E-22014 Electricity Demand Side Management Plan Evaluation Reports
177 passages
The ENSC's portfolio of DSM program components achieved 151.888 GWh in total energy savings at the generator, which were 10 percent higher than the 2014 UARB-approved target. The total portfolio peak demand savings of 27.077 MW were howeve...
AI summary The ENSC's DSM program achieved 151.888 GWh in energy savings, exceeding the 2014 UARB target by 10 percent, but peak demand savings were slightly below the target. Custom Incentives and Energy Savings Actions compensated for shortfalls in other programs. Codes and Standards also contributed additional savings.
Table 7: 2014 Evaluated Results, Targets and Tracked Demand Savings at the Generator 2014 Demand Savings (MW) ENSC DSM Program DSM Component Initial Gross Savings Installed/ Adjusted Gross Savings Installed/Adjusted Gross Savings with Inte...
AI summary Table 7 presents the 2014 evaluated results, targets, and tracked demand savings at the generator for various DSM programs and components, including residential and business initiatives. It includes metrics such as initial gross savings, net savings, and targets for each program, with some notes on evaluation methods.
Custom New Construction This program component saw a total of 13 projects implemented in 2014, which resulted in net energy savings of 6.656 GWh and 2.517 MW in net peak demand savings at the generator. The gross energy and peak demand sav...
AI summary The Custom New Construction program had 13 projects in 2014, achieving 6.656 GWh in energy savings and 2.517 MW in peak demand savings. The Econoler team found discrepancies between their evaluation and ENSC's tracked savings, mainly due to adjustments for a LEED project and the inclusion of a diversity factor in ENSC's calculations.
Business Energy Solutions For 2014, Business Energy Solutions had a total of 761 participants. In addition, 51 participants implemented Rental Properties and Condos Service Common Area measures in 105 separate buildings, and 42 participant...
AI summary In 2014, Business Energy Solutions had 854 participants, achieving net energy savings of 13.175 GWh and peak demand savings of 2.570 MW. Savings were evaluated for lighting, non-lighting, LED Blitz pilot, and Rental Properties and Condos Service common space measures. Differences between tracked and evaluated results were due to adjustments in parameters such as NTGR, ballast factor, heat pump operating hours, and LED lamp unitary savings.
Table 13: Recommendations for Green Heat No. Recommendations GH-R5. Similar to the results of the literature review for wood and pellet stoves, the Evaluator did not find any updated studies for wood and pellet furnaces/boilers. Since the...
AI summary The Evaluator recommends retaining current unitary savings figures for wood and pellet furnaces/boilers, as no updated studies are available. These figures are based on past simulations and a 2012 billing analysis, and the limited number of installations makes further analysis difficult.
Table 15: Recommendations for Home Energy Report No. Recommendations All the program documents available or developed when designing Home Energy Report. It is of crucial importance that Opower help develop a comprehensive evaluation plan b...
AI summary The Home Energy Report program requires a comprehensive evaluation plan developed by Opower, ensuring all available data, methodologies, databases, and data-collection tools are listed for the Evaluator to effectively assess the program and determine additional data needs.
No. Recommendations BER-R9. Stating baseline assumptions in the Equations tab. The Equation tab now indicates the baseline wattage for each product sub-category. However, it is often difficult for the Evaluator to understand how this value...
AI summary The document recommends adding a new column in the Equation tab to provide more detailed information about baseline wattage assumptions, including technology used and ballast consumption, to improve clarity for evaluators and support future revisions by ENSC.
Table 18: Recommendations for Custom Retrofit No. Recommendations Custom-R9. Supply service providers with a standardized summary document for them to report the actual measures implemented: This document will help ensure that savings and...
AI summary Table 18 recommends providing service providers with a standardized summary document to report actual measures implemented in custom retrofits. The document will clarify savings and costs for each measure, avoid combining non-electrical and electrical savings, and include substantiation approaches such as schedule logs and engineering calculations.
Table 19: Recommendations for Custom New Construction No. Recommendations NC-R1. Gather more data to conduct a conclusive calibration billing analysis in 2015. Despite the fact that 23 projects were completed in 2012 and 2013, it was only...
AI summary The document recommends gathering more data to conduct a conclusive calibration billing analysis in 2015. Only seven out of 23 projects completed in 2012 and 2013 had sufficient energy billing data for analysis in 2014. The analysis was inconclusive, and the Evaluator suggests continuing this activity in the future and implementing measures to improve result quality.
Table 21: Recommendations for Codes and Standards No. Recommendations CS-R1. Focus the evaluation collection activity on industry associations to ensure that the most up-to-date market information is collected. Based on this year's experie...
AI summary The text discusses recommendations for improving the evaluation of codes and standards by focusing on industry associations for up-to-date market data. It highlights the challenges of relying on manufacturers and distributors for accurate market size assessments and suggests using data from regulatory organizations and industry associations for more accurate evaluations.
Instant Savings (continued) Natural Resources Canada, Energy Consumption of Major Household Appliances Shipped in Canada, Summary Report, Trends for 1900-2007 , December 2009, p. 43. Natural Resources Canada, Residential Sector Nova Scotia...
AI summary The text provides references to various studies and reports related to energy consumption, efficiency measures, and technologies, including heat pumps, lighting, and appliance usage, primarily focusing on data and methodologies used in energy efficiency programs.
Table 2: Survey Sample Size and Margin of Error 2012 2013 2014 Population Sample Size (n) Margin of Error at 90% Confidence Level Population Sample Size (n) Margin of Error at 90% Confidence Level Population Sample Size (n) Margin of Error...
AI summary Table 2 presents survey sample sizes and margins of error for different appliance categories from 2012 to 2014. The margin of error reflects the precision of measurements at a 90% confidence level, considering only random sampling errors, not non-sampling errors or bias.
