Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “FINANCE”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 199 records · Page 11
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2014

In Search of the Economic Sustainability of Hadron Therapy: The Real Cost of Setting Up and Operating a Hadron Facility

Purpose: To determine the treatment cost and required reimbursement for a new hadron therapy facility, considering different technical solutions and financing methods. Methods and Materials: The 3 technical solutions analyzed are a carbon only (COC), proton only (POC), and combined (CC) center, each operating 2 treatment rooms and assumed to function at full capacity. A business model defines the required reimbursement and analyzes the financial implications of setting up a facility over time; activity-based costing (ABC) calculates the treatment costs per type of patient for a center in a steady state of operation. Both models compare a private, full-cost approach with public sponsoring, only taking into account operational costs. Results: Yearly operational costs range between €10.0M (M = million) for a publicly sponsored POC to €24.8M for a CC with private financing. Disregarding inflation, the average treatment cost calculated with ABC (COC: €29,450; POC: €46,342; CC: €46,443 for private financing; respectively €16,059, €28,296, and €23,956 for public sponsoring) is slightly lower than the required reimbursement based on the business model (between €51,200 in a privately funded POC and €18,400 in COC with public sponsoring). Reimbursement for privately financed centers is very sensitive to a delay in commissioning and to the interest rate. Higher throughput and hypofractionation have a positive impact on the treatment costs. Conclusions: Both calculation methods are valid and complementary. The financially most attractive option of a publicly sponsored COC should be balanced to the clinical necessities and the sociopolitical context.

62 RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE↗
DOE OSTI2018

Financial and Operational Bundling Strategies for Sustainable Micro-Grid Business Models

One of the biggest barriers to the scale up of mini-grids in Sub Sahara Africa ('SSA') is access to finance. While there are plenty of government and donor-led initiatives, private investment in the mini-grid sector has been slow to take off because of the high level of risk to reward and the relatively high transaction costs compared to larger grid-tied projects. Specific challenges for mini-grids include policy and regulatory risk, a lack of proven business models, and uncertainty about demand and the ability and willingness of customers to pay. Bundling or aggregation of mini-grids is one potential solution to these challenges. At its simplest, bundling means combining projects or different aspects of projects (eg. financial, operational and service) into a portfolio to create economies of scale (eg. lower costs, mitigation of risks, reaching an investment size that is attractive to more financiers.) There are two main types of bundling: Operational bundling - aggregation of similar projects (eg. similar business model, geographical area, technology or customer type) in order to reduce development and operating costs, - Financial bundling - aggregation of projects into a portfolio in order to attract more private investors through the larger ticket size and portfolio de-risking. This report looks at the different mini-grid business and financing models, and the opportunities and challenges around financial bundling. It looks at techniques for bundling through donors and national governments such as tenders, auctions and results based financing. It considers financial pooling mechanisms, including funds for mini-grid growth and end user financing, and financial products for de-risking mini-grid investments. Finally, there are three developer case studies of financial bundling of mini-grids.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2012

Sun City Progress Report: Policy Effects on Photovoltaic Adoption for City Planning

This progress report documents the Sun City modeling approach, intended to be an analytic tool for city planners. It is midway in development and this report provides the design basis to provide the mathematics for policy considerations applied to PV market acceleration. It assesses the effects on market diffusion for nine commonly used policies: cash incentives, third party financing, group purchase programs, community solar projects, feed-in-tariffs, property assessed clean energy financing, low interest loans, property and sales tax incentives, and streamlined PV permitting processes. Generic forms of all of these policies are modeled in a system dynamics PowerSim Studio TM model using a concept called the photovoltaic favorability (PVF). PVF is equal to the difference between the ratio of conventional electricity costs to levelized electricity costs of a PV system and four barrier ratios. The barriers are present to model inhibiting influences on human decisions and financial limitations. They include down payment costs, month to month payment costs of financing, time to net profit, and time to lower payments. Each barrier term is divided by a tolerance term which represents the potential that consumers of the region can typically invest. PVF is quantified across a range of limited budget financing and cash incentives options which are then consumed from greatest PVF to least PVF. Finding the overall PVF requires iteration on a variation of the Bass diffusion model. This iterative scheme is tied in a feed-back loop to local and national PV learning curves which in turn quantify reductions in the cost of PV for future time steps based on user input learning rates. The modeling has been wrapped into a graphical user interface which will allow city planners to easily compare and demonstrate multiple scenarios. Data for the DOE sponsored Solar America Cities and for Albuquerque, New Mexico has been entered into the model in order to minimize data collection efforts by city planners.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2018

