SEARCH · Engineering Papers
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.
Case study describes the U.S. Forest Service's Power-IT-Down Program, which strongly encouraged employees to shut off their computers when leaving the office. The U.S. Forest Service first piloted the program on a voluntary basis in one region then implemented it across the agency's 43,000 computers as a joint effort by the Chief Information Office and Sustainable Operations department.
Federal agencies are required to report on their progress in meeting various energy and water management requirements. These reporting requirements encompass energy and water projects at federal facilities, including projects that are alternatively financed, e.g., conducted through energy savings performance contracts (ESPCs) or utility energy service contracts (UESCs). The purpose of this guidance is to provide recommendations to streamline federal agency reporting. The guidance recommends the use of eProject Builder (ePB), a project development and archiving tool for energy projects. ePB carries additional value in its simplification of federal agency reporting by dovetailing with the Federal Energy Management Program’s (FEMP’s) EISA 432 Compliance Tracking System (CTS).
In 2014, the Mickey Leland Federal Building in Houston, Texas installed a 192 kW PV system on top of its parking structure. To monitor and optimize its performance, the General Services Administration, which manages the site, responded to the Federal Energy Management Program’s request for federal agency participation in the Federal Energy Management Program Solar PV Performance Initiative.
Case study describes how the Northwest/Arctic Region branch of the General Services Administration (GSA) improved safety and energy efficiency in its Fairbanks Federal Building parking garage used by federal employees, U.S. Marshals, and the District Court. A 74% savings was realized by replacing 220 high-pressure sodium fixtures with 220 light-emitting diode fixtures.
The resilience of federal facilities has become increasingly important among lawmakers, agency leadership, and the American public as high impact natural hazards occur more frequently over time. Resilience is broadly defined as the ability of a federal facility to withstand, respond to, and recover rapidly from disruptions to maintain critical functions. The Department of Energy (DOE) Federal Energy Management Program (FEMP) was codified to facilitate the strengthening of federal energy and water efficiency and resilience. Performance contracting is one of the mechanisms through which federal agencies can finance projects at their facilities, but resilience improvement measures do not always result in utility cost savings, which are the primary driver behind performance contracts. This report provides example cases where performance contracts, specifically energy savings performance contracts (ESPC) or utility energy service contracts (UESCs), were used to implement a resilience measure at a federal facility.
NREL's Intelligent Campus program leverages its own laboratory buildings as research instruments to study renewable energy, energy efficiency, and energy storage, integration, and analysis with real, quantitative measurements. At the heart of NREL's Intelligent Campus program is its Energy Management Information System (EMIS), a family of tools and services used to manage building and campus energy use. NREL's EMIS includes capabilities, such as benchmarking and monthly utility tracking, interval meter analytics, equipment fault detection and diagnostics, condition-based monitoring, and supervisory control, enabling unprecedented energy management capabilities. The system serves as a demonstration project for other federal facilities interested in learning about its design, features, and benefits.
Federal fleet operations span the diverse geography of the country as the vehicles provide services in support of equally diverse agency missions. Fleets face the potential for disruption of services from natural disasters, infrastructure failures, and human threats. This report reviews some of the hazards, threats, and disruptions that fleets may face, describes an approach to fleet management that incorporates resilience, and provides an overview of fleet resilience considerations. While this report is not comprehensive, it describes considerations for integrating resilience into fleet management organizational priorities.
The energy service company (ESCO) industry has a well-established track record of delivering energy and economic savings in the public and institutional buildings sector, primarily through the use of performance-based contracts. The ESCO industry often provides (or helps arrange) private sector financing to complete public infrastructure projects with little or no up-front cost to taxpayers. In 2014, total U.S. ESCO industry revenue was estimated at $5.3 billion. ESCOs expect total industry revenue to grow to $7.6 billion in 2017—a 13% annual growth rate from 2015-2017. Researchers at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL) were asked by the U.S. Department of Energy Federal Energy Management Program (FEMP) to update and expand our estimates of the remaining market potential of the U.S. ESCO industry. We define remaining market potential as the aggregate amount of project investment by ESCOs that is technically possible based on the types of projects that ESCOS have historically implemented in the institutional, commercial, and industrial sectors using ESCO estimates of current market penetration in those sectors. In this analysis, we report U.S. ESCO industry remaining market potential under two scenarios: (1) a base case and (2) a case “unfettered” by market, bureaucratic, and regulatory barriers. We find that there is significant remaining market potential for the U.S. ESCO industry under both the base and unfettered cases. For the base case, we estimate a remaining market potential of $92-$201 billion ($2016). We estimate a remaining market potential of $190-$333 billion for the unfettered case. It is important to note, however, that there is considerable uncertainty surrounding the estimates for both the base and unfettered cases.
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 151 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.