3.2.1 Gross Unitary Savings For all freezers retired in 2014, ENSC uses a gross unitary savings value of 1,049 kWh per year, which corresponds to the average energy consumption value of retired freezers established during the 2013 impact e...
AI summary The document discusses the gross unitary savings value for retired freezers in 2014, using a value of 1,049 kWh per year based on the 2013 impact evaluation. The Econoler team updated this value using 2014 metering activity and participant survey results.
Average Energy Consumption of Retired Freezers The Evaluator revised the annual energy consumption value of the retired freezers using the data from the 2014 metering activity. Reliable data for a total of 61 freezers was used for this cal...
AI summary The Evaluator revised the annual energy consumption of retired freezers using 2014 metering data. Freezers were categorized by age, and average consumption per cubic foot was calculated. An average size of 15 cubic feet was used, and an occupant adjustment factor of 1.12 was applied, resulting in an estimated average annual consumption of 916 kWh per retired freezer.
Induced Consumption Induced consumption is also deducted to establish the unitary savings value for freezers. A proportion of three percent is established based on findings from the participant survey, as summarized in the following table.
AI summary Induced consumption is deducted to calculate the unitary savings value for freezers, with a 3% proportion based on participant survey findings summarized in a table.
3.3.1 Gross Unitary Savings Based on the 2012 evaluation, ENSC uses a unitary savings value of 371 kWh per year for retired room air conditioners. This value was calculated using an energy efficiency ratio (EER) of 6.69, which was establis...
AI summary The 2012 evaluation used a unitary savings value of 371 kWh per year for retired room air conditioners, calculated using an EER of 6.69, a small metering sample, and data from the OPA's 2008 Every Kilowatt Counts program.
Non-sampling error Errors arising during the course of all survey activities other than sampling. Non-sampling errors tend to lead to bias in measurements and are very difficult to quantify. Peak demand savings The demand savings that coin...
AI summary The text defines various terms related to energy efficiency programs, including non-sampling error, peak demand savings, precision, random sampling error, sample size, tracked savings, and unitary savings. These definitions are critical for understanding measurement accuracy and program evaluation in energy efficiency initiatives.
ented a number of initiatives for 2014, such as the launch of the Instant Savings application, which shows customers the savings they can achieve through the use of eligible energy-efficient products. Key parameters such as light bulb repl...
AI summary The document discusses ENSC's initiatives in 2014, including the launch of the Instant Savings application and improvements in data collection methods for energy efficiency. It highlights the use of general population surveys over intercept surveys and notes improvements in LED wattage accuracy, though some issues remain with the DSMDS reporting function.
5.1 Gross Savings The quantities of products sold through the Instant Savings spring and fall campaigns are captured in the tracking sheet. For each product category, ENSC used the unitary savings values from last year's evaluation report....
AI summary This section discusses how Efficiency Nova Scotia Corporation (ENSC) estimated unitary savings values for products sold through the Instant Savings campaigns, using revised values from recent studies and customized engineering calculations.
Displaced Wattage In 2014, the displaced wattage was revised according to the LED wattage values found in the 2014 tracking sheet and the average equivalent lamp wattage values specified by the manufacturer. Last year, the replaced lamp wa...
AI summary In 2014, the displaced wattage methodology was revised to better reflect the actual lamp replacements, considering the share of each type of replaced lamps. The Evaluator used weighted averages of equivalent wattages from incandescent, halogen, CFL, and LED lamps to estimate displaced wattage, particularly for LED lamps, which were found to have a displaced wattage of 18.5 W. The adjustment aligns with the UMP recommendations and affects savings evaluations for Instant Savings.
Tracked Savings For this product, ENSC uses a unitary savings value of 159 kWh per year, based on a 1.8-hour reduction in hours of operation. This value comes from a detailed calculation in the 2011 OPA report that was reviewed as part of...
AI summary ENSC uses a unitary savings value of 159 kWh per year for this product, based on a 1.8-hour reduction in hours of operation. The value was derived from a 2011 OPA report and has remained unchanged since its review in the 2012 evaluation report process.
Revised Savings For this year's evaluation, the Econoler team reviewed the hours of operation and concluded that those contained in the 2011 OPA report (a baseline of 4.75 hours per day and a new operating time of 2.95 hours per day) shoul...
AI summary The Econoler team reviewed the 2011 OPA report and concluded that the operating hours for outdoor motion sensors should remain unchanged, as no more accurate studies were found. The OPA's unitary savings values have not been modified in the 2014 version of the Prescriptive Measures and Assumptions.
Table 23: Energy Consumption Breakdown for Standard and Efficient Clothes Washers Energy Consumption Breakdown for Clothes Washers Proportion of Overall Consumption33 Standard Clothes Washer Electricity Consumption (kWh) Efficient Clothes...
AI summary Table 23 provides an energy consumption breakdown for standard and efficient clothes washers, highlighting the proportion of overall consumption and electricity usage. The text explains how savings from the water-heating system were estimated using data from the ENERGY STAR database and assumptions about internal heaters and DHW tank usage.
Table 25: Electricity Consumption for Standard Clothes Washers Energy Consumption Component Energy Consumption Electricity Consumption (kWh) Adjustment Factor Adjusted Electricity Consumption (kWh) Water-heating System 154 87 0.67 58 Inter...
AI summary The text presents two tables comparing the electricity consumption of standard and efficient clothes washers, including components like water-heating systems, internal dryers, and washing machine drums. Adjustments are made based on factors such as energy efficiency, and the data is sourced from Natural Resources Canada.
