementing vehicle downsizing , but there is
potential to expand that practice to more vehicles in the fleet. For example, 21 Ford F-250 pick-ups will be replaced
with Ford F-150 Lightnings. Through conversations with City staff operating the pickup trucks, it can then be
determined whether an individual vehicle can be downsized, or if specific operational requirements prevent that.
▪ Option 3 – Delayed Replacement: If no suitable EV option is identified and vehicle downsizing is not an option,
the City can consider keeping the vehicle in the fleet for a year or two more to wait for a viable EV option. The
budget for replacing the existing vehicle could be earmarked for an appropriate EV replacement if it becomes
available during the delay time.
▪ Option 4 – Pilot Chassis Conversion Technology or Less Cost-effective OEM Offering: In cases where there is a
suitable electric option, but that option may be from an aftermarket vendor or is a new EV model that is
significantly more expensive than its ICE counterpart, the City may still want to purchase the EV option to meet
environmental goals and pilot new technologies within the fleet.
Page 138 of 349
THIS PAGE WAS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK.
Page 139 of 349
28
APPENDIX A : VEHICLE INCENTIVES
Page 140 of 349
29
APPENDIX A : VEHICLE INCENTIVES
The City of San Luis Obispo’s efforts toward fleet electrification and installing EV charging infrastructure are eligible
for rebates from the Inflation Reduction Act and the City’s community choice aggregator, Central Coast
Community Energy (CCCE). This section summarizes those funding opportunities.
INFL ATION REDUCTION ACT
New plug-in battery electric vehicles (EVs) purchased in 2023 or after may be eligible for a tax credit from the
Internal Revenue Service (IRS). The Inflation Reduction Act includes a Commercial Clean Vehicle credit, which
applies to both businesses and tax-exempt organizations (such as local governments). For EVs, this credit equals
the lesser of 30% the vehicle’s price or the incremental cost of the vehicle, up to $7,500 for light-duty vehicles
under a GVWR or 14,000 pounds and $40,000 for vehicles above. There is no limit on the number of credits that
can be claimed. There are a few additional requirements, including minimum battery sizes (7 kW h for light-duty
and 15 kWh for medium- and heavy-duty), vehicle use case (the vehicle must be used primarily in the United
States and must not be for resale), and manufacturer. A list of qualified manufacturers may be found here:
https://www.irs.gov/credits-deductions/manufacturers-for-qualified-commercial-clean-vehicle-credit, while
more information on the tax credits available to commercial fleets as a whole may be found here:
https://www.irs.gov/credits-deductions/commercial-clean-vehicle-credit.
CENTR AL COAST COMMUNITY ENERGY (CCCE)
For as long as funds are available, purchase of fleet EVs (light, medium, and heavy duty) are eligible for direct
rebates under CCCE’s Electrify Your Fleet program. The City of SAN LUIS OBISPO is eligible for up to $150,00 0 in
rebates through the program.10
10 https://3cenergy.org/rebates/electrify-your-fleet-2/
Page 141 of 349
30
HYBRID AND ZERO -EMISSION TRUCK AND BUS VOUCHER INCENTIVE PROJECT (HVIP)
Purchasers of EVs and PHEVs, including local governments, can access grant funding provided by California Air
Resource Board (CARB) on a first-come, first-served basis. For FY22-23, the total program funding is $250M.
Eligible vehicles can be found using the online HVIP catalogue. Base funding amounts per gross vehicle weight
rating (GVWR) are included in the table below.11
11 https://californiahvip.org/
Page 142 of 349
31
THIS PAGE WAS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK.
Page 143 of 349
32
APPENDIX B: FLEET DATABASE & TOTAL COST OF OWNERSHIP
APPENDIX B : FLEET DATABASE & DETAILED TCO ANALYSIS (EXCEL ATTACHMENT)
The detailed results of the Total Cost of Ownership calculations have been provided to the City separately from this
document in an Excel spreadsheet. This comprehensive vehicle database allows the City to sort results by any category
necessary including Department and Replacement Year.
Page 144 of 349
THIS PAGE WAS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK.
Page 145 of 349
34
APPENDIX C : COST OF CARBON ABATEMENT
Page 146 of 349
35
APPENDIX C : COST OF CARBON ABATEMENT CALCULATIONS
To provide guidance for the City’s budget towards the most cost-effective vehicles for emissions reductions, the
following tables summarize the marginal cost, or savings, of vehicle electrification on a capital cost and total cost
of ownership basis, the associated carbon reductions, and the cost of carbon abatement on a dollar per ton basis.
Incentives and rebates are included in marginal cost values. The incremental cost of carbon reductions is
calculated for 2023–2030 under the Current Technology and Potential Electrification scenarios described above.
