SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “energy efficiency programs”

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.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

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

At least 19 records

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

DOE OSTI2023

Estimating the Drivers of the Cost of Saved Electricity in Utility Customer-Funded Energy Efficiency Programs

Energy efficiency programs funded by utility customers provide an electricity resource in most U.S. states, but their scale and cost of saving electricity varies significantly by state. In this paper, we explore the drivers of the cost of saved electricity in these programs with an econometric model and nearly a decade of data reported by efficiency program administrators. We found strong evidence for economies of scale and weak evidence for diseconomies of scale, which suggests that states with low levels of efficiency savings relative to retail sales can increase the size of their efficiency programs without large increases to the cost of saved electricity. We discuss examples of energy efficiency forecasting and potential modeling in light our econometric analysis and identify methodological improvements relevant to utilities and grid operators. This paper provides insights into the economics of customer-funded efficiency programs that will support regulators, utilities, and policymakers to utilize energy efficiency as a resource.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

DOE OSTI2011

Interactions between Energy Efficiency Programs funded under the Recovery Act and Utility Customer-Funded Energy Efficiency Programs

Since the spring of 2009, billions of federal dollars have been allocated to state and local governments as grants for energy efficiency and renewable energy projects and programs. The scale of this American Reinvestment and Recovery Act (ARRA) funding, focused on 'shovel-ready' projects to create and retain jobs, is unprecedented. Thousands of newly funded players - cities, counties, states, and tribes - and thousands of programs and projects are entering the existing landscape of energy efficiency programs for the first time or expanding their reach. The nation's experience base with energy efficiency is growing enormously, fed by federal dollars and driven by broader objectives than saving energy alone. State and local officials made countless choices in developing portfolios of ARRA-funded energy efficiency programs and deciding how their programs would relate to existing efficiency programs funded by utility customers. Those choices are worth examining as bellwethers of a future world where there may be multiple program administrators and funding sources in many states. What are the opportunities and challenges of this new environment? What short- and long-term impacts will this large, infusion of funds have on utility customer-funded programs; for example, on infrastructure for delivering energy efficiency services or on customer willingness to invest in energy efficiency? To what extent has the attribution of energy savings been a critical issue, especially where administrators of utility customer-funded energy efficiency programs have performance or shareholder incentives? Do the new ARRA-funded energy efficiency programs provide insights on roles or activities that are particularly well-suited to state and local program administrators vs. administrators or implementers of utility customer-funded programs? The answers could have important implications for the future of U.S. energy efficiency. This report focuses on a selected set of ARRA-funded energy efficiency programs administered by state energy offices: the State Energy Program (SEP) formula grants, the portion of Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant (EECBG) formula funds administered directly by states, and the State Energy Efficient Appliance Rebate Program (SEEARP). Since these ARRA programs devote significant monies to energy efficiency and serve similar markets as utility customer-funded programs, there are frequent interactions between programs. We exclude the DOE low-income weatherization program and EECBG funding awarded directly to the over 2,200 cities, counties and tribes from our study to keep its scope manageable. We summarize the energy efficiency program design and funding choices made by the 50 state energy offices, 5 territories and the District of Columbia. We then focus on the specific choices made in 12 case study states. These states were selected based on the level of utility customer program funding, diversity of program administrator models, and geographic diversity. Based on interviews with more than 80 energy efficiency actors in those 12 states, we draw observations about states strategies for use of Recovery Act funds. We examine interactions between ARRA programs and utility customer-funded energy efficiency programs in terms of program planning, program design and implementation, policy issues, and potential long-term impacts. We consider how the existing regulatory policy framework and energy efficiency programs in these 12 states may have impacted development of these selected ARRA programs. Finally, we summarize key trends and highlight issues that evaluators of these ARRA programs may want to examine in more depth in their process and impact evaluations.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

DOE OSTI2021

Who is participating in residential energy efficiency programs? Exploring demographic and other household characteristics of participants in utility customer-funded energy efficiency programs

In addition to benefiting all customers by reducing the total electric system cost, utility customer-funded energy efficiency programs provide direct benefits to the participants. Understanding the current demographic and household characteristics of participants will help assess the extent of inequities in program participation and figure out what characteristics need to be targeted to achieve equitable outcomes. This report describes how 11 demographic and household characteristics including income, race and ethnicity, and education affect participation in residential utility customer-funded energy efficiency programs. It compiles previous work on this topic and adds new primary analysis of four datasets with different levels of detail from the Residential Energy Consumption Survey (RECS), two New England states, and a Midwestern state.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