Table 28: Evaluation Results – Gross Energy and Peak Demand Savings by Product – Other Products Product Category Power Bar with Timer Smart Power Bar Heavy Duty Timer Clothes lines Program mable Ther mostat CEE Tier III Refrige rator CEE T...
AI summary Table 28 presents evaluation results of energy and peak demand savings by product category for other products, including power bars, timers, clothes lines, and refrigerators. The data includes units installed during Spring and Fall, energy savings in GWh, and peak demand savings in MW, with line loss factors applied for both meter and generator levels.
5.4 Net Savings Net energy savings were estimated by adding the interactive effects and the NTGR to the gross energy savings, using the equation below. Net Energy Savings = Gross Energy Savings × (1 + Interactive Effects Factor) × NTGR The...
AI summary Net energy savings were calculated using the formula that incorporates gross energy savings, interactive effects, and the Net Take-Up Growth Rate (NTGR), resulting in total net energy and peak demand savings of 8.509 GWh and 1.344 MW at the meter, and 9.360 GWh and 1.479 MW at the generator.
Table 32: Evaluation Results – Net Energy and Peak Demand Savings by Product – Lighting Products Product Category Regular CFL Specialty CFL LED Lamp LED Recessed Downlight Dimmer Switch Indoor Motion Sensor Motion Sensor with Dimmer Switch...
AI summary Table 32 evaluates the net energy and peak demand savings from various lighting products, including Compact Fluorescent Lamps (CFL), Light Emitting Diodes (LED), and motion sensors, based on gross energy savings, interactive effects, and net take-up growth rate (NTGR) factors.
Table 33: Evaluation Results – Net Energy and Peak Demand Savings by Product – Other Products Product Category Power Bar with Timer Smart Power Bar Heavy Duty Timer Clothes lines Program mable Ther mostat CEE Tier III Refrige rator CEE Tie...
AI summary Table 33 presents evaluation results for net energy and peak demand savings by product category, including energy savings in GWh and peak demand savings in MW for various products like smart power bars, heavy-duty timers, and energy-efficient refrigerators.
Table 34: Comparison of Tracked and Evaluated Savings at the Generator Initial Gross Savings Installed Gross Savings Installed Gross Savings with Interactive Effects NTGR Net Savings Energy Savings Tracked Savings from ENSC 16.879 GWh 15.9...
AI summary Table 34 compares tracked and evaluated savings at the generator level, showing discrepancies between Energy Efficiency Nova Scotia (ENSC) tracked savings and evaluation results for both energy and peak demand savings. Net savings are calculated using the Net Take-Up Growth Rate (NTGR).
This Appendix summarizes all the recommendations made by the Evaluator throughout this report as well as the sections from which the recommendations originated. Sections Recommendations 5 Analyze the CEE Tier III appliances offered. In Sep...
AI summary The appendix discusses the need to reassess eligibility criteria for energy-efficient appliances, particularly refrigerators and clothes washers, due to changes in CEE Tier III standards. ENSC must ensure new criteria reflect product availability and performance improvements over market averages.
In the table below, please indicate by using Yes/No for each observation whether the products eligible for rebates were easily identified. The products are located at eye level on the shelf. Yes No Indicate the percentage of available prod...
AI summary The text presents a table assessing whether eligible rebate products are easily identifiable in retail settings. It includes questions about product placement, signage, customer ability to identify products, and sources of rebate information.
DEFINITIONS Accuracy Reflects the proximity of measurements to the true value. Bias Systematic deviations of measurements from the true value. Billing calibration An activity that consists in adjusting the expected energy savings based on...
AI summary This section defines key terms related to energy efficiency, measurement accuracy, and statistical concepts. It includes definitions such as accuracy, bias, billing calibration, confidence interval, distortion effects, free-ridership, and net-to-gross ratio, among others, which are relevant to assessing the effectiveness of energy efficiency programs.
1 PROGRAM DESCRIPTION Efficiency Nova Scotia Corporation's (ENSC) Home Energy Assessment (HEA) encourages homeowners in Nova Scotia to improve energy efficiency and comfort in their homes, while reducing their environmental impact and the...
AI summary The Home Energy Assessment (HEA) program, administered by Efficiency Nova Scotia Corporation (ENSC), helps homeowners improve energy efficiency and reduce energy costs through insulation measures and rebates. The program was relaunched in 2012 as HEA to avoid confusion after federal rebates were withdrawn. It includes pre- and post-retrofit assessments and uses the HOT2000 simulation tool for EnerGuide ratings.
3.1 Gross Savings The gross savings evaluation was divided into two different sections: building envelope measure savings and peak demand savings. A total of 2,343 participants participated in HEA in 2014, which represents an increase comp...
AI summary The gross savings evaluation included building envelope measure savings and peak demand savings. In 2014, 2,343 participants underwent Home Energy Assessments, an increase from 2013 and 2012.
3.1.1 Building Envelope Measure Savings For building envelope measures, energy savings were calculated by comparing the modelled heating consumption values of the HOT2000 D and E assessments from participants. This method was used for all...
AI summary Building envelope measure savings are calculated by comparing HOT2000 D and E assessments, with a 18% overestimation adjustment applied. The method was used for 2014 participants and validated in the tracking sheet. The calculation uses a formula incorporating heating energy consumption data and the Princeton Scorekeeping Method (PRISM).
3.1.3 Validated Gross Savings The annual gross savings tracked for the building envelope measures and the prescriptive measures implemented in 2014 were validated by the Evaluator and are presented in the table below. Overall, the validate...
AI summary The document presents validated gross energy and peak demand savings for 2014, including both meter and generator levels. The energy savings at the meter are 4.493 GWh, and at the generator, they are 4.943 GWh after applying a line loss factor of 1.100. Similarly, peak demand savings at the meter are 1.105 MW, and at the generator, they are 1.216 MW.
