Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “SAVINGS”

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 37 records · Page 2
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2021

Miscellaneous Electric Loads: Characterization and Energy Savings Potential

Over time, miscellaneous electric loads (MELs) are expected to increase both in magnitude and share of residential and commercial building energy consumption. This trend is most apparent in North America, but it is also occurring in Japan and Europe. However, the contribution of MELs to building energy use is not currently well understood, both because the products in this category are transforming rapidly and the definition and classification of MELs is ambiguous. This study estimated the national energy consumption of 36 MELs using best-available data and found them to comprise 12% of delivered electricity to the U.S. residential and commercial building sectors. If 26 of these MELs were replaced with the most energy-efficient product models available on the market, their energy consumption could be halved to 6% of delivered electricity. National energy models will better account for building energy consumption by incorporating the MELs data collected and analyzed for this study, leading to improved policy decisions.

Miscellaneous electric loads, Plug loads, Taxonomy↗
DOE OSTI2020

Assessing the Additional Carbon Savings with Biofuel

A recent study claims that corn used for ethanol should not be considered to be inherently biogenically carbon-neutral because not all that corn was grown additional to the level otherwise. By assessing the extent of carbon neutrality of corn for ethanol using the reference point baseline approach and historical data that study concluded that the carbon intensity of US corn ethanol is 27% higher than that of gasoline. We develop a framework to determine the carbon neutrality of corn for ethanol by assessing the additional carbon uptake by crops using an anticipated baseline approach. We also apply this framework to determine the additional corn produced for ethanol and include the direct life cycle carbon emissions of only that portion of corn in the direct life cycle carbon intensity of corn ethanol. We implement this framework by integrating an economic model of the agricultural sector in the USA with a biogenic carbon model and life cycle analysis to quantify biogenic carbon uptake and direct life cycle emissions with and without corn ethanol expansion over the 2007–2027 period. We find that the combined biogenic carbon emissions and direct life cycle carbon emission intensity of corn ethanol (not including indirect land use related emissions) is 21% lower than gasoline. In conclusion, the lower value of this carbon intensity of corn ethanol compared with gasoline is robust to a wide range of parametric assumptions.

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗
DOE OSTI2019

How Much Are We Saving after All? Characterizing the Effects of Commonly Varying Assumptions on Emissions and Damage Estimates in PJM

In recent years, several methods have emerged to estimate the emissions and health, environmental, and climate change damages avoided by interventions such as energy efficiency, demand response, and the integration of renewables. However, differing assumptions employed in these analyses could yield contradicting recommendations regarding intervention implementation. We test the magnitude of the effect of using different key assumptions—average vs marginal emissions, year of calculation, temporal and regional scope, and inclusion of nonemitting generation—to estimate Mid-Atlantic region power pool (PJM) emissions and damage factors. We further highlight the importance of factor selection by evaluating three illustrative 2017 power system examples in PJM. We find that for a simple building lighting intervention, using average emissions factors incorporating nonemitting generation underestimates avoided damages by 45% compared to marginal factors. For PJM demand response, outdated marginal emissions factors from 2016 overestimate avoided damages by 25% compared to 2017 factors. Our assessment of PJM summer load further suggests that fossil-only average emissions factors overestimate damages by 63% compared to average factors incorporating nonemitting generation. Here, we recommend that energy modelers carefully select appropriate emissions metrics when performing their analyses. Furthermore, since the U.S. electric grid is rapidly changing, we urge decision-makers to frequently update (and consider forecasting) grid emissions factors.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2024

Saving Energy, Saving Money [Slides]

Make sure you have CO detectors installed; Test batteries regularly; Have your furnace serviced annually; Don’t use grills or generators indoors.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2015

Walmart - Saving Energy, Saving Money Through Comprehensive Retrofits, Commercial Building Energy Efficiency (Fact Sheet); Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy (EERE)

Walmart partnered with the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) in 2009 to develop and demonstrate energy retrofits for existing buildings. The goal was to reduce energy consumption by at least 30% versus ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2007, as part of DOE's Commercial Building Partnerships (CBP) Program. The project presented here, the retrofit of a 213,000 square foot store in Centennial, Colorado, withefficiency measures across multiple building systems, is part of Walmart's ongoing environmental sustainability program, which originated in 2005.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2025