Lessons in Commercial PACE Leadership: The Path from Legislation to Launch

Property Assessed Clean Energy (PACE) financing enables building owners to finance energy efficiency, renewable energy, and, in some states, non-energy building improvements through a voluntary special assessment on their properties. For commercial buildings, there are many benefits to using Commercial PACE (C-PACE) financing. Still, using C-PACE financing is a multi-step process and involves diverse stakeholders (see Figure ES-1 for a simplified overview), and the process may vary depending on the state and policy context. The primary audience for this report, Lessons in Commercial PACE Leadership, is state and local decision makers that seek an informed, objective perspective of what it takes to launch a C-PACE program. The report is specifically for those states with enabling legislation and program sponsors (i.e., state or local governments) that are looking to launch or join a C-PACE program. The report is a starting point for understanding what approaches have worked to establish successful C-PACE programs. It examines the experience of programs across the country and provides insights for making the process smoother, and hopefully less cost and time-intensive, for new state and local governments sponsoring C-PACE programs. The report also provides a roadmap to key decision points on the path to setting up a program — the different paths taken and program models employed by those who have blazed the trail. The report is organized into three sections describing the decision points involved, options and considerations, and experience from the field.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2014

Wind Technology Modeling Within the System Advisor Model (SAM) (Poster)

This poster provides detail for implementation and the underlying methodology for modeling wind power generation performance in the National Renewable Energy Laboratory's (NREL's) System Advisor Model (SAM). SAM's wind power model allows users to assess projects involving one or more large or small wind turbines with any of the detailed options for residential, commercial, or utility financing. The model requires information about the wind resource, wind turbine specifications, wind farm layout (if applicable), and costs, and provides analysis to compare the absolute or relative impact of these inputs. SAM is a system performance and economic model designed to facilitate analysis and decision-making for project developers, financers, policymakers, and energy researchers. The user pairs a generation technology with a financing option (residential, commercial, or utility) to calculate the cost of energy over the multi-year project period. Specifically, SAM calculates the value of projects which buy and sell power at retail rates for residential and commercial systems, and also for larger-scale projects which operate through a power purchase agreement (PPA) with a utility. The financial model captures complex financing and rate structures, taxes, and incentives.

17 WIND ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2014

Strengthening Retrofit Markets for Comprehensive Savings in Multifamily Buildings (Interim Final Report)