Table 5: Validated Net Energy and Peak Demand Savings Parameter 2014 Result Energy Savings Total Gross Energy Savings – at meter (GWh) 4.493 NTGR 0.75 Total Net Energy Savings – at meter (GWh) 3.370 Line Loss Factor 1.100 Total Net Energy...
AI summary Table 5 presents validated net energy and peak demand savings for 2014, including gross and net savings at both the meter and generator levels, along with the net-to-gross ratio (NTGR) and line loss factor. These figures are used to assess the effectiveness of energy efficiency programs.
4 UNCONVERTED D STUDY SAVINGS In 2013, many participants did not complete the E assessment. The partner's interviews from the 2013 process evaluation showed that the main reason for this was the length of time to complete the E assessment...
AI summary The document discusses the 2013 Unconverted D Study Savings, focusing on participants who did not complete the E assessment. It outlines the methodology used to calculate energy savings from unconverted participants, including survey results, the influence of energy assessments, and the calculation of net energy and peak demand savings.
Table 7: Validated Savings at the Generator Parameter Gross Savings NTGR Net Savings Energy Savings Validated Savings 4.943 GWh 0.75 3.707 GWh Unconverted D Study Validated Savings 2.078 GWh 2.078 GWh Total Validated Energy Savings 7.020 G...
AI summary Table 7 presents validated energy and peak demand savings at the generator level, including gross savings, net-to-gross ratio (NTGR), and net savings. The data includes validated savings from energy efficiency programs and unconverted D study validated savings.
Precision The extent to which repeated measures agree with one another. Random sampling error The error in measurement due to the fact that measures are taken from a subset of the population and not the entire population. Sample size The n...
AI summary The text defines key terms related to statistical sampling and energy efficiency program tracking, including precision, random sampling error, sample size, tracked savings, and unitary savings. These definitions are used in the context of evaluating energy efficiency programs.
2.2.2 On-site Visits In October 2014, five on-site visits were conducted by Equilibrium Engineering to some participants' homes, including one visit for the air-source heat pump, one for the geothermal heat pump, one for the pellet stove a...
AI summary In October 2014, Equilibrium Engineering conducted five on-site visits to participants' homes to validate new heating equipment, collect data on previous systems, and gather information on energy usage. The methodology and protocol are detailed in Appendix V.
Installed Systems The final tab in the tracking report contains a summary table of the equipment installed to date. The quantity of each equipment type was recorded and categorized in two groups, namely those that received financing and th...
AI summary The tracking report for installed systems provides a detailed summary of equipment installed, categorized by financing and rebate. The report is well-organized, but issues were identified, such as inaccuracies in unitary savings for heat pump projects and missing data like utility account numbers and backup heating sources. The Evaluator recommends improvements to data collection for future analysis.
Table 13: Revised Unitary Savings Values Based on Literature Review Category of Equipment Revised Unitary Savings Value (kWh/year) Revised Unitary Peak Demand Savings Value (kW) Wood Stoves 10,443 4.00 Pellet Stoves 8,959 4.00 Wood Furnace...
AI summary Table 13 presents revised unitary savings values for various heating equipment based on a literature review. The values are calculated assuming a switch from an electrical heating system with 100% efficiency. Adjustments were made to account for the higher efficiency of air source heat pumps, using an HSPF value from a 10-year-old EnerGuide document.
Table 14: Revised Unitary Savings Values for Participants With Air Source Heat Pump Prior to Conversion Equipment Category Revised Unitary Savings Value When Heat Pump is Installed Prior to Conversion (kWh/year) Revised Unitary Peak Demand...
AI summary Table 14 provides revised unitary savings values for participants with air source heat pumps prior to conversion. The table includes savings values for various heating equipment categories, such as wood stoves, pellet stoves, and heat pumps. The adjustment ratio is equal to 1 for systems that did not initially use a heat pump as their primary heating system.
Sampling Methodology In preparation for five on-site visits, the Evaluator prepared a sampling plan for the 138 projects listed in the tracking report. The primary criterion for the development of the sampling plan was the gross savings re...
AI summary The Evaluator developed a sampling plan for 138 projects based on gross savings reported for each equipment category. The square root of tracked gross savings was calculated and used to determine the sample distribution. A secondary screening confirmed the sample outcome, and sites were randomly selected within a 200 km radius of the HRM.
2 VALIDATED SAVINGS In 2014, a full-scale evaluation of LIH was not carried out. The evaluation of LIH involved not only substantiating the savings tracked by ENSC who used the parameters established in the 2013 evaluation, but also reasse...
AI summary In 2014, a full-scale evaluation of the Low Income Homeowner (LIH) program was not conducted. The evaluation of LIH involved verifying savings tracked by ENSC using parameters from the 2013 evaluation and reassessing key parameters such as EnerGuide point value, modelled energy consumption, and unitary savings. This section discusses the validation of gross and net savings for LIH.
2.1 Gross Savings The final tracking sheet provided by ENSC for 2014 contained a total of 961 participants, which represents an increase compared to 2013 (739 participants) and 2012 (811 participants). In 2014, the Evaluator reviewed the f...
AI summary The 2014 ENSC tracking sheet reported 961 participants, an increase from previous years. The Evaluator assessed building envelope gross savings using energy savings per EnerGuide point and HOT2000 simulations. Prescriptive measures were updated using Appliance Retirement evaluation results. The demand-to-energy ratio was used to calculate gross peak demand savings.
2.1.1 Building Envelope Measures Using Savings per EnerGuide Point Increase In 2014, ENSC calculated the building envelope measures' savings for 109 LIH participants by applying an incremental savings coefficient per increased EnerGuide po...