Reported Energy and Cost Savings from the DOE ESPC IDIQ Program: FY 2024

Energy Savings Performance Contracts (ESPCs)are a contractual mechanism that allow a federal agency to procure energy savings and facility improvements without upfront capital costs to reduce costs and resiliency. ESPCs are covered under FAR Part 23.2, and 42 USC § 8287. Section 8287(a)(2)(A) of Title 42 of the U.S. Code requires that each energy savings performance contract (ESPC) undergo an annual energy audit, resulting in a separate audit report for every project. The objective of the present report is to compile and analyze all annual ESPC audit reports issued between October 1, 2023, and September 30, 2024, for projects awarded under Generations 1, 2, and 3 of DOE’s ESPC IDIQ contracts. During this period, 205 measurement and verification (M&V) reports were produced for 200 projects; the total number of reports exceeds the number of projects because some projects generated more than one report(for example, a few projects measure savings twice per year and produce two audit reports annually, each covering a different six-month period). By aggregating the results from these individual audits, the report determines the portfolio-wide realization rate of energy and cost savings for all active ESPC projects awarded under DOE’s IDIQ program. For all 205audit reports, sufficient information was available to compare project-level estimated, reported, and guaranteed cost savings. Reported cost savings accounted for ESCO verified savings per each project’s M&V plan. The total reported cost savings for the period addressed were $\$$647.8million,compared with the total guaranteed cost savings of $\$$601.6million. On average across the reported projects: •ESPC contractors guaranteed 92.8% of the estimated cost savings• projects reported achieving 100.0% of the estimated cost savings• projects reported achieving 107.7% of the guaranteed cost savings. The M&V performed for the period indicated adjustments for government operations and maintenance impacts to savings amount to$\$$43.9millionandcould be restored with the original operational parameters for impacted projects. Accounting for this potential cost savings impact, these projects still realized 100.4% of the guaranteed cost savings. The information on estimated and reported energy savings was collected and compared for all 205of the reports examined. Based on site energy, estimated savings totaled 14.88million MMBtu, and reported savings were 15.33million MMBtu; 3.1% greater than the estimated energy savings. All of the reports examined contained sufficient information to calculate source energy savings. Based on site-adjusted source energy, total estimated energy savings were 20.90 million MMBtu, and reported savings were 21.22million MMBtu, 101.5% of the estimated energy savings. For water savings, the estimated savings were 11,539,055 kGal and the reported savings were 13,315,930 kGal. This means 1,776,875 kGal more water was saved than estimated, which is about 15% higher than the estimate. These results indicate that, overall, the reported energy savings slightly exceeded the estimated values, while estimated water savings significantly exceeded estimated values, suggesting that the projects achieved greater cost savings than originally projected. The total annual expense for the ESCOs to perform annual M&V audits and reporting was $\$$10.02million. Through this effort, $\$$647.8 million in annual cost savings was verified. The M&V results indicated that $\$$43.9 million of these verified savings reflected adjustments due to government operations A-6and maintenance impacts, which could be restored under the original operational parameters for the affected projects. These findings show the value of M&V that only costs 1.7%of the guaranteed cost savings to ensure guarantees are met.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2015

Reported Energy and Cost Savings from the DOE ESPC Program: FY 2014

The objective of this work was to determine the realization rate of energy and cost savings from the Department of Energy’s Energy Savings Performance Contract (ESPC) program based on information reported by the energy services companies (ESCOs) that are carrying out ESPC projects at federal sites. Information was extracted from 156 Measurement and Verification (M&V) reports to determine reported, estimated, and guaranteed cost savings and reported and estimated energy savings for the previous contract year. Because the quality of the reports varied, it was not possible to determine all of these parameters for each project. For all 156 projects, there was sufficient information to compare estimated, reported, and guaranteed cost savings. For this group, the total estimated cost savings for the reporting periods addressed were $\$$210.6 million, total reported cost savings were $\$$215.1 million, and total guaranteed cost savings were $\$$$204.5 million. This means that on average: ESPC contractors guaranteed 97% of the estimated cost savings; projects reported achieving 102% of the estimated cost savings; and projects reported achieving 105% of the guaranteed cost savings. For 155 of the projects examined, there was sufficient information to compare estimated and reported energy savings. On the basis of site energy, estimated savings for those projects for the previous year totaled 11.938 million MMBtu, and reported savings were 12.138 million MMBtu, 101.7% of the estimated energy savings. On the basis of source energy, total estimated energy savings for the 155 projects were 19.052 million MMBtu, and reported saving were 19.516 million MMBtu, 102.4% of the estimated energy savings.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2017

Energy savings potential from improved building controls for the US commercial building sector