Energy efficiency is vitally important in Maine. Nearly 70% of Maine households rely on fuel oil as their primary energy source for home heating, a higher share than in any other state. Coupled with the state's long, cold winters, Maine's dependence on oil renders homeowners particularly vulnerable to fluctuating fuel costs. With $\$$4.5 million in seed funding from the Energy Department's Better Buildings Neighborhood Program, the Governor's Energy Office (GEO), through Efficiency Maine Trust (the Trust), is spurring Maine landlords to lower their monthly energy bills and improve comfort for their tenants during the state's cold winter months and increasingly warmer summers. Maine's aging multifamily housing stock can be expensive to heat and costly to maintain. It is not unusual to find buildings with little or no insulation, drafty windows, and significant air leaks, making them ideal candidates for energy efficiency upgrades. Maine modeled its Multifamily Efficiency Program (MEP) after the state's highly successful Home Energy Savings Program (HESP) for single-family homes. HESP provided cash incentives and financing opportunities to owners of one-to four-unit structures, which resulted in thousands of energy assessments and whole-house energy upgrades in 225 communities. Maine's new MEP multifamily energy efficiency upgrade and weatherization initiative focuses on small to medium-sized (i.e., five to 20 units) apartment buildings. The program's energy efficiency upgrades will provide at least 20% energy savings for each upgraded multifamily unit. The Trust’s MEP relies on a network of approved program partners who help move projects through the pipeline from assessment to upgrade. MEP has two components: benchmarking and development of an Energy Reduction Plan (ERP). Using the ENERGY STAR® Portfolio Manager benchmarking tool, MEP provides an assessment of current energy usage in the building, establishes a baseline for future energy efficiency improvements, and enables tracking and monitoring of future energy usage at the building— all at no cost to the building owner. The ERP is developed by a program partner using either the Trust’s approved modeling or prescriptive tools; it provides detailed information about the current energy related conditions in the building and recommends energy efficiency, health, and safety improvements. The Trust's delivery contractor provides quality assurance and controls throughout the process. Through this effort, MEP's goal is to establish a self-sustaining, market-driven program, demonstrating the value of energy efficiency to other building owners. The increasing value of properties across the state will help incentivize these owners to continue upgrades after the grant period has ended. Targeting urban areas in Maine with dense clusters of multifamily units—such as Portland, Lewiston- Auburn, Bangor, and Augusta—MEP engaged a variety of stakeholder groups early on to design its multifamily program. Through direct emails and its website, program officials invited lending institutions, building professionals, engineering firms, equipment distributors, and local property owners associations to attend open meetings around the state to learn about the goals of the multifamily program and to help define its parameters. These meetings helped program administrators understand the diversity of the customer base: some owners are individuals with a single building, while other owners are groups of people or management companies with an entire portfolio of multifamily buildings. The diversity of the customer base notwithstanding, owners see MEP as an opportunity to make gains in their respective properties. Consistently high turnouts at stakeholder meetings fueled greater customer interest as awareness of the program spread through word of mouth. The program also gained traction by utilizing the program partner networks and building on the legacy of the Trust’s successful HESP for single-family residences. MEP offers significant incentives for building owners to participate in the upgrade program. Wholebuilding benchmarking services are available to most multifamily housing buildings free of charge. The service provides the building owner with an assessment of the building's current energy efficiency as compared to other multifamily buildings on a national scale, establishes a baseline to measure future improvements, and enables owners to track monthly energy consumption using the ENERGY STAR Portfolio Manager. Once the benchmarking process is complete, the program links building owners with approved program partners (e.g., energy professionals, home performance contractors) to identify and implement specific energy-saving opportunities in the building. Program partners can also provide project quotes with estimated financing incentives and payback period calculations that enable building owners to make informed decisions. What's more, the Trust provides two financial incentives for successful completion of program milestones. The first is a per-unit incentive for completion of an approved ERP (i.e., $\$$100 per unit if a prescriptive path is followed, and $\$$200 per unit for a modeled ERP). Upon final inspection of the installed project scope of work, an incentive of $\$$1,400 per unit or 50% of installed cost—whichever is less—is paid. The Trust originally established a $\$$1 million loan-loss reserve fund (LLRF) to further enhance financing opportunities for qualified multifamily building owners. This funding mechanism was designed to connect building owners with lenders that retain the mortgages for their properties and encourages the lenders to offer financing for energy efficiency improvements. However, there has been no interest in the LLRF and therefore the LLRF has been reduced. Ultimately, MEP plans to build an online tool for building owners to assess opportunities to make upgrades in their multifamily units. The tool will include a performance rating system to provide a way for building owners to more easily understand energy use in their building, and how it could be improved with energy efficiency upgrades. Prospective tenants will also be able to use the rating system to make informed decisions about where to rent. Furthermore, the rating can be incorporated into real estate listings as a way for prospective home buyers and the real estate financial community to evaluate a home's operating costs. The Trust’s MEP has identified the state's most experienced energy professionals, vendors, suppliers, and contractors that install energy efficiency equipment in the multifamily sector to be qualified program partners. To be eligible for partnership, energy assessment professionals and contractors are required to have demonstrated experience in the multifamily sector and hold associated professional certifications, such as Building Operator Certification (BOC), Certified Energy Manager (CEM), Professional Engineer (PE), or Building Performance Institute (BPI) Multifamily Building Analyst. Widespread program interest has enabled the Trust to redirect funds that might otherwise be needed for program promotion to building capacity through contractor training. In addition to boosting professional training and certification opportunities, MEP teaches its partners how to market the multifamily program to prospective multifamily homeowners.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2023