AI summary In 2014, ENSC calculated building envelope measure savings for LIH participants using a savings per EnerGuide point method. A coefficient of 783 kWh was applied, and a 95.5% realization rate was used for participants who had not completed the E assessment. This method was reviewed as part of the 2014 evaluation.
Calibration As part of the 2012 evaluation of Home Energy Assessment (HEA) and LIH, a billing analysis was performed with 416 participants1 to evaluate the accuracy of the modeled heating consumption obtained from the HOT2000 simulations....
AI summary A 2012 evaluation of Home Energy Assessment (HEA) and Low Income Homeowner (LIH) programs used a billing analysis with 416 participants to assess the accuracy of HOT2000 simulations. The analysis found an 18% overestimation of modeled energy consumption, which was applied in the 2014 evaluation and resulted in an EnerGuide point savings value of 877 kWh.
2.1.2 Building Envelope Measures Using Modelled Energy Consumptions For the 394 participants with modeled energy consumption data available, building envelope measures' savings were calculated using the new method implemented in 2013. Inst...
AI summary The document discusses the method used by ENSC to calculate building envelope measure savings based on modeled energy consumption data from HOT2000 simulations and the percentage of electrical heating. It notes the continued use of an 18% overestimation factor from a 2012 billing analysis in the calculation formula.
2.1.5 Validated Gross Savings The annual gross savings for the building envelope measures and the prescriptive measures implemented in 2014 were validated by the Evaluator and are presented in the following table. Overall, the validated gr...
AI summary The annual gross energy and peak demand savings from building envelope and prescriptive measures implemented in 2014 were validated and amount to 2.101 GWh and 0.490 MW at the meter. Using a line loss factor of 1.100, the estimated savings at the generator are 2.311 GWh and 0.539 MW.
Table 4: Validated Gross Energy and Peak Demand Savings Building Envelope Measures Prescriptive Measures Product Category Modelled Heating Consumption Savings per EnerGuide Point Increase Refrigerator Replacement Freezer Replacement Dehumi...
AI summary Table 4 presents validated gross energy and peak demand savings across various product categories and measures. The data includes total number of units, unitary savings, and total gross energy and peak demand savings at both the meter and generator levels, along with line loss factors and demand-to-energy ratios.
Table 6: Validated Savings at the Generator Initial Gross Savings NTGR Net Savings Energy Savings 2.311 GWh 1.00 2.311 GWh Peak Demand Savings 0.539 MW 1.00 0.539 MW
AI summary Table 6 presents validated savings at the generator level, showing initial gross savings, net-to-gross ratio (NTGR), and net savings for energy and peak demand. Energy savings amount to 2.311 GWh, and peak demand savings are 0.539 MW, with an NTGR of 1.00 for both categories.
Non-sampling error Errors arising during the course of all survey activities other than sampling. Non-sampling errors tend to lead to bias in measurements and are very difficult to quantify. Peak demand savings The demand savings that coin...
AI summary The text defines several key terms related to energy efficiency programs and statistical methodologies, including non-sampling error, peak demand savings, precision, random sampling error, sample size, tracked savings, and unitary savings. These terms are relevant to the evaluation and tracking of energy savings in programs managed by Efficiency Nova Scotia Corporation (ENSC).
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The 2014 evaluation of New Home Construction, also known as Performance Plus in 2013, involved validating the tracked savings of Efficiency Nova Scotia Corporation (ENSC) as well as re-evaluating specific key parameters,...
AI summary This report evaluates the 2014 Performance Plus program, validating the tracked savings of Efficiency Nova Scotia Corporation (ENSC) and re-evaluating key parameters such as EnerGuide point value, free-ridership, and market spillover effects. It presents the validated gross and net savings for 2014.
Program Component Overview New Home Construction is meant to encourage homeowners and builders to exceed building code requirements for energy efficiency in new homes, thus increasing the number of energy-efficient dwellings in the provinc...
AI summary The Program Component Overview outlines incentives for new home construction that exceed energy efficiency standards, including reimbursement for enrollment fees and additional incentives for homes meeting specific energy consumption thresholds. Former Performance Plus projects must meet previous eligibility criteria.
Key Findings Econoler reviewed the content of the 2014 tracking sheet. A total of 846 participants took part in New Home Construction in 2014 (including 709 participants registered under Performance Plus). To calculate the gross savings of...
AI summary Econoler evaluated the New Home Construction program in 2014, finding a net-to-gross ratio (NTGR) of 0.78 after accounting for free-ridership and market effects. The savings per EnerGuide point increased slightly compared to 2013, and free-ridership levels rose among builders and homeowners.
2 METHODOLOGY This section presents the Econoler team and the methodology used to evaluate New Home Construction.
AI summary This section introduces the Econoler team and outlines the methodology used to evaluate New Home Construction within the regulatory proceeding.
2.2 Methodology Description In 2014, the evaluation of New Home Construction involved validating ENSC's tracked savings, which were established using the 2013 evaluation results, and re-evaluating the following specific key parameters: (1)...
AI summary In 2014, ENSC evaluated new home construction by validating tracked savings and re-evaluating key parameters like EnerGuide point value, free-ridership, and spillover. Surveys were conducted to revise these parameters, using data from the Home Energy Assessment and computer-assisted telephone interviews.
3.1.1 Unitary Savings Value per EnerGuide Point Increase The next sections present the three key features used to calculate gross energy savings under New Home Construction, namely the EnerGuide baseline, the savings per EnerGuide point ca...
AI summary This section outlines the three key features used to calculate gross energy savings under New Home Construction: the EnerGuide baseline, savings per EnerGuide point calculated with HEA participants, and 2012 billing calibration results.
