EM&V Forum Quarterly Update - Q3 2017

Director’s Note

A busy summer and fall culminated in several fall recent Forum activities, so this newsletter spans both seasons: July and August saw webinars and conferences and produced our REED Rendering, our most recent EM&V Forum Brief, the EM&V Forum Fall Meeting on The Many Flavors of Advanced M&V and another update to the Mid-Atlantic TRM. These, and regional and national progress on protocol-related topics, are briefly described.

Looking ahead: Happy Thanksgiving and don’t forget to register online for our December 11 EM&V Forum Webinar, (Rapid Fire) Overview of Advanced M&V Software Products

Top Five Recent NEEP EM&V Accomplishments:

Some Other Recent EM&V Accomplishments (NEEP and other):

 

 

What’s New in the Latest Update to The Mid-Atlantic TRM? Review of Baseline Assumption for LED Lighting Data Tables

Thanks to District of Columbia funding, the Mid-Atlantic Technical Reference Manual (TRM) got  a mid-year revision:  the V7.5 update. Its primary focus was information pertaining to LED lighting. One matter that was especially important to address, given the prominence of this measure in programs, was the residential lighting LED data tables. Since the 2016 presidential election, the course of the US DOE and its appliance standards program has changed from the previous eight years. Standards for several products have either not been completed or final standards have not been published. This has prompted legal action from some Attorneys General1, but in some cases has just left confusion over what products will be in the market into the future.

For residential lighting products, regulated by the Energy Independence and Securities Act (EISA) from 2007, there are three phases of standards. The first took place from 2012-2014, the second in 2020, and the third in 2025. The second phase of standards is currently a focus for programs and the lighting industry alike, as DOE did not publish a final rule setting new standards for general service lighting by the mandated deadline of 1/1/2017. When EISA was written, it included a “backstop” efficiency standard of 45 lumens per watt, something ostensibly only CFL and LED technology could meet, to take effect on 1/1/2020 in case DOE did not meet a series of regulatory obligations. One of those obligations was issuing a final rule by the 1/1/2017 deadline, and thus according to the language in the 2007 law, this backstop standard has been triggered; however with the new administration much confusion has been added to this equation. Litigation from the lighting trade association has resulted in a settlement that will re-open some portions of the rule; the impact or scope of that rule is unknown and yet to be issued by DOE (expected at some point in 2018).

Residential lighting programs have long assumed 1/1/2020 to be the date when baselines rise, but the various considerations over the past year  brought into question whether the long-expected baseline shift will in fact happen as planned. For the Mid-Atlantic TRM, the team thought long and hard about how to address this in the LED lighting data tables. Ultimately, however, because the backstop has been triggered and other elements of the standard, while they may change in the future in reaction to litigation, have not changed yet, we decided to keep 2020 as the baseline shift year. This means halogen products are largely unavailable in the market and therefore the savings claimed by LEDs in and after 2020 diminishes significantly. Ultimately, it was a decision based on what is known, not hedging bets for a longer program based on unknown factors or predicting the future. We will continue to track the appliance standards program and this lighting standard in particular and  we will reconsider whether this is the right course of action given the information available when we do future updates. This exercise underscores the value of a frequently updated TRM to reflect dynamic forces.

 

 

Does the Energy Efficiency Industry Need New Guidance Protocols for Advanced M&V?

Guidance was the concluding topic at NEEP’s EM&V Fall Meeting on The Many Flavors of Advanced M&V2. The meeting opened by making the case that Advanced M&V is already in widespread use in the industry in a range of applications, for example: to inform geo-targeted delivery of energy efficiency, to deliver and assess demand response, to identify program opportunities for cooperatives whose customers have advanced metering infrastructure, to provide rapid feedback impact assessments for customers investing in energy efficiency, and as one option when weighing trade-offs between costs, accuracy and timing in commercial program evaluation.

On the topic of guidance, two leading experts, Dr. Mimi Goldberg, DNVGL, and Eliot Crowe, LBNL, were invited to address some core questions and their takeaways are summarized here.

What guidance is available and why?  A lot of guidance pertaining to commercial and/or residential whole-facility impact measurement and verification is publicly available developed between 1994 and 2016 and supports energy efficiency program evaluation. While the motivations for developing the guidance varied, they all generally serve the purposes of either supporting program management and delivery or strengthening credibility of program results and reporting. It is not surprising that much of the guidance builds on the cornerstones provided by 1994 California Protocols and 1995 International Program Measurement and Verification Protocols, given that, as Dr. Goldberg noted: “If it’s M&V, it should do what M&V does and follow the same rules.”

So, does the industry need more guidance? Yes! And Dr. Goldberg and Mr. Crowe, who are working on this, pointed to at least four good reasons why: new industry players, new processes, more and finer data; and new uses and risks.

Two foundational needs are (1) guidance on identifying non-routine events and (2) appropriate adjustments in models with consumption data and guidance on criteria for selecting appropriate models to use.

On the short-term (immediate) wish list:

  • Can we promulgate, prioritize existing whole -premise guidance?
  • How should we demonstrate (test) that tools predict well in “typical” data sets?
  • What documentation should be standard?