2022 Product Commercialization and Market Development Awardee: Bergey Windpower

In 2023, consumers will finance more than 80% of the residential solar energy systems they purchase, which they use as collateral (called "non-recourse loans"). Similar loans are not yet offered to fund distributed wind energy systems. To accelerate deployment of small wind systems, which power individual rural homes and farms, the United States will need to make consumer loans available at reasonable rates with modest downpayments and collateral requirements. A team led by Bergey Windpower Co. is creating new consumer financing options to reduce or eliminate the upfront cash needed to buy distributed wind energy systems. This new financing structure would decrease purchase costs for small wind turbines produced by Bergey Windpower and possibly other manufacturers. Product financing is instrumental in growing wind power market share, clean energy manufacturing, and installation jobs while reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Bergey Windpower's previous Competitiveness Improvement Project (CIP) awards have led to the development of affordable, high-performance wind turbines, microgrids, and components.

CIP↗
DOE OSTI2019

Decommissioning of obsolete Nuclear Facilities in the UJV Rez, a. s. - 19027

UJV Rez, a. s. (further also UJV) is a leading institution in all areas of nuclear R and D in the Czech Republic and has had a dominant position in the nuclear program since it was established in 1955 as the Nuclear Research Institute Rez. The activities of UJV encompass nuclear physics, chemistry, nuclear power and many other topics. The main issues addressed at UJV in past decades have included research, development and services for NPPs, the fuel cycle and irradiation services for research and development in the industrial sector and medicine. UJV also manages most institutional radioactive wastes (RAW) produced in the Czech Republic (approx. 90 %). After more than 60 years of activities of the UJV in the nuclear field, there were obsolete nuclear facilities to be decommissioned. Decommissioning of nuclear facilities UJV is the only ongoing decommissioning project in the Czech Republic. Preparations for decommissioning began in 1996. Safety analysis report (SAR) was performed comprising the identification and characterization of potential sources of risk, potentially exposed receptors and exposure pathways, potential chemical compounds, radionuclides and media of concern. The results of the SAR enabled to determine the priorities of the decommissioning, the decommissioning the expenses and as well as project implementation. The decommissioning project was revised on the base of information obtained during decommissioning. The decommissioning was divided into two phases according to the level of risk and the financing limitations. The Ministry of Finance significantly financially contributed the decommissioning, although the UJV also contributed a considerable amount. Overall cost is close to the amount of Eur 27 million. Decommissioning started in 2003 and will be finished in 2018. Almost all facilities have already been successfully decommissioned. In the following table, the status of decommissioning of facilities is described. 1) Reloading site for RAW storage (Building 211/6): last item in progress 2003 - 2018; 2) Special Sewage System: decommissioned 2004 - 2005, reused; 3) Liquid RAW storage tanks (Building 211/3): decontaminated 2004 - 2013, reused; 4) Technology for RAW treatment (Building 241): decommissioned 2003 - 2011; 5) Contaminated equipment (Building 250): decommissioned 2003 - 2016; 6) Systems for storage of sealed sources (Building 261); decommissioned 2003 - 2005; 7) Decay tanks (Building 211/5); decommissioned 2003 - 2014, reused; 8) Old bituminating unit (Building 211/3); decommissioned 2004 - 2008; 9) Surface RAW storage site; decommissioned 2009 - 2014. Later, other unused decommissioning facilities, which were not included in the decommissioning project financed by the state, were included. These facilities are continuously decommissioned and financed from own resources of UJV. These facilities are like facilities already decommissioned: radiochemical laboratories, (including glove boxes), liquid RW storage tanks (including sewage systems), liquid RW treatment technology, hot cells, accumulated RW, etc. Realization started 2016 and expected duration is till 2026. Estimated budget is approximately Eur 17 million. The decommissioning of nuclear facilities in UJV is being carried out on the high level of radiation protection and up to now there was no extraordinary event or accident, although some challenges we were forced to address. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2011

Austin's Home Performance with Energy Star Program: Making a Compelling Offer to a Financial Institution Partner

Launched in 2006, over 8,700 residential energy upgrades have been completed through Austin Energy's Home Performance with Energy Star (HPwES) program. The program's lending partner, Velocity Credit Union (VCU) has originated almost 1,800 loans, totaling approximately $12.5 million. Residential energy efficiency loans are typically small, and expensive to originate and service relative to larger financing products. National lenders have been hesitant to deliver attractive loan products to this small, but growing, residential market. In response, energy efficiency programs have found ways to partner with local and regional banks, credit unions, community development finance institutions (CDFIs) and co-ops to deliver energy efficiency financing to homeowners. VCU's experience with the Austin Energy HPwES program highlights the potential benefits of energy efficiency programs to a lending partner.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2011