Table 4: Calculation of Average Savings per EnerGuide Point from HOT2000 Data Description Values and Units Range of EnerGuide Point per Participant From 1 to 40 Range of Space Heating Savings per Participant From 151 to 44,002 kWh/year Ran...
AI summary The table provides data on average energy savings per EnerGuide point from HOT2000 data, with an overall average of 1,085 kWh/year. This information is used by the Evaluator to estimate the value of savings per EnerGuide point.
Table 5: Validated Gross Energy and Demand Savings Parameter Value Energy Savings Number of Units 5,980 Unitary Savings (kWh) 891 Total Gross Energy Savings – at meter (GWh) 5.328 Line Loss Factor 1.100 Total Gross Energy Savings – at gene...
AI summary Table 5 presents validated gross energy and demand savings, including 5,980 units with unitary savings of 891 kWh, leading to total gross energy savings of 5.328 GWh at the meter and 5.861 GWh at the generator. Peak demand savings are also detailed, with total gross peak demand savings of 1.369 MW at the meter and 1.506 MW at the generator.
3.2 Interactive Effects No additional interactive effects are considered in the net savings calculation since they are already taken into account in the HOT2000 simulations.
AI summary The section discusses that interactive effects are not considered separately in the net savings calculation because they are already accounted for in the HOT2000 simulations.
Table 6: Validated Net Energy and Peak Demand Savings Parameter Value Energy Savings Total Gross Energy Savings – at meter (GWh) 5.328 NTGR 0.78 Total Net Energy Savings – at meter (GWh) 4.156 Line Loss Factor 1.100 Total Net Energy Saving...
AI summary Table 6 presents validated net energy and peak demand savings, including total gross and net energy savings at both the meter and generator levels, along with line loss factors and corresponding peak demand savings values.
INSTRUCTION READ: "Can you please tell me which answer(s) need(s) to be corrected between the number of new houses you or your firm have built so far in 2014 in Nova Scotia and the number of houses built in Nova Scotia under the Performanc...
AI summary The text provides instructions for correcting answers related to the number of new houses built in Nova Scotia in 2014 and their participation in Efficiency Nova Scotia's programs. It also asks about energy efficiency measures implemented outside of these programs.
2.2.5 Unitary Savings Review To review the unitary savings values used in the tracking sheet, the Econoler team validated the parameters currently used in the tracked savings calculations by conducting a literature review of the technical...
AI summary The Econoler team validated unitary savings values by reviewing technical reference manuals, public evaluations, and conducting engineering calculations when reliable data was unavailable. They also evaluated energy savings from changes in clothes washing habits among CBSM Pilot participants using literature reviews, engineering calculations, and annual survey results.
Hours of Operation To review the hours of operation, Econoler applied some of the principles promoted by the Uniform Methods Protocol (UMP). Since it was impossible to conduct a metering study specific to Nova Scotia due to budgetary const...
AI summary Econoler used the Uniform Methods Protocol (UMP) to estimate the hours of operation for LED lamps in Nova Scotia due to budget constraints preventing specific metering studies. The analysis relied on secondary data and studies focused on CFLs from jurisdictions like Massachusetts, California, Maine, and Illinois, assuming similar applicability for LED lamps.
Table 18: Revised Unitary Savings Value for Low-flow Faucet Aerators Parameter Unitary Savings (kWh/year) Source Housing Type Single Family - Baseline Flow Rate [gpm] 1.2 2003 Aquacraft Study Low-flow Rate (gpm) 0.94 2003 Aquacraft Study D...
AI summary Table 18 presents the revised unitary savings value for low-flow faucet aerators, based on parameters such as baseline and low-flow rates, water usage, and efficiency of electric water heaters. The calculation involves data from various studies and conventions, resulting in an annual savings of 125 kWh per household.
Revised Savings The Econoler team reviewed this unitary savings value by conducting a literature review to validate the assumptions used by the OPA. The OPA provides assumptions for the showerhead base (1.75 gpm to 2.25 gpm) and low flow (...
AI summary The Econoler team reviewed assumptions used by the OPA for calculating unitary savings related to showerhead flow rates. They validated these assumptions using literature and studies but were unable to derive specific hot water consumption values. Data on shower duration, DHW usage, and household size were sourced from Mayer and Oreo and the CBEEDAC.
Table 19: Revised Unitary Savings Value for Low-flow Showerheads 17 Parameter Unitary Savings (kWh/year) Source Baseline Flow Rate (gpm) Variable (2.0 gpm, 2.25 gpm or 2.5 gpm) Tracking sheet Low-flow Rate (gpm) 1.5 On-site visits Number o...
AI summary Table 19 presents the revised unitary savings value for low-flow showerheads, detailing parameters such as baseline flow rates, average shower time, and water heater efficiency. It calculates the energy savings in kWh/year for different flow rate reductions, using data from various sources like the RDI survey and the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission's Technical Reference Manual.
Revised Savings To revise the savings, the Evaluator consulted various technical reference manuals from similar jurisdictions. It was found that the savings per foot of pipe varied significantly. For instance, the Mid-Atlantic 2013 TRM19 c...
AI summary The Evaluator revised savings estimates for pipe insulation based on the OPA's 38 kWh per 3 ft assumption, considering realistic heat loss hours and insulation thickness. The decision to not cap insulation length was made after on-site visits showed effective heat loss reduction in homes with extensive insulation, even beyond 15 ft.
Table 20: Revised Unitary Savings Value for Hot Water Tank Wraps Variable Value Unit Source Layer 1: Interior Insulation of Tank re 0.300 M Giant21 ri 0.262 M Idem k 0.018 W/m°C Idem Rlayer 1.198 m°C/W Calculation RTop 2.113 m°C/W Giant La...