Over the longer-term, the wish list includes:

  • Rules for identifying and addressing non-routine events
  • Data cleaning criteria
  • Accuracy metrics for high frequency data
  • Protocols for “bad” cases in samples of premises
  • Protocols/documentation for model selection rules
  • Demonstrate tools follow the protocols or documentation
  • (Re)defining “normal”

 

 

ACEEE Looks at Recent Development in Evaluation of Energy Efficiency

Over the past decade, the use of energy efficiency as a resource has increased considerably. Consequently, rigorous EM&V has gained importance as a way to help ensure that the resource is valid and the impacts are appropriately valued.

ACEEE recently released a report: Recent Developments in Energy Efficiency Evaluation, Measurement, and Verification that assesses and documents examples of what pioneering states and gas and electric utilities are doing in innovative approaches to evaluation of impacts, to address challenges and stake steps to evolve in a changing utility landscape.

The report focuses on three examples: Deemed savings in Technical Reference Manuals (TRMS), Common Practice Baseline Methods, and “M&V2.0.”

Clear and transparent processes for updating TRMs is a growing trend, regional collaboration on TRMS, and efforts to make TRMs available online are all trends contributing to improvement and accuracy of deemed values within them. Several states in the Northeast region are among those that the report cites as examples of some of these best practices.

The Common Practice Baseline is a method long used in the Northwest for estimating attributable program impacts; it describes “what a typical consumer would have done” if not participating in an efficiency program and it was recommended for use in the Clean Power Plan EM&V guidance. CA and MA are experimenting with development of an “industry standard practice” guide. Pros and cons to this baseline strategy need to be clarified before a clear consensus is reached. 

Regarding M&V2.0, the ACEEE research indicates it is viewed as a positive trend, especially for delivering early feedback on program, implementer and customer performance, but states lack enough information to know the full range of its opportunities and do not expect it to perfectly substitute for independent third party review. Connecticut was recognized as a state researching M&V2.0 as an evaluation strategy and in California M&V2.0 is being used for new (Residential Pay for Performance) program designs.

Many other evaluation challenges remain, and were beyond the scope of the report. High among these are effectively communicating evaluation results; the interactions of energy efficiency and other distributed energy resources, such as demand response; the evaluation of market effects and market transformation strategies; the role of efficiency evaluation for air regulators; measurement of non-energy benefits; and the increased attention—especially from economists—on randomized control trials.

 

 

REED and NEER: Cousins and Colleagues

NEEP’s Regional Energy Efficiency Database (REED) and the National Energy Efficiency Registry (NEER) are both web-based data repositories that help document energy efficiency program impacts. As you probably know, NEEP developed REED to track and report energy efficiency program impacts in New England, New York and the Mid-Atlantic. It is widely used for policy analysis, documentation, benchmarking and planning, and it helps inform work done by DOE and the EIA. NEEP is beginning to explore additional types and sources of data that could augment the information contained in REED. True to the spirit of making consistent and quality data on energy efficiency available, NEEP has also been assisting in the development of NEER and is pleased to briefly summarize here, some of the significant progress that has been made on it.

Similar to REED, NEER is a web-based platform intended to serve as a central repository. NEER differs in that it is national in scope, it incorporates a registration process, and has the goal of being a vehicle to support compliance and trading. It is being designed to support public and private sector inputs, as a first step toward creating a voluntary energy efficiency market. It will support documentation of program compliance and voluntary tracking of sustainability and energy goals. By creating a credible mechanism for energy savings and associated attributes – including NOx, SOx and carbon - to be bundled into financial instruments, NEER sets the stage for an innovative new asset class in the U.S.

In 2015, Tennessee, Georgia, Michigan, Minnesota, Oregon, Pennsylvania, The Climate Registry (TCR), and the National Association of State Energy Officials (NASEO), along with supporting organizations E4TheFuture and APX, were awarded competitive funding from the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) to develop a roadmap for the NEER. This year, principles and operating rules and the NEER roadmap were established.

The next steps for NEER involve exploration of how it can be used. The project team is looking for programs to pilot NEER and is currently in discussions with states on how it can best be utilized. In a recent working group meeting, a variety of stakeholders weighed in with suggestions and reactions that suggest that areas holding large future promise are serving local and corporate or ESCO audiences. NEER is currently working with EIA to test proof of concept for how NEER could be used to support national energy information systems. 

 

Additional Forum Updates

In early October, NEEP was invited to attend a workshop funded by the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation at which a small group of economists from various universities and energy efficiency program evaluation consultants, regulators and practitioners came together to discuss “Evaluating Residential Energy Efficiency Programs – A Path Forward“ referring to how to optimize evidence of savings from energy efficiency programs. The workshop provided an opportunity to improve these groups’ ability to share priorities and concerns and seek possible research interests, given the common interest in optimizing energy efficiency as a resource that also contributes to carbon reduction. It also reaffirmed the importance of continuing to work towards communicating about energy program evaluation and results in a common language, since academic economists may not be familiar with energy efficiency industry’s terminology. Elizabeth Titus shared EM&V Forum resources with the group and also moderated a panel of energy efficiency practitioners and regulators from California, Illinois and Wisconsin.  

 

Mark Your Calendar

Upcoming Forum, NEEP, and other webinars and meetings of potential interest


2 Advanced M&V refers to applications of sophisticated software to analysis of metering data which can include everything from traditional billing data to the high volumes and rapid turnaround associated with smart meter or smart device data.

 

Stay informed

Stay up to date with the latest NEEP and industry news, policies, and trends to your inbox every so often.

Subscribe to our newsletter