State Support for Clean Energy Deployment: Lessons Learned for Potential Future Policy

Proposed federal clean energy initiatives and climate legislation have suggested significant increases to federal funding for clean energy deployment and investment. Many states and utilities have over a decade of experience and spend billions of public dollars every year to support EE/RE deployment through programs that reduce the cost of technologies, provide financing for EE/RE projects, offertechnical assistance, and educate market participants. Meanwhile, constraints on public expenditures at all levels of government continue to call upon such programs to demonstrate their value. This report reviews the results of these programs and the specific financial incentives and financing tools used to encourage clean energy investment. Lessons from such programs could be used to inform thefuture application of EE/RE incentives and financing tools. These lessons learned apply to use of distributed resources and the historical focus of these EE/RE programs.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2011

Process Design and Economics for Conversion of Lignocellulosic Biomass to Ethanol: Thermochemical Pathway by Indirect Gasification and Mixed Alcohol Synthesis

This design report describes an up-to-date benchmark thermochemical conversion process that incorporates the latest research from NREL and other sources. Building on a design report published in 2007, NREL and its subcontractor Harris Group Inc. performed a complete review of the process design and economic model for a biomass-to-ethanol process via indirect gasification. The conceptual designpresented herein considers the economics of ethanol production, assuming the achievement of internal research targets for 2012 and nth-plant costs and financing. The design features a processing capacity of 2,205 U.S. tons (2,000 metric tonnes) of dry biomass per day and an ethanol yield of 83.8 gallons per dry U.S. ton of feedstock. The ethanol selling price corresponding to this design is $2.05 per gallon in 2007 dollars, assuming a 30-year plant life and 40% equity financing with a 10% internal rate of return and the remaining 60% debt financed at 8% interest. This ethanol selling price corresponds to a gasoline equivalent price of $3.11 per gallon based on the relative volumetric energy contents of ethanol and gasoline.

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗
DOE OSTI2011

State Support for Clean Energy Deployment: Lessons Learned for Potential Future Policy

Proposed federal clean energy initiatives and climate legislation have suggested significant increases to federal funding for clean energy deployment and investment. Many states and utilities have over a decade of experience and spend billions of public dollars every year to support EE/RE deployment through programs that reduce the cost of technologies, provide financing for EE/RE projects, offer technical assistance, and educate market participants. Meanwhile, constraints on public expenditures at all levels of government continue to call upon such programs to demonstrate their value. This report reviews the results of these programs and the specific financial incentives and financing tools used to encourage clean energy investment. Lessons from such programs could be used to inform the future application of EE/RE incentives and financing tools. These lessons learned apply to use of distributed resources and the historical focus of these EE/RE programs.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2016

Accelerating Clean Energy Commercialization. A Strategic Partnership Approach

Technology development in the clean energy and broader clean tech space has proven to be challenging. Long-standing methods for advancing clean energy technologies from science to commercialization are best known for relatively slow, linear progression through research and development, demonstration, and deployment (RDD&D); and characterized by well-known valleys of death for financing. Investment returns expected by traditional venture capital investors have been difficult to achieve, particularly for hardware-centric innovations, and companies that are subject to project finance risks. Commercialization support from incubators and accelerators has helped address these challenges by offering more support services to start-ups; however, more effort is needed to fulfill the desired clean energy future. The emergence of new strategic investors and partners in recent years has opened up innovative opportunities for clean tech entrepreneurs, and novel commercialization models are emerging that involve new alliances among clean energy companies, RDD&D, support systems, and strategic customers. For instance, Wells Fargo and Company (WFC) and the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) have launched a new technology incubator that supports faster commercialization through a focus on technology development. The incubator combines strategic financing, technology and technical assistance, strategic customer site validation, and ongoing financial support.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2024

Achieving Cooperative Community Equitable Solar Sources (ACCESS) (Final Technical Report)