TABLE 7 : INCREMENTAL COST OF CARBON REDUCTION – “BEST FIT” SCENARIO
DEPARTMENT # OF
VEHICLES
CARBON
REDUCTIONS
(MTCO2)
MARGINAL
CAPITAL
COSTS ($)
MARGINAL
TOTAL COST OF
OWNERSHIP
($)
COST OF
ABATEMENT –
CAPITAL COST
($/MTCO2)
COST OF
ABATEMENT –
TCO ($/MTCO2)
2023 – 2025 VEHICLE REPLACEMENTS
POLICE 18 142.14 $123,400 -$189,710 $868 -$1,335
FIRE 4 2.97 $41,271 -$81,033 $13,884 -$27,260
UTILITIES 16 35.26 $121,473 -$150,442 $3,445 -$4,266
PUBLIC WORKS 30 92.90 $318,715 -$171,582 $3,431 -$1,847
IT 2 5.86 $22,300 -$13,026 $3,808 -$2,224
PARKS AND REC 3 4.87 $35,971 -$14,011 $7,392 -$2,879
COMMUNICATIONS 3 1.84 -$3,928 -$24,920 -$2,133 -$13,531
ADMIN 0 0.00 $0 $0 INF INF
2026 – 2030 VEHICLE REPLACEMENTS
POLICE 29 127.68 -$1,740 -$526,385 -$14 -$4,123
FIRE 12 25.73 $113,828 -$508,269 $4,424 -$19,753
UTILITIES 17 41.25 $186,357 -$152,892 $4,518 -$3,707
PUBLIC WORKS 19 79.20 $223,371 -$127,777 $2,820 -$1,613
IT 1 0.46 $17,000 $10,015 $37,361 $22,010
PARKS AND REC 2 6.21 $27,343 -$1,558 $4,404 -$251
COMMUNICATIONS 3 3.80 $15,900 -$13,164 $4,179 -$3,460
ADMIN 1 1 3.50 $13,671 -$674 $3,905
Page 147 of 349
36
TABLE 8 : INCREMENTAL COST OF CARBON REDUCTION – POTENTIAL ELECTRIFICATION SCENARIO
DEPARTMENT # OF
VEHICLES
CARBON
REDUCTIONS
(MTCO2)
MARGINAL
CAPITAL
COSTS ($)
MARGINAL
TOTAL COST OF
OWNERSHIP ($)
COST OF
ABATEMENT
– CAPITAL
COST
($/MTCO2)
COST OF
ABATEMENT
– TCO
($/MTCO2)
2023 – 2025 VEHICLE REPLACEMENTS
POLICE 18 142.14 $123,400 -$189,710 $868 -$1,335
FIRE 4 2.97 $41,271 -$81,033 $13,884 -$27,260
UTILITIES 18 45.49 $273,623 -$102,583 $6,015 -$2,255
PUBLIC WORKS 33 103.28 $560,141 -$64,862 $5,423 -$628
IT 2 5.86 $22,300 -$13,026 $3,808 -$2,224
PARKS AND REC 3 4.87 $35,971 -$14,011 $7,392 -$2,879
COMMUNICATIONS 3 1.84 -$3,928 -$24,920 -$2,133 -$13,531
ADMIN 0 0.00 $0 $0 INF INF
2026 – 2030 VEHICLE REPLACEMENTS
POLICE 32 132.31 $156,910 -$452,926 $1,186 -$3,423
FIRE 12 25.73 $113,828 -$508,269 $4,424 -$19,753
UTILITIES 23 62.50 $714,733 $232,786 $11,435 $3,724
PUBLIC WORKS 26 121.80 $832,222 $254,106 $6,833 $2,086
IT 1 0.46 $17,000 $10,015 $37,361 $22,010
PARKS AND REC 5 28.98 $242,368 $56,099 $8,363 $1,936
COMMUNICATIONS 3 3.80 $15,900 -$13,164 $4,179 -$3,460
ADMIN 1 1 3.50 $13,671 -$674 $3,905
Page 148 of 349
Page | 1
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FLEET ELECTRIFICATION EVI NEEDS REPORT
Fleet Electrification Study
Charging Infrastructure Report
Page 149 of 349
THIS PAGE WAS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK.
Page 150 of 349
Cover photo by Robert Smrekar on Flickr.
REPORT PREPARED BY:
Optony Inc.
5201 Great America Parkway, Suite 320
Santa Clara, CA 95054
www.OptonyUSA.com
March 2023
Page 151 of 349
THIS PAGE WAS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK.
Page 152 of 349
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................................................ 2
BACKGROUND ......................................................................................................................................................................... 4
APPROACH SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................................................ 5
METHODOLOGY ....................................................................................................................................................................... 6
INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDS & CAPITAL COST ESTIMATES ................................................................................................... 11
IMPLEMENTATION OF EV CHARGING INFRASTRUCTURE .................................................................................................. 14
APPENDIX A: FLEET ELECTRIFICATION PRO FORMA........................................................................................................... 16
APPENDIX B: INCREMENTAL COST OF CARBON REDUCTION ............................................................................................ 17
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE 1: CUMULATIVE VEHICLE ELECTRIFICATION BY FACILITY ...................................................................................... 4
FIGURE 2: EVI ANALYSIS APPROACH .................................................................................................................................... 5
FIGURE 3: ESTIMATED EV CHARGING INFRASTRUCTURE COSTS (2025 – BASE NEEDS) ............................................. 12
FIGURE 4: ESTIMATED EV CHARGING INFRASTRUCTURE COSTS (2030 - BASE NEEDS WITH BUILDING UPGRADES) 13
ACRONYMS & DEFINITIONS
EVI Electric vehicle infrastructure; referring to the charging station, required mounting, conduit,
transformers and other balance of system equipment needed to supply electricity to electric
vehicles.
kW Kilowatt; a unit of power equal to 1,000 Watts; when used for solar PV system sizes, refers to
the maximum instantaneous output of a solar panel (module) or system (for larger PV systems
rating is generally in MW, Megawatt, or 1,000 kW).
kWh Kilowatt-hour: a unit of energy equal to 3,600 kilojoules, or equivalent to the product of 1 kW of
constant power used or produced, over 1 hour.