The U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE’s) Building Technologies Office (BTO) sponsored a study to determine the potential national savings achievable in the commercial building sector through widespread deployment of best practice controls, elimination of system and component faults, and use of better sensing. Detailed characterization of potential savings was one source of input to set research, development, and deployment (RD&D) goals in the field of building sensors and controls. DOE’s building energy simulation software, EnergyPlus, was employed to estimate the potential savings from 34 measures in 9 building types and across 16 climates representing almost 57% of commercial building sector energy consumption. In addition to estimating savings from individual measures, three packages of measures were created to estimate savings from the packages. These packages represented an 1) efficient building, 2) typical building, and 3) inefficient building. To scale the results from individual measures or a package to the national scale, building weights by building type and climate locations from the Energy Information Administration’s 2012 Commercial Building Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS) were used. The results showed significant potential for energy savings across all building types and climates. The total site potential savings from individual measures by building type and climate location ranged between 0% and 25%. The total site potential savings by building type aggregated across all climates (using the CBECS building weights) for each measure varied between 0% and 16%. The total site potential savings aggregated across all building types and climates for each measure varied between 0% and 11%. Some individual measures had negative savings because correcting underlying operational problems (e.g., inadequate ventilation) resulted in increased energy consumption. When combined into packages, the overall national savings potential is estimated to be 29%; seven of the nine building types were in the range of 23 to 29% and two exceeded 40%. The total potential national site savings in for each building type ranged between 95x106 GJ (0.09 Quadrillion British thermal units [Quads]; Large Hotels) to 222x106 GJ (0.21 Quads; Large Office, Hospital Administrative areas, and College/University), resulting in total site savings of 1,393x106 GJ (1.32 Quads) when the three packages are applied to the U.S. commercial buildings stock. Using the source (or primary) energy conversion factors of 1.05 for natural gas and 3.14 for electricity resulted in an approximate potential primary energy savings of 2,912x106 GJ (2.76 Quads), which would be 15% of the sector’s 2015 use of approximately 18,991x106 GJ (18 Quads). Extrapolating the results for other building types not analyzed as part of this study, the primary energy savings could be in the range of 4,220x106 GJ to 5,275x106 GJ (4 to 5 Quads). If this savings potential is realized, it would be equivalent to not combusting 180 to 230 million tons of coal or reducing the energy impacts, at today’s energy intensities, of the per capita consumption of 12 to 15 million people in the U.S. To realize most of this potential savings, many gaps can be addressed through RD&D, as recommended in this paper.

Fernandez, Nick↗
DOE OSTI2016

The Value of Regression Models in Determining Industrial Energy Savings

Determination of industrial facility energy savings is commonly undertaken to comply with legal requirements, meet sustainability goals, and quantify greenhouse gas emissions, cost savings, and as one way to demonstrate energy performance improvement per the requirements of an energy management system standard, such as ISO 50001. At their most basic level, energy savings are determined through a process of accounting for baseline and reporting period energy consumption followed by a calculation of energy savings as the difference in the levels of energy consumption between the two periods. The determination of industrial facility-wide energy savings can be undertaken in a wide variety of ways and in relation to energy performance improvement, energy savings can be expressed as any number of energy performance indicators (EnPIs). Energy savings values will vary depending upon if an absolute, intensity, or regression basis of calculation is selected for use. The use of one of the three basis of energy savings calculation will alter the relevance, meaning, and comparability of the resulting energy savings values To increase consistency in the determination of energy savings values, standards such as the International Performance Measurement and Verification Protocol (IPMVP), ISO 17747 – Determination of Energy Savings in Organization, and the U.S. Department of Energy (U.S. DOE) Superior Energy Performance (SEP) program Measurement and Verification Protocol (SEP M&V Protocol) have been published. Industrial facilities in the United States, Mexico, and Canada are certified to the U.S. DOE SEP program after becoming ISO 50001 certified and verification by a third party of calculated energy savings per the SEP M&V Protocol. This paper discusses some of the different meanings energy savings values will have when calculated by using the three different bases. Additionally, data from five SEP certified industrial facilities are used to calculate energy savings values using the three bases and compared as energy performance improvement percentage (EPI %) values. Discussion of why a large degree in variation in EPI % values are seen for any given set of data is provided. Ultimately, while each energy saving calculation basis has merit and can be used appropriately in its own context, the regression basis is shown to best translates energy savings values into contextualized energy performance improvement values by conveying comparable information regarding operational and behavioural improvements not otherwise observable with the absolute or intensity bases.