Since 2011, solar has grown from a niche technology to a widely accessible source of power for homes and businesses across the United States and has become a fundamental part of the modern grid. There are still challenges, however, in learning how to integrate and use PV most effectively and how to make PV universally available. Most low- and moderate-income (LMI) customers cannot currently afford PV; capital costs and financing costs are too high to drive significant penetration. Providing access to LMI individuals and communities is a critical and immediate priority, and the focus of this project. The overall objective of the Achieving Cooperative Community Equitable Solar Sources (ACCESS) project is to explore and amplify the use of innovative, cost-effective energy access programs to serve co-ops’ LMI members1. ACCESS will research at least three financing mechanisms and at least six LMI program designs including LMI engagement strategies to maximize participation for these hard-to-reach audiences. ACCESS evaluated the financial mechanisms and program designs from field tests sited at diverse co-ops that provide recognizable models for the broader co-op community to identify optimal solutions for small utilities. The research with these cooperatives allowed testing of concepts and development of models and tools for other utilities to adapt to their own program designs and expansions. ACCESS published results and developed an “ACCESS Solar Access Toolkit” consisting of program designs, LMI engagement strategies, how-to guidance, and other tools to facilitate replication at small utilities across the country. Through the dissemination practices of the ACCESS project team, all NRECA member co-ops (~900) were made aware of the “ACCESS Solar Access Toolkit” and all other ACCESS resources. NRECA and its partners developed innovations to expand co-ops’ solar energy offerings to provide all of a co-op’s members—especially those who struggle to pay their bills—with cost-effective options that meet their needs. ACCESS specifically explored utility financing mechanisms and program designs that, independently or used in combination, increase solar access for rural electric cooperatives’ LMI members/ratepayers and that reduce LMI member/ratepayers’ electricity costs by at least 10%. LMI engagement strategies focused on maximizing the number of members who receive benefits and on the cost savings to LMI participants.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2015

The Danish contribution to the European DEMOCOPHES project: A description of cadmium, cotinine and mercury levels in Danish mother-child pairs and the perspectives of supplementary sampling and measurements

Human biomonitoring (HBM) is an important tool, increasingly used for measuring true levels of the body burdens of environmental chemicals in the general population. In Europe, a harmonized HBM program was needed to open the possibility to compare levels across borders. To explore the prospect of a harmonized European HBM project, DEMOCOPHES (DEMOnstration of a study to COordinate and Perform Human biomonitoring on a European Scale) was completed in 17 European countries. The basic measurements performed in all implemented countries of DEMOCOPHES included cadmium, cotinine and phthalate metabolites in urine and mercury in hair. In the Danish participants, significant correlations between mothers and children for mercury in hair and cotinine in urine were found. Mercury in hair was further significantly associated with intake of fish and area of residence. Cadmium was positively associated with BMI in mothers and an association between cadmium and cotinine was also found. As expected high cotinine levels were found in smoking mothers. For both mercury and cadmium significantly higher concentrations were found in the mothers compared to their children. In Denmark, the DEMOCOPHES project was co-financed by the Danish ministries of health, environment and food safety. The co-financing ministries agreed to finance a number of supplementary measurements of substances of current toxicological, public and regulatory interest. This also included blood sampling from the participants. The collected urine and blood samples were analyzed for a range of other persistent and non-persistent environmental chemicals as well as two biomarkers of effect. The variety of supplementary measurements gives the researchers further information on the exposure status of the participants and creates a basis for valuable knowledge on the pattern of exposure to various chemicals. - Highlights: • Levels of cadmium, mercury and cotinine in the Danish subpopulation are comparable to levels in the total DEMOCOPHES population with mercury in hair above the European median. • Supplementary sample collection and measurements in Denmark gave valuable exposure information on a variety of other chemicals of current toxicological, public and regulatory interest, such as persistent organic pollutants. • It is highly valuable to obtain as much exposure information as possible once you have established the study cohort.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2013