Levelized Cost of
Charging (LCOC)
Levelized cost of charging is a metric used to compare the cost of serving EV load across
multiple sites with different metering scenarios, load management strategies and DER mixes. It
is calculated by dividing the total annual cost of serving load ($) by the total load served (kWh).
Managed Charging The practice of adjusting an EV charging profile to optimize for cost and charge when electricity
is cheaper or reduce coincident peak load.
Time-of-Use (TOU) A utility billing structure for electricity where the retail price of electricity varies depending on
the time of day, time of year and/or day of the week in which the electricity is being used.
Unmanaged
Charging
The practice of allowing EV charging profiles to match natural driver/vehicle behavior, such that
charging begins at the time of plug in and ends at the driver plug out time, or when the vehicle
battery is fully charged (whichever occurs first).
Page 153 of 349
1
THIS PAGE WAS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK.
Page 154 of 349
2
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report accompanies the vehicle study for the City of San Luis Obispo’s fleet electrification plan. The City’s has set a
goal to transition its municipal fleet by reaching 100% electrification of light-duty vehicles and 50% electrification of
medium- and heavy-duty vehicles by 2030. As a result, there is a need for the City to install EV charging infrastructure at
its primary domicile locations. Three sites were identified by the City as priority sites that will support a majority of the
vehicle electrification over the next two decades. Those priority sites are the Corp Yard, 919 Palm Parking Garage, and Fire
Station 1, which currently serve as domicile facilities for the majority of the fleet, and 1109 Walnut, as well as the future
new Public Safety Center.
Analysis suggests that across all sites 31 Level 2 ports and 6 Level 3 ports would be required by 2025 and an incremental
37 Level 2 ports and 15 Level 3 ports by 2030. Installation of the 89 total ports is estimated to cost approximately
$5,327,288 through 2030 and will support the charging of 211 fleet vehicles located at 10 sites. The total EV charging
infrastructure project cost will be approximately $2,883,769 after incentives.
The cost estimates are subject to variability and uncertainty given the rapid expansion and evolving nature of the EV
industry. Recent research has shown that charging infrastructure costs are subject to a similar experience curve as t he
solar industry, with material costs expected to decline over time, while soft costs such as site assessment, utility
interconnection, and permitting remain high, unpredictable, and site-specific.1 In order to minimize costs and ensure the
successful implementation of EV charging infrastructure, it is recommended that the City engage in planning and
coordination with stakeholders, including PG&E, during the implementation of the enclosed recommendations. It is also
recommended that the City utilize incentives and grants from PG&E, the State, and Federal governments to offset the
costs of EV charging infrastructure installation.
Overall, the installation of EV charging infrastructure for the City’s municipal fleet is a critical step in reducing carbon
emissions and leading by example to promote the use of clean energy transportation. By following the enclosed
recommendations, the City can achieve its goal of 100% electric light-duty and 50% electric medium- and heavy-duty
vehicles by 2030.
On the following page, Table 1 summarizes infrastructure needs across 11 domicile facilities based on 2025 and 2030
infrastructure buildout, which are detailed in this report. In the table, the infrastructure needs in 2030 are cumulative and
include 2025 needs. It is assumed that the majority of make-ready infrastructure costs are incurred in the first phase of
construction (2023-2025) and additional charging stations are added by 2030.
1 Chris Nelder and Emily Rogers, Reducing EV Charging Infrastructure Costs, Rocky Mountain Institute, 2019, https://rmi.org/ev-charging-costs
Page 155 of 349
3
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FLEET ELECTRIFICATION EVI NEEDS REPORT
PROJECTED INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDS BY SITE
This section summarizes infrastructure needs for 2025 and 2030 across all domicile facilities. In Table 1, the infrastructure needs in 2030 are cumulative and include
2025 needs.