Therkelsen, Peter↗
DOE OSTI2018

Beyond Widgets: Validated Systems Energy Savings and Utility Custom Incentive Program Systems Trends

Energy efficiency upgrades to buildings to date through avenues such as utility incentive programs have been largely limited to component-based products (e.g., lamps, RTUs). While some utilities do provide ‘custom’ incentive programs with whole building and system level technical assistance, these programs require deeper levels of analysis, resulting in higher program costs. This results in custom programs being restricted to utilities with greater resources, and are typically applied mainly to large or energy-intensive facilities, leaving much of the market without cost effective access and incentives for these solutions. In addition, with increasingly stringent energy codes, cost effective component-based solutions that achieve significant savings are dwindling. Integrated building systems (e.g., integrated façade, HVAC and/or lighting solutions) can deliver higher savings (Regnier et al. 2017) that translate into large sector-wide savings if deployed at the scale of these programs. However, systems application poses a number of challenges – energy savings assessments are inherently more complex and are not easily suited to the deemed measure model, and implementation of systems can be more disruptive. This paper presents the outcomes of a project to develop validated utility incentive program packages for three specific integrated building systems, in collaboration with ComEd, a consortium of California Public Owned Utilities (CA POUs) (Northern California Power Agency(NCPA) and the Southern California Public Power Authority(SCPPA)), and Xcel Energy (CO, MN). Previous work described the potential for energy savings of these systems at the individual and market level, early test findings for the task-ambient lighting system, and described the work products to develop utility incentive programs (Regnier et al. 2016). This paper presents validated end use energy savings of all three systems showing energy savings of ~20% for automated shading combined with daylight dimming (does not include light fixture retrofit savings); 30-46% for task-ambient lighting systems combined with plug load occupancy controls, depending on technology package and office building size (no daylight dimming impacts); and ~94% in the south-façade daylit zone for workstation specific lighting systems with daylight dimming (including lighting retrofit and task tuning). Using a U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) reference building model (DOE 2018), this translates to whole building savings of 2-5% (large-medium commercial), 12-23% (large-small commercial), and 13-15% (medium-large commercial) for these systems respectively. Early findings from the utilities in deploying these systems through their incentive programs indicate that deployment methods such as direct install programs might be best suited for these integrated systems. Further, early findings from a scoping study across custom utility programs and federal retrofit programs indicate that component level retrofits are still prevalent even in these programs, pointing towards an opportunity for deeper energy savings deployment. High performance retrofit case studies demonstrate that deeper energy savings is possible through integrated approaches. Market stakeholder interviews indicate however that there is generally a low level of awareness of the potential for energy savings of these three integrated systems.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2014

Estimating customer electricity savings from projects installed by the U.S. ESCO industry

The U.S. energy service company (ESCO) industry has a well-established track record of delivering substantial energy and dollar savings in the public and institutional facilities sector, typically through the use of energy savings performance contracts (ESPC) (Larsen et al. 2012; Goldman et al. 2005; Hopper et al. 2005, Stuart et al. 2013). This ~$6.4 billion industry, which is expected to grow significantly over the next five years, may play an important role in achieving demand-side energy efficiency under local/state/federal environmental policy goals. To date, there has been little or no research in the public domain to estimate electricity savings for the entire U.S. ESCO industry. Estimating these savings levels is a foundational step in order to determine total avoided greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from demand-side energy efficiency measures installed by U.S. ESCOs. We introduce a method to estimate the total amount of electricity saved by projects implemented by the U.S. ESCO industry using the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL) /National Association of Energy Service Companies (NAESCO) database of projects and LBNL’s biennial industry survey. We report two metrics: incremental electricity savings and savings from ESCO projects that are active in a given year (e.g., 2012). Overall, we estimate that in 2012 active U.S. ESCO industry projects generated about 34 TWh of electricity savings—15 TWh of these electricity savings were for MUSH market customers who did not rely on utility customer-funded energy efficiency programs (see Figure 1). This analysis shows that almost two-thirds of 2012 electricity savings in municipal, local and state government facilities, universities/colleges, K-12 schools, and healthcare facilities (i.e., the so-called “MUSH” market) were not supported by a utility customer-funded energy efficiency program.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2016

Energy Savings Lifetimes and Persistence

This technical brief explains the concepts of energy savings lifetimes and savings persistence and discusses how program administrators use these factors to calculate savings for efficiency measures, programs and portfolios. Savings lifetime is the length of time that one or more energy efficiency measures or activities save energy, and savings persistence is the change in savings throughout the functional life of a given efficiency measure or activity. Savings lifetimes are essential for assessing the lifecycle benefits and cost effectiveness of efficiency activities and for forecasting loads in resource planning. The brief also provides estimates of savings lifetimes derived from a national collection of costs and savings for electric efficiency programs and portfolios.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2017