Expert Meeting Report: Energy Savings You Can Bank On

In October 2011, ARBI organized and conducted an Experts' Meeting on the topic of performance guarantees and financing vehicles for Energy Efficiency Upgrades. The meeting brought together technical, policy, and financial experts, including researchers, experienced installation contractors, and innovative energy business leaders, in order to discuss the opportunities and challenges for the energy efficiency upgrade industry to increase market uptake of Home Energy Upgrades (HEUs) through innovative offerings, such as performance guarantees. The meeting had several primary goals. First, it sought to understand how other industries have developed successful models for financing renewable energy installations while providing performance guarantees. This has been most recently demonstrated by the solar leasing industry. Second, the meeting explored the applicability of such business models to the energy efficiency upgrade industry. Third, the meeting sought to identify technical impediments to performance guarantees for energy efficiency retrofits. Fourth, the meeting sought to provide a common framework for these goals within the context of current financing mechanisms for energy efficiency upgrades.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2013

Non-Hardware ("Soft") Cost-Reduction Roadmap for Residential and Small Commercial Solar Photovoltaics, 2013-2020

The objective of this analysis is to roadmap the cost reductions and innovations necessary to achieve the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) SunShot Initiative's total soft-cost targets by 2020. The roadmap focuses on advances in four soft-cost areas: (1) customer acquisition; (2) permitting, inspection, and interconnection (PII); (3) installation labor; and (4) financing. Financing cost reductions are in terms of the weighted average cost of capital (WACC) for financing PV system installations, with real-percent targets of 3.0% (residential) and 3.4% (commercial).

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2014

City of Phoenix - Energize Phoenix Program

Energize Phoenix (EPHX) was designed as an ambitious, large-scale, three-year pilot program to provide energy efficiency upgrades in buildings, along Phoenix’s new Light Rail Corridor – part of a federal effort to reduce energy consumption and stimulate job growth, while simultaneously reducing the country’s carbon footprint and promoting a shift towards a green economy. The program was created through a 2010 competitive grant awarded to the City of Phoenix who managed the program in partnership with Arizona State University (ASU), the state’s largest university, and Arizona Public Service (APS), the state’s largest electricity provider. The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Better Buildings Neighborhood Program (BBNP) and the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) of 2009 provided $25M in funding for the EPHX program. The Light Rail Corridor runs through the heart of downtown Phoenix, making most high-rise and smaller commercial buildings eligible to participate in the EPHX program, along with a diverse mix of single and multi-family residential buildings. To ensure maximum impact and deeper market penetration, Energize Phoenix was subdivided into three unique parts: i. commercial rebate program, ii. commercial financing program, and iii. residential program Each component was managed by the City of Phoenix in partnership with APS. Phoenix was fortunate to partner with APS, which already operated robust commercial and residential rebate programs within its service territory. Phoenix tapped into the existing utility contractor network, provided specific training to over 100 contracting firms, and leveraged the APS rebate program structure (energy efficiency funding) to launch the EPHX commercial and residential rebate programs. The commercial finance program was coordinated and managed through a contract with National Bank of Arizona, NBAZ, which also provided project capital leveraging EPHX finance funds. Working in unison, approved contractors jointly produced more than 161,000 labor hours in pursuit of EPHX goals over the life of the project. Labor hours were spread among electricians, heating, ventilating and air-conditioning (HVAC) technicians, marketing professionals, engineers, sales, and administrative support staff across the approved contractor workforce. Program participants received both the utility rebate along with the EPHX rebate, and depending on project size and utility rebate structure some projects resulted in low to no-cost upgrades for customers. Phoenix also partnered with ASU, a grant sub-recipient, to leverage the institution’s expertise in research and data analysis. In this partnership, ASU accepted marketing responsibilities for the grant and partnered with DRA Communications (DRA), a Phoenix-based marketing firm, to create and communicate the message out to the marketplace. The EPHX program has completed its energy upgrade activities. A review of the work completed by ASU revealed that the EPHX program substantially exceeded the program’s stated goals by retrofitting/upgrading over 33 million sq ft of commercial space (30 million sq ft goal exceeded by 11%) and 2,014 residential units (1,700 unit goal exceeded by 18%) along the Light Rail Corridor. The program helped stimulate economic growth by adding $31million to the local economy and enhanced an already robust energy efficiency contractor network. This contractor network will continue to promote utility energy incentives to sustain energy efficiency upgrade activities in the future. Finally, EPHX helped reduce participants annual energy consumption by 135 million kilowatt-hour (kWh) translating into over $12.5 million of annual energy cost avoidance for the community. This also resulted in projected payback period of 4.5 years for total investment by all parties and reduced greenhouse gas emissions by over 95,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e).

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