TABLE 1: SUMMARY OF INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDS
SITE
2025 2030
# OF EVs (%
OF TOTAL) # OF PORTS VEHICLE TO
PORT RATIO
# OF EVs (%
OF TOTAL) # OF PORTS VEHICLE TO
PORT RATIO
919 PW ADMIN 12 (80%)
3 x 6.6 kW
4 x 11.5 kW
1 x 25 kW
1.5 15 (100%)
7 x 6.6 kW
4 x 11.5 kW
2 x 25 kW
1.15
CORP YARD 33 (52%)
2 x 6.6 kW
12 x 11.5 kW
1 x 25 kW
2.2 63 (100%)
4 x 6.6 kW
22 x 11.5 kW
2 x 25 kW
1 x Freewire
2.2
LAGUNA LAKE GOLF COURSE 0 (0%) 2 x 11.5 kW 0 1 (100%) 2 x 11.5 kW 0.5
MARSH PARKING STRUCTURE 2 (50%) 1 x 6.6 kW 2.0 4 (100%) 1 x 6.6 kW
1 x 11.5 kW 2.0
NEW POLICE DEPARTMENT 0 (0%) No ports in 2025 0 30 (100%)
8 x 6.6 kW
1 x 11.5 kW
8 x 25 kW
1.8
SLO SWIM CENTER 3 (100%) 1 x 6.6 kW
1 x 11.5 kW 1.5 3 (100%) 1 x 6.6 kW
1 x 11.5 kW 1.5
WASTEWATER PLANT (WRRF) 5 (50%)
1 x 6.6 kW
1 x 11.5 kW 2.5 10 (100%) 1 x 6.6 kW
1 x 11.5 kW 5.0
WATER TREATMENT PLANT (WTP) 1 (33%) 1 x 11.5 kW 1 3 (100%) 1 x 11.5 kW 3.0
FIRE STATION 1 4 (25%) 1 x 6.6 kW
2 x 11.5 kW 1.3 16 (100%) 7 x 6.6 kW
8 x 11.5 kW 1.1
842 PACIFIC PARKING 5 (71%) No ports No new ports
recommended 0 (100%) No ports No new ports
recommended
1109 WALNUT PD 11 (55%) 4 x 25 kW 2.75 20 (100%) 2 x 6.6 kW
8 x 25 kW 2.0
Page 156 of 349
4
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FLEET ELECTRIFICATION EVI NEEDS REPORT
BACKGROUND
The report provides an analysis of the future electric vehicle infrastructure (EVI) needs across ten of the City of San Luis
Obispo’s fleet domicile facilities. Additional analysis is provided for priority sites expected to house most electric vehicles
purchased by the City. The sites chosen for additional study are the Corp Yard, 919 Palm Parking, Fire Station 1, 1109
Walnut, and the Public Safety Center after it is constructed. The report builds directly on previous analysis by the Project
Team that identified vehicle electrification opportunities and a vehicle electrification timeline for the City’s fleet. Figure 1
summarizes the vehicle electrification timeline and growth in annual electricity load for the City’s domicile facilities. The
infrastructure needs identified for each site are based on the timeline below and focused on 2025 and 2030.
As presented in the report, vehicles are assigned to different domicile facilities by Optony. Though some of these vehicles
may occasionally be parked in alternative locations, for clarity they are currently sorted according to their initial domicile
assignment in the year they are electrified, per Optony’s recommendations based on the City’s requests and needs . For
example, police vehicles may domicile at 1109 Walnut, 919 Palm Parking, and City Hall due to construction at the current
Police Station location. Those police vehicles electrifying before the completion of the new P ublic Safety Center building
are assigned in this report to those facilities, while police vehicles electrifying after the completion of the new Public Safety
Center are assigned to that facility. Despite this, the full EV load that the new Public Safety Center will eventually need to
shoulder is being accounted for in making charger recommendations for that facility.
FIGURE 1: CUMULATIVE VEHICLE ELECTRIFICATIO N BY FACILITY
Page 157 of 349
5
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FLEET ELECTRIFICATION EVI NEEDS REPORT
APPROACH SUMMARY
Figure 2, below, outlines the general approach used in the detailed EVI analysis. Each step in this approach is further
discussed in the following sections.
FIGURE 2 : EVI ANALYS IS APPROACH
•Based on the Current Technology Plus scenario
identified in the vehicle analysis, calculate
annual expected EV charging needs (kWh) by
domicile facility
Aggregation of Energy
Needs by Site
•Analyze fueling transaction reports, telematic
data and qualitative data on vehicle operations
to determine accurate vehicle duty cycles,
minimum dwell times and probabilistic
distributions of charging times
Duty Cycle Analysis
•Based on duty cycle analysis, calculate
required minimum port ratings (kW) for each
site, or a mix of port ratings depending on
vehicle type
Identify Required Port
Ratings
•Leverage probablistic charging distributions to
model 10-year load growth from vehicle
electrification down to the 15-min interval
(only completed for priority sites)
Load Modeling
•Determine amount (# of ports) of charging
infrastructure required to support future load
and estimate cost of required infrastructure
Charging Infrastructure
Needs Identification &
Cost Estimate
•Calculate annual energy costs associated with
operation of required infrastructure and EV
load growth based on relevant electrical rates
and determine the levelized cost of charging
on a per kWh basis
Energy Cost Simulation
Page 158 of 349
6
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FLEET ELECTRIFICATION EVI NEEDS REPORT
METHODOLOGY
When determining required charging infrastructure to support fleet electrification, there are two primary constraints that
must be solved for:
• First, charging ports must have power high enough to charge vehicles during their dwell time. Appropriate port
ratings (kW) may vary by vehicle type or use case.
• Second, there must be enough charging ports to provide sufficient energy to every vehicle parked at each domicile
facility.
Solving for both constraints enables site-specific recommendations of charging infrastructure needs to be made for every
domicile facility based on the energy needs and operating patterns of the vehicles at a given site, ena bling a fleet to cost-
effectively plan for implementation.
Since the purpose of long-term charging infrastructure planning is to enable San Luis Obispo to cost-effectively phase
implementation of charging infrastructure with future needs in mind, this analysis relies on the “Current Technology Plus”
scenario for vehicle electrification identified during the vehicle analysis. While it is likely that, due to expected expansion
of medium- and heavy-duty electric vehicle options, San Luis Obispo will not purchase the exact electric models identified
during the vehicle analysis, the required energy needs calculated will remain reflective of future needs. Thus, leveraging
an aggressive vehicle electrification scenario ensures that charging infrastructure recommendations are sufficient to
support all possible vehicle electrification and avoid the need for expensive retrofits.
DATA SOURCES
Two primary data sources were used to assess the dwell times, identify required port ratings and calculate charging
probabilities for San Luis Obispo’s fleet.