DOE OSTI2014

The Program Administrator Cost of Energy Saved for Utility Customer-Funded Energy Efficiency Programs

End-use energy efficiency is increasingly being relied upon as a resource for meeting electricity and natural gas utility system needs within the United States. There is a direct connection between the maturation of energy efficiency as a resource and the need for consistent, high-quality data and reporting of efficiency program costs and impacts. To support this effort, LBNL initiated the Cost of Saved Energy Project (CSE Project) and created a Demand-Side Management (DSM) Program Impacts Database to provide a resource for policy makers, regulators, and the efficiency industry as a whole.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

DOE OSTI2015

Building Energy Asset Score for Utilities and Energy Efficiency Program Administrators

The Building Energy Asset Score is a national standardized tool for evaluating the physical and structural energy efficiency of commercial and multifamily residential buildings. The Asset Score generates a simple energy efficiency rating that enables comparison among buildings, and identifies opportunities for users to invest in energy efficiency upgrades. It is web-based and free to use. This fact sheet discusses the value of the score for utilities and energy efficiency program administrators.

Building energy simulation, building envelope, hot↗

DOE OSTI2012

Improving EM&V for Energy Efficiency Programs (Fact Sheet) (Revised)

This fact sheet describes the objectives of the U.S. Department of Energy Uniform Methods Project to bring consistency to energy savings calculations in U.S. energy efficiency programs.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

DOE OSTI2013

Greenbelt Homes Pilot Energy Efficiency Program Phase 1 Summary: Existing Conditions and Baseline Energy Use

A multiyear pilot energy efficiency retrofit project has been undertaken by Greenbelt Homes, Inc, (GHI) a 1,566 co-operative of circa 1930 and 1940 homes in Greenbelt, Maryland. The three predominant construction methods of the townhomes in the community are materials common to the area and climate zone including 8 in. concrete masonry unit (CMU) block, wood frame with brick veneer and wood frame with vinyl siding. GHI has established a pilot project that will serve as a basis for decision making for the rollout of a decade-long community upgrade program that will incorporate energy efficiency upgrades to the building envelope from the exterior and equipment with the modernization of other systems like plumbing, mechanical equipment, and cladding.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

DOE OSTI2013

Greenbelt Homes Pilot Energy Efficiency Program Phase 1 Summary: Existing Conditions and Baseline Energy Use

A multi-year pilot energy efficiency retrofit project has been undertaken by Greenbelt Homes, Inc, (GHI) a 1,566 co-operative of circa 1930 and '40 homes. The three predominate construction methods of the townhomes in the community are materials common to the area and climate zone including 8” CMU block, wood frame with brick veneer and wood frame with vinyl siding. GHI has established a pilot project that will serve as a basis for decision making for the roll out of a decade-long community upgrade program that will incorporate energy efficiency to the building envelope and equipment with the modernization of other systems like plumbing, mechanical equipment, and cladding.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

DOE OSTI2012

The Future of Utility Customer-Funded Energy Efficiency Programs in the United States: Projected Spending and Savings to 2025

We develop projections of future spending on, and savings from, energy efficiency programs funded by electric and gas utility customers in the United States, under three scenarios through 2025. Our analysis, which updates a previous LBNL study, relies on detailed bottom-up modeling of current state energy efficiency policies, regulatory decisions, and demand-side management and utility resource plans. The three scenarios are intended to represent a range of potential outcomes under the current policy environment (i.e., without considering possible major new policy developments). By 2025, spending on electric and gas efficiency programs (excluding load management programs) is projected to double from 2010 levels to $9.5 billion in the medium case, compared to $15.6 billion in the high case and $6.5 billion in the low case. Compliance with statewide legislative or regulatory savings or spending targets is the primary driver for the increase in electric program spending through 2025, though a significant share of the increase is also driven by utility DSM planning activity and integrated resource planning. Our analysis suggests that electric efficiency program spending may approach a more even geographic distribution over time in terms of absolute dollars spent, with the Northeastern and Western states declining from over 70% of total U.S. spending in 2010 to slightly more than 50% in 2025, with the South and Midwest splitting the remainder roughly evenly. Under our medium case scenario, annual incremental savings from customer-funded electric energy efficiency programs increase from 18.4 TWh in 2010 in the U.S. (which is about 0.5% of electric utility retail sales) to 28.8 TWh in 2025 (0.8% of retail sales). These savings would offset the majority of load growth in the Energy Information Administration’s most recent reference case forecast, given specific assumptions about the extent to which future energy efficiency program savings are captured in that forecast. However, the pathway that customer-funded efficiency programs ultimately take will depend on a series of key challenges and uncertainties associated both with the broader market and policy context and with the implementation and regulatory oversight of the energy efficiency programs themselves.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