AI summary Table 20 presents the revised unitary savings value for hot water tank wraps, including variables such as thermal resistance, heat transfer rates, and energy savings calculations. The data is based on estimates and specifications from various sources, including Frost King Insulation Blanket and the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission.
Table 27: Evaluated Net Energy and Peak Demand Savings by Product C F Ls Sa in To l Ne En ta t er g g s y v – ( G W h ) t m te a e r 0. 1 0 1 3. 6 4 7 0. 1 2 8 0. 0 0 4 0. 1 7 7 1. 4 0 2 0. 0 4 4 L ine Lo Fa to ss c r 1. 1 0 0 1. 1 0 0 1....
AI summary Table 27 presents evaluated net energy and peak demand savings by product, including metrics such as total net energy savings in gigawatt-hours and total peak demand savings in megawatts for various products like CFLs and LEDs.
(Continued) LED L _amps Low-F low Showe rhead Llot Woton 0 Totalfan Category of Product 12W Replacing 60W 12W Replacing 100W LED Nightlights Faucet Aerator 0.5 gpm Reduction 0.75 gpm Reduction Pipe Insulation Hot Water Tank Wrap Smart Powe...
AI summary The document presents a detailed table of energy and peak demand savings associated with various efficiency programs and products, including LED lighting, low-flow fixtures, and insulation. It includes metrics such as gross and net energy savings, interactive effect factors, and line loss factors.
Water Heating Energy Usage per Load Since the vast majority of the CBSM Pilot participants took part in the program in 2013, the total energy consumption for a clothes washer was taken from the 2013 evaluation report for Instant Savings, w...
AI summary The document calculates water heating energy consumption per load for clothes washing, using data from Hydro-Québec and the CSA test procedure. It adjusts the energy consumption based on findings that Quebecers use 33% less energy for water heating than assumed in the CSA standard, leading to an adjusted value of 0.51 kWh per load.
Water Heating Electricity per Load The percentage of hot water produced electrically was then determined. The percentage of washers with their own electrical resistance to heat water was assumed to be insignificant, as this information was...
AI summary The text discusses the calculation of electricity use for water heating per laundry load, based on data from 2007 and 2014, estimating that 71% of water is heated electrically, resulting in 0.36 kWh of electricity use per load.
Table 30: Average Water Usage of Clothes Dryers per Year of Purchase Year 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Litres per cycle 1.45 1.25 1.16 1.14 1.09 0.82 These values were used to calculate the average increase of water consumption per additi...
AI summary Table 30 shows the average water usage of clothes dryers per year of purchase from 2005 to 2010. The data indicates a 12% increase in water consumption per additional year of use. Based on a survey of CBSM Pilot participants, the average water usage for seven-year-old washers is estimated to be 2.2 times that of 2013 models, leading to an estimated electricity use of 0.81 kWh per load.
Unitary Savings Value As it has been previously determined, the reduction in warm water usage of CBSM Pilot participants with respect to the control group stands at 60 percent. This reduction, multiplied by the water heating electricity us...
AI summary The document calculates the annual unitary savings value for CBSM Pilot participants based on a 60% reduction in warm water usage compared to a control group. The calculation uses factors like water heating electricity use per load, average laundry loads per week, and weeks per year, resulting in an annual savings of 114 kWh per participant.
Table 9: Percentage of Products Installed and Installation Rate Type of Product Installation Rate Regular CFL (13W and 23W) 95% Dimmable CFL (16W) 100% LED Nightlight 100% Faucet Aerator 95% Low-Flow Showerhead 92% Low-Flow Showerwand 100%...
AI summary Table 9 outlines the installation rates of various energy-efficient products, showing high adoption levels for items such as CFLs, LED nightlights, and low-flow showerheads. Section 3.1.7 discusses validated gross savings, which is likely related to the energy and cost savings achieved through these installations.
The annual gross savings tracked for the products installed in 2014 were validated by the Evaluator and are presented in Table 10. Overall, the gross energy and peak demand savings amount to 3.325 GWh and 0.775 MW at the meter, respectivel...
AI summary The document validates annual gross savings from energy efficiency programs in 2014, showing 3.325 GWh and 0.775 MW at the meter. Using a line loss factor of 1.099, the savings at the generator were calculated as 3.655 GWh and 0.852 MW, based on data provided by Nova Scotia Power.
Table 10: Validated Gross Energy and Peak Demand Savings by Product Ty f Pr du t p e o o c 1 3- W t C t a F L 1 3- W t C t a L O F do t u or 1 4- W t C t a F L 1 4- W t C t a L O F do t u or 2 3- W t C t a F L 2 3- W t C t a L O F do t u o...
AI summary Table 10 presents validated gross energy and peak demand savings by product type, including data on the number of units and installation rates for various lighting and heating products. The table includes metrics like CFL, LED, and DHW, with percentages indicating installation rates.
(Continued) Type of Product 10-Watt LED A- Lamp 10-Watt LED Dim. A-Lamp LED Nightlight Low-Flow Faucet Aerator Low-Flow Shower- head Low-Flow Shower- wand Pipe Insulation Tank Wrap Hot Water Tank Wrap (RSI-1.21) Energy Savings Number of Un...
AI summary The document presents a detailed table of energy savings data for various products, including LED lamps, low-flow faucets, and insulation materials. It includes metrics such as the number of units installed, energy savings in GWh, and peak demand savings in MW. The data provides a comprehensive overview of the impact of these energy efficiency measures.
15 DOE-2 is a widely used and accepted building energy analysis software tool, developed with U.S. Department of Energy funding. 16 Statistics Canada (CANSIM), Households having air conditioning, Nova Scotia, 2009. 17 ADS ASSOCIÉS, "Évalua...