▪ Fueling Transactions: A record of every fueling transaction completed by existing ICE vehicles in 2019 and 2021
was analyzed to inform required port ratings and provide insight into when vehicles currently fuel. Based on th e
best fit EV for each existing vehicle, existing fueling events were converted to charging events to assess minimum,
maximum, and average charging times that could be expected if each existing vehicle were converted to electric
and continued to fuel as it does today. Additionally, the time distribution and length of these synthetic charging
events were used to create charging probabilities (discussed further below).
▪ Staff Interviews: Interviews with fleet staff were used to supplemental qualitative informa tion on how vehicles
operate. Interviews focused on areas that were not reflected in the quantitative data collected, namely emergency
operations of Utility vehicles and shift patterns of Police patrol vehicles.
DUTY CYCLE ANALYSIS & PORT POWER RATINGS
Fueling transaction data and staff interviews were leveraged in different ways to analyze vehicle duty cycles in order to
identify dwell times and combined with expected per vehicle energy needs to identify required port ratings for e ach
facility. In some cases, multiple port ratings were identified for a single facility due to differences in the operations of
subsets of vehicles located at a particular facility. For police patrol vehicles in the City’s fleet, average dwell times were
approximately 12 hours between shifts. Dwell times were compared with vehicle energy needs to identify a common port
Page 159 of 349
7
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FLEET ELECTRIFICATION EVI NEEDS REPORT
power rating needed to provide the required daily energy during an average dwell time. For the Corp Yard, a facility with
many medium- and heavy-duty vehicles, these initial recommendations were refined based on vehicle type. Fueling
transactions converted to charging events were analyzed to filter out vehicles, usually those with large battery capacities,
that may require charge times longer than the average dwell time in certain instances when the battery is depleted. The
result was identification of two subsets of vehicles that required ports with higher power than the initial 6.6 kW
recommendation.
POLICE VEHICLES
Due to their unique duty cycles and operational demands, vehicles in the police department were analyzed separately.
These vehicles were split into two categories reflecting different duty cycles: admin and patrol. Admin units are assumed
to follow similar duty cycles as a standard vehicle in the City’s fleet, with daily driving and long overnight dwell time. Patrol
vehicles were assumed to require charge times that could be achieved during an off shift . An analysis of the daily energy
needs for special units indicated that 25 kW ports would be sufficient to provide every vehicle’s average daily energy
requirement in about 1.5 hours, and full charge (from 0% to 100%) in approximately 3 hours.
A summary of the vehicle dwell times identified by facility is provided in Table 2.
TABLE 2: VEHICLE DWELL TIME BY SITE
SITE DWELL TIME
POLICE DEPARTMENT 11-13 hours between shifts, periodic emergency responses
CORP YARD
No dwell times calculated (no telematic data)
MARSH PARKING STRUCTURE
919 PW ADMIN
SLO SWIM CENTER
WASTEWATER PLANT (WRRF)
WATER TREATMENT PLANT (WTP)
FIRE STATION 1
SLO TRANSIT (NO VEHICLES)
MANAGED CHARGING POTENTIAL
For many fleets, employing managed charging strategies that use the charging station software to limit the hours in the
day when vehicles can charge are effective for reducing the cost of charging. In the case of San Luis Obispo, however,
modeling for EV charging was based off an average cost of electricity at each domicile . As such, a managed charging
scenario may result in additional savings beyond what is reported here.
LOAD MODELING & OVERALL INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDS
After determining port ratings, the number of ports required must be calculated. On facilities with a small number of
vehicles this was determined by adding charging ports and manually calculating the minimum number of ports that could
provide the required daily energy in the expected dwell time. For larger sites, a sophisticated probabilistic load modeling
technique was used, as described below.
Page 160 of 349
8
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FLEET ELECTRIFICATION EVI NEEDS REPORT
CHARGING PROBABILITIES
To enable accurate modeling of load growth over time and identification of total charging infrastructure needs in 2025
and 2030 at sites with many vehicles, a site-specific, annual, probabilistic method was used. Depending on the
characteristics of the vehicles domiciled at each site, the distribution of fueling transactions and the distribution when
vehicles are parked determined from the telematic data were converted to a probability distribution that indicated the
chance that a vehicle was charging in each 15-min interval of a given week. For emergency vehicles, such as those in the
Police Department, there is limited flexibility available in vehicle fueling patterns. Given operational requirements,
vehicles, even after conversion to electric, must charge in the same way that they are fueling today. Emergency vehicles
do not have 12 hours overnight to charge. As such, the distribution of current fueling transactions is the most appropriate
data source to determine when those vehicles will be charging once they are converted to electric. In contrast, vehicles
without daily emergency response requirements, such as those in the Public Works department, have significant flexibility
to change fueling patterns once they are electrified. For these vehicles, the distribution of when vehicles are parked is the
most appropriate data source to determine when those vehicles will be charging once they are converted to electric.
The weekly charging probability profile represents an average expectation for which time intervals are most and least
likely to be used for charging by a vehicle during a work week. Since probability distributions differ depending on the
number of EVs at a site, and that number is expected to increase each year, different distributions were created for each
year at each site. Once probability profiles were established, projected EV load profiles were constructed by site and by
year based on the total number of vehicles, required port ratings and annual energy requirements of those vehicles.