A framework for quantifying the impact of occupant behavior on energy savings of energy conservation measures

To improve energy efficiency—during new buildings design or during a building retrofit—evaluating the energy savings potential of energy conservation measures (ECMs) is a critical task. In building retrofits, occupant behavior significantly impacts building energy use and is a leading factor in uncertainty when determining the effectiveness of retrofit ECMs. Current simulation-based assessment methods simplify the representation of occupant behavior by using a standard or representative set of static and homogeneous assumptions ignoring the dynamics, stochastics, and diversity of occupant's energy-related behavior in buildings. The simplification contributes to significant gaps between the simulated and measured actual energy performance of buildings. This paper presents a framework for quantifying the impact of occupant behaviors on ECM energy savings using building performance simulation. During the first step of the study, three occupant behavior styles (austerity, normal, and wasteful) were defined to represent different levels of energy consciousness of occupants regarding their interactions with building energy systems (HVAC, windows, lights and plug-in equipment). Next, a simulation workflow was introduced to determine a range of the ECM energy savings. Then, guidance was provided to interpret the range of ECM savings to support ECM decision making. Finally, a pilot study was performed in a real building to demonstrate the application of the framework. Simulation results show that the impact of occupant behaviors on ECM savings vary with the type of ECM. Occupant behavior minimally affects energy savings for ECMs that are technology-driven (the relative savings differ by less than 2%) and have little interaction with the occupants; for ECMs with strong occupant interaction, such as the use of zonal control variable refrigerant flow system and natural ventilation, energy savings are significantly affected by occupant behavior (the relative savings differ by up to 20%). Finally, the study framework provides a novel, holistic approach to assessing the uncertainty of ECM energy savings related to occupant behavior, enabling stakeholders to understand and assess the risk of adopting energy efficiency technologies for new and existing buildings.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2021

Energy-saving potential evaluation for primary schools with occupant-centric controls

Recent studies demonstrated that there is significant energy-saving potential for primary schools, which heating, ventilation, and air-conditioning (HVAC) systems with occupant-centric control (OCC) is an excellent candidate to save energy. However, such an energy impact has yet to be evaluated for different climate zones as well as different energy code versions, but is critical for technology transfer and deployment. Therefore, this paper conducts comprehensive evaluation on the energy-saving potentials for the primary schools with two advanced OCC strategies: presence-based and counting-based. In this work, ninety-six building energy models with stochastic behavior of occupants are developed and simulated, which consist of two building energy code versions, 16 climate zones, and baseline case (without OCC) and two advanced cases (with OCC). To evaluate the energy saving potentials for OCC, primary schools in the U.S. are used as an example. The results show that there is significant energy-saving potential for primary schools by considering OCC strategies, especially the counting-based case. The energy-saving potential is up to 10.2% for presence-based OCC and 12.41% for counting-based OCC. Furthermore, both climate and code version have a significant impact on energy savings from OCC strategies. The energy-saving potentials vary from 1.79% to 12.41% for different climates and code versions. This evaluation can also contribute to quantify the nationwide energy saving potential for other countries.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2022

Multi-technology building system retrofits for utility incentive programs: Savings, costs and baseline considerations

Utility incentive programs are an important channel to support the deployment of energy efficiency in buildings. To date, these programs have largely been limited to single-component strategies. However, many utilities are now motivated to identify and develop multi-component system retrofits to achieve deeper energy savings, which are essential to achieving broader energy and greenhouse gas reduction goals in the buildings sector. In this paper we present the energy savings, demand reductions, and cost-effectiveness of 16 systems retrofit packages in six utility regions in the United States. These results are being used by these utilities to inform and develop incentive programs for systems retrofits. Our analysis shows that packages with proven lighting and HVAC measures can provide 5–22% whole building annual energy savings, and 13–22% annual energy costs savings, using utility incentive program baselines (code and existing building). The packages are reasonably cost effective for replace-on-burnout but generally not for a retrofit scenario prior to end of equipment life. Demand response can increase both the energy savings and energy cost savings, further improving the cost effectiveness of these packages. We analyzed the impact of using existing building vs. code baselines for calculating savings, showing that the choice of baseline in developing utility incentive programs has a substantial impact on the attributable energy savings to a program, with significant implications for the overall viability of a program (generally savings against existing building condition are higher and improve project and program cost-effectiveness).

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