This report focuses on the Department of Health and Human Services, Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response fleet to identify daily operational characteristics of select vehicles and report findings on vehicle and mission characterizations to support the successful introduction of PEVs into the agency’s fleet. Individual observations of these selected vehicles provide the basis for recommendations related to electric vehicle adoption and whether a battery electric vehicle or plug-in hybrid electric vehicle (collectively referred to as PEVs) can fulfill the mission requirements.
Operations and maintenance (O&M) savings frequently occur in energy savings performance contracts (ESPCs). During FY 2022, 37% of reported annual cost savings for projects awarded under the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) ESPC indefinite delivery indefinite quantity (IDIQ) contracts and in the performance period were due to O&M or other energy- and/or water-related cost savings, with the balance (63%) from utility cost savings (i.e., energy or water cost savings). Sometimes the energy- and water-related cost savings are acknowledged and included in payments within ESPCs; other times, for various reasons, they are not. As presented in this guide, FEMP recommends including energy- and water-related cost savings that are O&M (including related repair and replacement) savings in the financial aspects of an ESPC, to the extent such savings can be documented. Inclusion of these savings will help augment project scopes and/or lower interest costs (by shortening financing terms). However, there is a burden of proof as to what constitutes acceptability in O&M savings that needs to be carefully considered and documented in individual projects. Beyond promoting a key tenet used in U.S. federal performance contracting—that savings must be from actual budgets and therefore based on the level of O&M that is actually occurring, not what should have been performed—FEMP also recommends good practice in establishing and documenting O&M baselines, formulating the rationale for baseline adjustments during the performance period, and conducting ongoing verification activities. This document concludes with five examples of how O&M savings may be handled, in situations ranging from the partial displacement of O&M contracts to consolidation and “virtualization” of servers in data centers. A key theme that permeates this guide is the importance of thoroughly documenting all conditions and assumptions used in the development of and accounting for O&M costs and savings throughout the ESPC life cycle, from baseline-setting to measurement and verification (M&V) of the savings during each year of the performance period. Doing so not only prevents internal claims of non-performance (especially in the case of staff turnover during the contract term), but also simplifies ordering agency and energy service company (ESCO) response in the event of scrutiny from oversight organizations, such as government audits. While this guide focuses on federal ESPCs, it may also be applicable when O&M savings are included in utility energy service contracts (UESCs) and non-federal ESPCs.
Karen Thomas from NREL will discuss utility partnership programs with the federal government under the Federal Energy Management Program (FEMP) of the Department of Energy (DOE). These programs offer a way for a utility to partner with federal agencies. She will describe the federal government's ability to work directly with their serving natural gas utility to implement successful energy efficiency projects. Also, Jill Engel-Cox from NREL's Joint Institute for Strategic Energy Analysis will briefly share their analysis to identify opportunities to reduce emissions and increase efficiency of the production and delivery of natural gas.
This report serves as a program guide to support federal agencies in developing their own policy documents for workplace charging. It provides suggested language that agencies can incorporate into their own policies to define requirements for charging privately owned vehicles (POVs) on government-owned or leased property. The Fixing America's Surface Transportation Act authorizes the U.S. General Services Administration (GSA) and other federal agencies to install, operate, and maintain electric vehicle supply equipment (EVSE) for POVs in parking areas used by federal employees and authorized users, and it requires the collection of fees to recover the costs of installing, operating, and maintaining this equipment. This guide offers details for agency facility managers, transportation personnel, employees, and vendors regarding the charging of electric vehicles (EVs) for use by employees and personnel at government-owned and leased buildings. This guide describes the requirements associated with federal agencies providing EV charging in publicly accessible sites. The policy also describes when and how fees may be imposed to cover costs of electricity, as well as EVSE units and installations in various scenarios.
This webinar provides instructions and resources for financing distributed energy projects (e.g. on-site renewable energy, storage, and combined heat and power) using an energy savings performance contract (ESPC) energy sales agreement (ESA) through the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) energy savings performance contract (ESPC) vehicle. The DOE IDIQ ESPC contract vehicle uses a streamlined master contract that allows federal agencies to work with 21 energy service companies holding the current DOE IDIQ ESPC. Topics covered in the webinar include: An overview of the DOE IDIQ contract vehicle; ESA-specific considerations for IDIQ contracts; and Specific use cases. The webinar also provides an overview of the resources available on the Federal Energy Management Program website, such as IDIQ tools and templates. This webinar is the fifth in a series that provides information, best practices, and resources for implementing an ESPC ESA project. ESPC ESAs are a great option for federal sites that are motivated to reduce site costs, have no capital investment funding, and cannot use the U.S. Department of Defense 10 USC 2922a authority for long-term contracting.