LOAD PROFILE BUILDER
In order to simulate the electric load profiles from charging of a future electric vehicle fleet, the Project Team utilized an
internal modeling tool to build time dependent load profiles. The load profile builder leverages the weekly probability
profiles discussed above to take an index of 672 numbers (the number of 15-minute intervals in a week), where each
number represents the likelihood that a random charging interval will occur on that day and time. Once the charging
probability indices are determined, the user provides additional inputs to the load profile builder. The load profile builder
was given these fixed inputs for each department site in each year studied:
▪ Number of EVs at each facility2
▪ The total annual amount of electrical energy needed to fuel all EVs domiciled at each facility from 2023 to 2035
▪ Maximum number of ports available
▪ The power rating of each port, as determined for each site, with different port ratings for different sub-classes of
fleet vehicles, as appropriate3
▪ The site’s rate structure, if applicable
▪ Whether the load profile should be built to allow unrestricted charging according to driver behavior and ignore
TOU pricing impacts; or manage charging to avoid highest TOU cost impacts
▪ The time at which overnight and weekend charging treatment should be a ssumed for vehicles which are
exclusively used during normal business hours, and parked during nights and weekends
These choices are given to the load profile builder as inputs in a control panel of a spreadsheet -based simulator. Over the
2 This determines the maximum number of vehicles charging at any given time, since the number of ports active is assumed to be less than or equal to the number of
vehicles.
3 Example: Police patrol vehicles have a different dwell times and behavior from Po lice administrative vehicles and required higher powered ports
Page 161 of 349
9
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FLEET ELECTRIFICATION EVI NEEDS REPORT
course of a non-leap year, there are 35,040 charging intervals.4 For each charging port (as based on inputs given above)
the load profile builder creates a vector of 35,040 intervals and repeatedly generates a signal of whether that port should
be active or inactive based on the probabilities given at the outset. The load profile builder then takes the sum of all
charging in all intervals across all ports. The user is given this annual total along with an error signal which compares the
total delivered energy to the required annual energy as determined in the fixed inputs. If the total amount of energy
delivered is below the amount needed, an adjustment factor is increased to boost the utilization of each port in proportion
to its probability profile. This boost forces more charging events into the most preferred charging intervals as determined
by driver behavior from the data sources described above. However, if the total energy allotted by the load profile builder
exceeds the amount of energy needed the user can decrease the number of ports or manage charging by restricting
charging only to certain intervals (e.g., overnight and weekends).
TOTAL PORT NEEDS
From the simulations of annual charging completed for each site, the total port needs for each power rating can be
identified by analyzing the maximum number of coincident ports in use. To account for variations in vehicle charging
needs, a safety factor of 20% is applied to the maximum coincident port number to determine the final recommended
port counts.
4 365 days per year x 24 hours per day x 4 intervals per hour (with each interval at 15 minutes)
Page 162 of 349
10
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FLEET ELECTRIFICATION EVI NEEDS REPORT
INFRASTRUCTURE COST ASSUMPTIONS
The cost assumptions for charging hardware and installation costs in this study are specifically for California and are
primarily drawn from a 2019 study by the International Council on Clean Transportation.5 This study aggregated data from
past studies, as well as costs reported to public utility commissions via utility programs. Data on charger component costs
aggregated through industry interviews by the Rocky Mountain Institute confirmed that the costs in the ICCT study were
in an accurate range. Representative of the limited data available, both the ICCT and RMI studies built significantly on data
from a 2013 Electric Power Research Institute study.6 Given the age of the EPRI data, costs figures may have fallen in the
intervening years. However, the cost range remains sufficiently broad to warrant a conservative approach.7 Table 3
includes a summary of the cost figures used to calculate total cost.
TABLE 3: SUMMARY OF EVI COST ASSUMPTIONS
CHARGER HARDWARE COSTS
(PER PORT) INSTALLATION COSTS
CHARGER TYPE COST ($) # OF PORTS
INSTALLED
L2 COST PER
PORT (6.6 KW)
L2 COST PER
PORT (11.5 KW)
DCFC COST PER
PORT (25 KW)
FREEWIRE COST
PER PORT
LEVEL 2 (6.6 KW) $1,925 1 $39,600 $39,600 $52,600 $46,400
LEVEL 2 (11.5 KW) $2,500 2 $19,800 $19,800 $49,600 $43,400
DC FAST (25 KW) $15,746 3-5 $24,400 $24,400 $48,600 $42,400
FREEWIRE $172,000 >6 $17,800 $17,800 $47,600 $41,400
The hardware costs used are per port and assume networked capability. Installation costs include labor, permits, taxes
and the cost of make-ready electric infrastructure on the customer side of the meter. Make -ready electric infrastructure
on the customer side of the meter generally includes wiring, conduits, trenching, service panels and switchgear upgrades
(when needed) and can vary significantly from site to site.8 The cost figures above include only wiring, conduit and service
panel costs. Trenching costs for installation are not considered in the cost estimates calculated for this study because site
layouts have not been determined.
Cost assumptions are used to provide a starting point in estimating infrastructure costs. City staff can adjust cost
assumptions for key sites in the Fleet Electrification Pro-Forma accompanying this report.