DOE OSTI2017

Application of automated measurement and verification to utility energy efficiency program data

Trustworthy savings calculations are critical to convincing regulators of both the cost-effectiveness of energy efficiency program investments and their ability to defer supply-side capital investments. Today’s methods for measurement and verification (M&V) of energy savings constitute a significant portion of the total costs of energy efficiency programs. They also require time-consuming data acquisition. A spectrum of savings calculation approaches is used, with some relying more heavily on measured data and others relying more heavily on estimated, modeled, or stipulated data. The increasing availability of “smart” meters and devices that report near-real time data, combined with new analytical approaches to quantify savings, offers the potential to conduct M&V more quickly and at lower cost, with comparable or improved accuracy. Commercial energy management and information systems (EMIS) technologies are beginning to offer these ‘M&V 2.0’ capabilities, and program administrators want to understand how they might assist programs in quickly and accurately measuring energy savings. This paper presents the results of recent testing of the ability to use automation to streamline the M&V process. In this paper, we apply an automated whole-building M&V tool to historic data sets from energy efficiency programs to begin to explore the accuracy, cost, and time trade-offs between more traditional M&V, and these emerging streamlined methods that use high-resolution energy data and automated computational intelligence. For the data sets studied we evaluate the fraction of buildings that are well suited to automated baseline characterization, the uncertainty in gross savings that is due to M&V 2.0 tools’ model error, and indications of labor time savings, and how the automated savings results compare to prior, traditionally determined savings results. The results show that 70% of the buildings were well suited to the automated approach. In a majority of the cases (80%) savings and uncertainties for each individual building were quantified to levels above the criteria in ASHRAE Guideline 14. In addition the findings suggest that M&V 2.0 methods may also offer time-savings relative to traditional approaches. Lastly, we discuss the implications of these findings relative to the potential evolution of M&V, and pilots currently being launched to test how M&V automation can be integrated into ratepayer-funded programs and professional implementation and evaluation practice.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

DOE OSTI2018

New Advances in Data and Analysis-Driven Residential Energy Efficiency Program Design

This paper presents new capabilities and applications of ResStock, a public-domain tool for residential energy efficiency analysis. The high level of granularity available in the ResStock platform makes it a unique tool to more accurately model the potential for energy efficiency and demand response across the diversity of the residential housing stock. We present state-level results including interactive fact sheets of energy efficiency potential for each state. Energy efficiency program designers can use these results to identify strategic improvements with the highest potential for cost-effective savings in a particular state or region, as well as help identify customer segments for targeted marketing and deployment. Beyond the state-level results, the paper presents three new advances in ResStock capabilities: 1) sub-state, county-level results and evaluation of energy efficiency potential in specific ranges of household income, 2) ability to analyze the cost-effectiveness and emissions impact of electrification measures and packages 3) ability to evaluate the time value of energy efficiency by predicting changes in load shapes. The paper includes discussion and real-world examples of how these new capabilities can be used to enhance the design and implementation of residential energy efficiency programs.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

DOE OSTI2020

Applying Non-Energy Impacts from Other Jurisdictions in Cost-Benefit Analyses of Energy Efficiency Programs: Resources for States for Utility Customer-Funded Programs

Avoided energy and capacity costs are the primary yardstick utilities use to determine which energy efficiency programs are cost-effective for their customers. But sometimes "non-energy impacts" — not commonly recognized as directly associated with energy generation, transmission and distribution — represent substantial benefits, such as improving comfort, air quality and public health. Considering whether and how to include non-energy impacts is an important part of cost-benefit analyses for these programs. This report offers practical considerations for deciding which non-energy impacts to include and how to apply values or methods from other jurisdictions. Researchers reviewed studies quantifying non-energy impacts used in 30 states and applied a five-point system to indicate transferability of a value or method from each study for 16 categories of non-energy impacts: Water resource costs and benefits; Other fuels costs and benefits; Avoided environmental compliance costs; Environmental impacts; Productivity; Health and safety; Asset value; Energy and/or capacity price suppression effects; Avoided costs of compliance with Renewable Portfolio Standard requirements; Avoided credit and collection costs; Avoided ancillary services; Comfort; Economic development and job impacts; Public health impacts; Energy security impacts; Increased reliability. The U.S. Department of Energy’s Building Technologies Office supported this work.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