Federal buyers are required to purchase energy-efficient products in an effort to minimize energy use in the federal sector, save the federal government money, and spur market development of efficient products. The Federal Energy Management Program (FEMP)’s Energy Efficient Product Procurement (EEPP) Program helps federal agencies comply with the requirement to purchase energy-efficient products by providing technical assistance and guidance and setting efficiency requirements for certain product categories. Past studies have estimated the savings potential of purchasing energy-efficient products at over $500 million per year in energy costs across federal agencies.1 Despite the strong policy support for EEPP and resources available, energy-efficient product purchasing operates within complex decision-making processes and operational structures; implementation challenges exist that may hinder agencies’ ability to comply with purchasing requirements. The shift to purchasing green products, including energy-efficient products, relies on “buy in” from a variety of potential actors throughout different purchasing pathways. Challenges may be especially high for EEPP relative to other sustainable acquisition programs given that efficient products frequently have a higher first cost than non-efficient ones, which may be perceived as a conflict with fiscal responsibility, or more simply problematic for agency personnel trying to stretch limited budgets. Federal buyers may also face challenges in determining whether a given product is subject to EEPP requirements. Previous analysis on agency compliance with EEPP, conducted by the Alliance to Save Energy (ASE), shows that federal agencies are getting better at purchasing energy-efficient products. ASE conducted two reviews of relevant solicitations for product and service contracts listed on Federal Business Opportunities (FBO), the centralized website where federal agencies are required to post procurements greater than $25,000. In 2010, ASE estimated a compliance rate of 46% in 2010, up from an estimate of 12% in 2008. Our work updates and expands on ASE’s 2010 analysis to gauge agency compliance with EEPP requirements.
Recent high-impact events such as hurricanes and wildfires highlight the need for energy system resilience. One potential impact of these events is the loss of utility grid power to federal sites, negatively affecting the ability to carry out their missions. Depending on the need to sustain critical functions, it may be important to continue operations during an outage of the electric grid, or at least have power restored quickly after the event. One approach to addressing this need is through a microgrid. Microgrids can provide a more reliable solution than the traditional approach of using a backup generator at individual buildings. A microgrid can enhance a site’s electrical power system during normal operations, as well as provide reliable backup power to critical loads when electric utility power is interrupted. Many times, certain components of a microgrid (and potentially the entire system) can be justified economically and paid for out of energy savings or avoided costs. In cases where savings can cover the project costs, one of several privately financed procurement mechanisms may be used to implement the project. Procurement options available to all federal agencies include utility energy services contracts (UESC), energy savings performance contracts (ESPC), and utility services contracts (USC); other mechanisms such as a power purchase agreement (PPA), enhanced use lease (EUL), and utility privatization (UP) may also be useful to agencies that have the authority to use them. Implementing a microgrid in a comprehensive effort that also includes energy efficiency can provide an important savings component, while reducing power requirements for critical loads, thus reducing the cost of the microgrid and associated distributed energy resources (DER). However, it can be difficult to achieve enough savings and avoided costs to cover the entire microgrid system, so leveraging these avoided costs in combination with appropriated funds may be necessary to implement the full project. When a site is deciding if a microgrid is the best solution, activities early in the process include identifying critical loads and existing DERs, conversations with the local electric utility, and implementation options that work best for the agency and site. This paper explores procurement options and agreements that may be useful to federal agencies interested in implementing microgrids at their sites. Microgrid complexities, implementation considerations, and suggestions to get started are also discussed. This information will be most useful to agencies when they are exploring electric energy system resilience options and/or considering different procurement options to meet their needs.
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.
The 2015 Fixing America's Surface Transportation (FAST) Act authorizes the installation, operation, and maintenance of electric vehicle supply equipment (EVSE) for the purpose of recharging employees' privately owned vehicles (POVs) under the custody or control of the General Services Administration (GSA) or a Federal agency. It requires the collection of fees to recover the costs of installing, operating, and maintaining this equipment and imposes reporting requirements. This program guide reviews those requirements, excerpts the relevant language in Appendix A, and describes when and how fees may be required to cover costs of electricity, network costs, EVSE units, and installations in various scenarios. This program guide is designed to support Federal agencies developing and refining workplace charging programs for employee POVs. While it provides guidance and best practices, it does not replace agencywide policies or agency-specific legal counsel. It contains a roadmap for agency workplace charging programs and defines roles and responsibilities. This guide explains how to determine the number of POVs likely to charge at a given site and contains a sample employee survey in Appendix B. It reviews EVSE planning, including unit selection and acquisition, charger location(s), accounting for available power capacity, using existing infrastructure, and funding an incentive program. It also discusses the costs associated with EVSE acquisition, installation, and network management. These costs inform the subsequently provided information, which describes how to amortize costs to determine appropriate fees for each charging session. The final two sections of this guide address aspects of ongoing program management that the facility coordinator should consider and the reporting requirements associated with the FAST Act. The insights in this guide are applicable to all agency-owned and GSA-leased buildings or facilities offering the use of EVSE or a 120-volt receptacle for the purpose of recharging an employee's POV. However, the FAST Act requirements typically do not apply to any building or facility operated and maintained by a third-party vendor offering the use of EVSE as part of a commercial building lease unless the agency is managing the station and/or energy on behalf of the building and collecting POV fees.