ELECTRIC VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE INCENTIVES & FINANCING
There are regional and state-wide efforts in California to provide incentives to accelerate electric vehicle infrastructure
deployment. One opportunity is the statewide Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) which provides a market-based
mechanism for ongoing operational incentives to off-set energy costs. The City can earn credits based on the number of
kilowatt hours dispensed by City-owned EVI and monetize those to reduce operational costs. Additionally, the City can
receive incentives through its CCA, Central Coast Community Energy (CCCE) and the SLO County Air Pollution Control
5 Michael Nicholas, Estimating electric vehicle charging infrastructure costs across major U.S. metropolitan areas, International Council on Clean Transportation,
August 2019, https://theicct.org/sites/default/files/publications/ICCT_EV_Charging_Cost_20190813.pdf
6 Electric Power Research Institute, Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment Installed Cost An alysis, 2013, https://www.epri.com/research/products/000000003002000577
7 Initial data reported to the California Energy Commission via the CALeVIP project shows even higher installation costs than assumed in this report. However, these
costs result from a small sample size that CEC indicates may have been skewed by a few high-cost sites. As a result, these costs have not been included in this study.
The data is available here: https://www.energy.ca.gov/programs-and-topics/programs/clean-transportation-program/california-electric-vehicle/calevip-level.
8 Reducing EV Charging Infrastructure Costs, Rocky Mountain Institute, 2019
Page 163 of 349
11
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FLEET ELECTRIFICATION EVI NEEDS REPORT
District (APCD). SLO APCD incentives cover up to Level 3 chargers for public agencies, and cover 50% of installation,
engineering, design, and equipment costs for non-low-income communities. Service upgrades may not be covered by
APCD incentives and are not assumed to be covered in cost modelling. Incentives available to the City for fleet EVI are
estimated at $2,443,519 or 45.9% of the total EVI project cost.
In addition to incentives, increasingly available 3rd-party financing options for fleets may be useful for San Luis Obispo to
address capital costs required for charging infrastructure. Some charging infrastructure developers and vendors offer
“charging as a service” options that enable a fleet to defer capital costs of infrastructure in favor of shifting those costs to
the operating budget and paying them off on a per kWh basis over time. Charging as a service can be explored further as
the City explores procurement options.
INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDS & CAPITAL COST ESTIMATES
Unlike vehicle electrification, which has the potential for total cost of ownership savings, the infrastructure required to
charge electric vehicles is a cost that the City of San Luis Obispo is required to bear in support of their fleet electrification
goals. A primary challenge when identifying charging infrastructure needs is identifying the minimum number of charging
ports at each location required to satisfy the fleet’s daily energy needs while balancing operational considerations such as
dwell time. One way to minimize the total cost of EVI is to minimize installation costs through futureproofing. Instead of
installing a handful of charging stations to meet immediate need and then having to remove those, expand power capacity
and re-install more chargers as fleet electrification continues, total costs can be minimized by installing make -ready
electrical infrastructure to support future charging needs at the time of initial installation. Long -term planning of charging
infrastructure allows fleets to futureproof effectively.
OPERATIONAL CONSIDERATIONS OF VEHICLE TO PORT RATIOS
For every domicile facility considered, the recommendations indicate a vehicle to port ratio greater than 1:1.
Implementing vehicle to charger ratios higher than 1:1 minimizes EVI hardware and installation costs but has operational
considerations, as not every vehicle can be plugged in at the same time. This challenge can be managed in a variety of
ways ranging from staff training to software solutions. A first solution is to recognize that during standard operations, the
City’s vehicles do not need to be charged every night. San Luis Obispo is about 13 square miles in area and it is important
to recognize that, especially as electric vehicle ranges increase, the common perception that EVs need to charge daily is a
misconception. Across the sites analyzed in this report, the average daily energy needs per vehicle ranges from 3.3-15.28
kWh per day, with a maximum of 15.28 kWh per day at the Police Department. In contrast, the vehicle types modeled
have between 12-138 kWh battery capacities. This is a clear indication that the majority of vehicles in the City’s fleet will
not be required to charge on a daily basis.
A second option that may be appropriate for large sites , such as the Corp Yard or new Public Safety Center, that require
more complex management is to have additional staff on hand that rotate the vehicles overnight.
Finally, the recommendations provided below are for “fully powered” ports, meaning charging ports that have sufficient
circuit capacity to provide a power output at their nameplate capacity. In some cases, it may be advantageous for the City
to add additional charging ports, without taking the capital-intensive step of expanding the recommended power capacity,
to enable more vehicle to be plugged in at once and leverage software to balance charging across ports .
Page 164 of 349
12
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FLEET ELECTRIFICATION EVI NEEDS REPORT
PROJECTED INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDS: COSTS
The section presents projected electric vehicle infrastructure costs for each site based on build out to meet 2030 needs.
The costs listed are total costs for a given site and are not reflective of project-specific costs if the San Luis Obispo pursues
phased implementation of the required charging infrastructure. All charts are after incentives.
Figure 3 summarizes the estimated costs by component across all sites for base infrastructure needs in 2025. Costs include
all charging station hardware and installation costs, as well as costs for procurement management (as applicable) and
estimated overhead for Public Works staff.
FIGURE 3 : ESTIMATED EV CHARGING INFRASTRUCTURE COSTS (2025 – BASE NEEDS )
Beyond costs for charging hardware, conduit, wiring and trenching, additional electrical infrastructure upgrades to
building equipment can add cost if charging infrastructure is connected to the building meter , or a new service is needed.
Table 4 summarizes the remaining power capacity on each facility’s main switchgear compared to the additional power
needed in the recommended charging scenario. The charging needs of the Police Department are listed under the 919
Palm Parking, 1109 Walnut and Corp Yard. This review of the City of San Luis Obispo’s domicile facilities indicated that
current power capacity at Fire Station 1, Corp Yard, and 919 Palm Parking is not sufficient to support all future charging.