DOE OSTI2017

Will the Measurement Robots Take Our Jobs? An Update on the State of Automated M&V for Energy Efficiency Programs

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

DOE OSTI2020

Herding Cats: Firm Non-Compliance in China’s Industrial Energy Efficiency Program

Here we study firm responses to a large-scale energy efficiency program in China, focusing on the quality of reporting and compliance outcomes. Using statistical methods to detect data manipulation in compliance reports, we find evidence that firms deliberately exaggerated performance during the first phase of the program (2006-2010), suggesting the high compliance rate was overstated. In its second phase (2011-2015), the number of firms in the program expanded by an order of magnitude, and the compliance rate decreased. We develop a simple model to show how the observed increase in non-compliance is consistent with reduced misreporting. Statistical tests find no evidence of manipulation in the second phase. Larger firms, especially those not controlled by the state, and firms in cities with relatively low growth were more likely to report non-compliance, which suggests a role for state control and local protectionism in shaping compliance decisions. Based on our findings, we offer several lessons for future program design.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

DOE OSTI2013

Energy Efficiency Program Typology and Data Metrics: Enabling Multi-State Analyses Through the Use of Common Terminology

In order to compile and analyze information about energy efficiency programs across the country, it is necessary to have a common categorization of program types as well as definitions of the metrics that define program performance and characteristics. As part of an effort to analyze the cost per unit of savings for utility-customer funded, end-use energy efficiency programs, LBNL developed a program typology with standardized program categories, as well as metrics and associated definitions that describe program characteristics, costs and impacts. These definitions and naming conventions facilitate meta-analysis of program results and could simplify the analyses and use of such information by a wide range of entities engaged in reporting and assessing the impacts of energy efficiency.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

DOE OSTI2014

Scoping Study Using Randomized Controlled Trials to Optimize Small Buildings' and Small Portfolios' (SBSP) Energy Efficiency Programs

This report is an initial step in determining whether randomized controlled trials (RCTs) should be used by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), utilities, and others to optimize energy efficiency programs targeting the small buildings and small portfolios (SBSPs) community. This scoping study reviews the use of RCTs to evaluate consumer purchasing and decision-making behaviors and to inform energy-efficient decision making. The scoping study discusses the relevant work, gaps in existing work, and potential value in pursuing further RCTs as related to energy-efficiency decision making in the SBSPs community. Our findings show that the factors that drive consumer behavior toward the purchasing of green products or energy efficiency programs remain complex, requiring further study of the underlying behavior mechanisms leading to environmental concern and action. Although small- and medium-sized businesses may share some purchasing behaviors with individual consumers and large commercial portfolios, important differences should be considered. Factors that are relevant to businesses include firm size to determine economies of scale, regulation, age, and turnover of capital equipment. Marketing approaches to promote green services such as energy efficiency need to go beyond a conventional cost-benefit analysis to include the highlighting of the psychological benefits and delivery of practical benefits, such as energy efficiency.

Guzowski, Leah↗

DOE OSTI2012

The impact of energy efficiency program information and incentives

Residential retrofits are widely viewed as a key resource to improve the national economy and strengthen the nation’s energy future by saving homeowners money, creating local jobs, and reducing building energy consumption. However, there has been only limited success in engaging large numbers of homeowners to pursue comprehensive home energy improvements. To increase the market penetration of home retrofits, national programs like the Department of Energy's Home Energy Score (HEScore), and local programs like the Kentucky Home Partnership (KHP), have recently been developed. When successfully deployed with existing energy efficiency programs such as the Tennessee Valley Authority's (TVA) In-Home Energy Evaluation (IHEE), national energy efficiency goals that once seemed unattainable may now be within reach.

Jackson, Roderick K.↗

DOE OSTI2017

A Case Study in Market Transformation for Residential Energy Efficiency Programs

This case study describes how the Midwest Energy Efficiency Alliance (MEEA) partnered with gas and electric utilities in Iowa to establish the Iowa residential heating, ventilation, and air conditioning System Adjustment and Verified Efficiency (HVAC SAVE) program, taking it to scale improving the performance and energy efficiency of HVAC systems, growing businesses, and gaining consumer trust.

Federal efficiency standards, installation practic↗