This means that switchgear upgrades or a software solution such as adaptive load management will be required,
depending on the needs of the site. Adaptive load management is a solution that leverages software to balance the power
a set of charging stations is drawing to ensure that the total draw never exceeds the building capacity. While costs for load
management software vary based on power and quantity of chargers, it is safe to say that the solution can be a less capital-
intensive than a service upgrade, but requires the ability to curtail charging ports, which is not recommended for police
vehicles.
Page 165 of 349
13
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FLEET ELECTRIFICATION EVI NEEDS REPORT
TABLE 4: REMAINING POWER CAPACITY VS . POWER NEEDED
SITE NAME ESTIMATED CAPACITY
AVAILABLE (KW)
2040 CHARGING
NEEDS (kW)
SUFFICIENT
CAPACITY?
GOLF COURSE Unknown 23 TBD
WATER TREATMENT PLANT Unknown 11.5 TBD
SLO SWIM CENTER 36.23 18.1 Yes
MARSH PARKING LOT 80.83 18.1 Yes
WASTEWATER PLANT Unknown 18.1 TBD
FIRE STATION 1 19.03 138.2 No
CORP YARD 129.63 337.1 No
919 PW ADMIN 13.17 142.2 No
1109 WALNUT Unknown 213.2 TBD
Figure 4 summarizes the estimated costs by component across all sites for base infrastructure needs in 2030, with the
addition of estimated building electrical capacity upgrades.
FIGURE 4 : ESTIMATED EV CHARGING INFRASTRUCTURE COSTS (2030 - BASE NEEDS WITH BUILDING UPGRADES )
UTILITY UPGRADE COSTS
If the required charging infrastructure exceeds the capacity of the nearest transformer on the distribution system, m ake-
ready costs on the utility side of the meter have the potential to exceed costs on the customer side of the meter. All site
needs should be reviewed by the City to determine if additional upgrades may be needed to support charging.
Page 166 of 349
14
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FLEET ELECTRIFICATION EVI NEEDS REPORT
IMPLEMENTATION OF EV CHARGING INFRASTRUCTURE
It is crucial that the City act on immediate term recommendations for EV charging infrastructure to ensure there is sufficien t charging
capacity for the fleet as it transitions to EVs. Because the City already has some EVI installed, the recommendations within this report
consider 2025 to be the construction year for immediate needs, although infrastructure can be installed sooner if preferred.
The Pro Forma, found in Appendix A of this report, details the cost estimates for each phase of construction (2025 and 2030), along
with recommended equipment for each site. Details from the Pro Forma can be used by the City to determine project budget and
informing the procurement process, such as publishing a request for proposals for design or design and build.
RECOMMENDED 2025 EV CHARGING INFRASTRUCTURE
SITE # OF PORTS FOR 2025
# OF PORTS FOR MAKE
READY (2025
CONSTRUCTION)
919 PW ADMIN
3 x 6.6 kW
4 x 11.5 kW
1 x 25 kW
7 x 6.6 kW
4 x 11.5 kW
2 x 25 kW
CORP YARD
2 x 6.6 kW
12 x 11.5 kW
1 x 25 kW
4 x 6.6 kW
22 x 11.5 kW
2 x 25 kW
1 x Freewire
LAGUNA LAKE GOLF COURSE 2 x 11.5 kW 2 x 11.5 kW
MARSH PARKING STRUCTURE 1 x 6.6 kW 1 x 6.6 kW
1 x 11.5 kW
NEW POLICE DEPARTMENT None
4 x 6.6 kW
1 x 11.5 kW
8 x 25 kW
SLO SWIM CENTER 1 x 6.6 kW
1 x 11.5 kW
1 x 6.6 kW
1 x 11.5 kW
WASTEWATER PLANT (WRRF) 1 x 6.6 kW
1 x 11.5 kW
1 x 6.6 kW
1 x 11.5 kW
WATER TREATMENT PLANT (WTP) 1 x 11.5 kW 1 x 11.5 kW
FIRE STATION 1 1 x 6.6 kW
2 x 11.5 kW
7 x 6.6 kW
8 x 11.5 kW
842 PACIFIC PARKING None None
1109 WALNUT 4 x 25 kW 2 x 6.6 kW
8 x 25 kW
Page 167 of 349
THIS PAGE WAS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK.
Page 168 of 349
APPENDIX A: FLEET ELECTRIFICATION PRO FORMA (EXCEL ATTACHMENT)
The City of San Luis Obispo fleet electrification pro forma has been provided to the City as a separate Excel attachment.
APPENDIX A: FLEET ELECTRIFICATION PRO FORMA
Page 169 of 349
APPENDIX B: INCREMENTAL COST OF CARBON REDUCTION FROM FLEET ELECTRIFICATION
TIME PERIOD
CARBON
EMISSIONS
REDUCED (MTCO2)
MARGINAL
CAPITAL COST ($)
MARGINAL
TCO ($)
CHARGING
INFRASTRUCTURE
COSTS ($)
ESTIMATED COST OF
CARBON REDUCTION
($/MTCO2)
2023-2025 264.97 $954,249 $(377,749) $1,952,774 $5,944
2026-2030 380.2 $2,106,633 $(422,028) $3,294,640 $7,555
APPENDIX B: INCREMENTAL COST OF CARBON REDUCTION
Page 170 of 349