AI summary The text discusses the use of DOE-2 software for building energy analysis and provides details on interactive effects factors for insulation and hot water tank wraps, including calculations based on heating and cooling periods in Halifax. The factors are determined using COP and degree-days data.
Table 13: Validated Net Energy and Peak Demand Savings by Product Type of Product 13-Watt CFL 13-Watt CFL Outdoor 14-Watt CFL 14-Watt CFL Outdoor 23-Watt CFL 23-Watt CFL Outdoor 14-Watt Dim. CFL 15-Watt Dim. CFL 16-Watt Dim. CFL 14-Watt G2...
AI summary Table 13 presents validated net energy and peak demand savings by product type, including energy savings at the meter and generator, interactive effects, NTGR, line loss, and peak demand savings. The table includes various products such as CFLs and LEDs, with associated metrics like gross and net energy savings and peak demand savings.
Table 14: Validated Savings at the Generator Initial Gross Savings Installed Gross Savings Installed Gross Savings with Interactive Effects NTGR Net Savings Energy Savings 3.750 GWh 3.655 GWh 3.277 GWh 0.83 2.720 GWh Peak Demand Savings 0....
AI summary Table 14 presents validated savings at the generator level, showing initial gross savings, installed gross savings, and net savings after accounting for interactive effects. The table includes energy savings and peak demand savings, along with the net-to-gross ratio (NTGR) for each category.
Table 2: Values of Variables for Solar DHW Systems Variables Values Number of Occupants Number of occupants claimed on application Daily Water Use 60 L/day per person (RETScreen calculates this) Slope Actual value if available; otherwise d...
AI summary Table 2 outlines variables used in RETScreen models for Solar DHW systems, including occupant numbers, water use, slope, azimuth, solar water heater efficiency, storage, and pump power. Annual savings are calculated using differences in electricity consumption between base and proposed cases, with specific assumptions for system efficiency and losses.
Table 3: Values of Variables for Solar Space Heating Systems Variables Values Number of Occupants Number of occupants claimed on application Indoor Temperature (°C) Actual, otherwise default value = 21 Air Temperature – maximum (°C) Actual...
AI summary Table 3 outlines the variables and their default values used in RETScreen models for solar space heating systems. Variables include occupant numbers, temperature settings, airflow rates, and solar collector specifications. The table also includes parameters like seasonal efficiency and incremental fan power, which are used to calculate annual electricity savings between base and proposed cases.
2.1.1 Adjustment Ratios During the 2013 impact evaluation, the Econoler team evaluated the savings values calculated by ENSC for solar DHW systems by reviewing the RETScreen simulation and conducting sites visit for 11 projects. The inform...
AI summary In 2013, the Econoler team evaluated ENSC's savings values for solar DHW systems and air space heating systems using RETScreen simulations and site visits. An adjustment ratio of 1.028 was applied to DHW systems, while a 1.000 adjustment ratio was used for air space heating systems based on similar findings.
2.1.2 Validated Gross Savings The gross annual savings for all categories of equipment installed through Solar are presented in Table 4. The results are based on the calculated RETScreen savings found in the tracking sheet and the adjustme...
AI summary The validated gross savings for Solar installations are 0.0864 GWh at the meter and 0.0950 GWh at the generator, using a 1.100 line loss factor provided by Nova Scotia Power. Peak demand savings for Solar are assumed to be nil for 2014.
Table 2: ENSC Unitary Savings Estimate for Each Set of LED Lights Exchanged Parameters Values Proportion of Old Large Incandescent Sets Returned (25 lamps per set) 40% Proportion of Old Mini Incandescent Sets Returned (100 lamps per set) 4...
AI summary Table 2 provides an estimate of unitary energy and demand savings from replacing old incandescent light sets with new LED sets. The table calculates the average displaced wattage, annual usage, and resulting energy and demand savings per exchange of light sets.
Proportion of Sets Replaced The in-field survey carried out in 2014 highlights major differences in the proportion of each incandescent set category and in the average number of lamps per set compared to assumptions used in the previous ev...
AI summary A 2014 in-field survey revealed significant differences in the proportion of incandescent set categories and average number of lamps per set compared to previous evaluations, as shown in a table.
Displaced Wattage Based on former in-field observations, ENSC established the percentages of old sets that were returned among three different types of incandescent light sets. The lamp wattages used for the different types of old sets tha...
AI summary The document discusses the validation of wattage values for old incandescent light sets based on various studies and sources, including Pacific Gas and Electric Company, BC Hydro, Ontario Power Authority, and the Technical Reference Manual from the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission and California Municipal Utilities Association. The wattage values used by ENSC for large and mini incandescent bulbs are deemed appropriate.
Table 7: Evaluation Results – Total Gross Energy Savings Energy Savings Number of LED Sets – from tracking sheet 6,343 Unitary Energy Savings Value (kWh) 29 Total Gross Energy Savings – at meter (GWh) 0.184 Line Loss Factor 1.100 Total Gro...
AI summary Table 7 presents the evaluation results for total gross energy savings from LED sets. It includes metrics such as the number of LED sets, unitary energy and demand savings, line loss factors, and peak demand savings at both the meter and generator levels.
Table 9: Evaluation Results – Total Net Savings Energy Savings Total Gross Energy Savings – at meter (GWh) 0.184 Interactive Effects Factor -5.0% NTGR 1.00 Total Net Energy Savings – at meter (GWh) 0.175 Line Loss Factor 1.100 Total Net En...
AI summary Table 9 presents evaluation results for total net energy and peak demand savings, showing gross and net savings at both the meter and generator levels, with adjustments for interactive effects and line loss factors. The results are compared to 2014 tracking sheet estimates.
ngs for a customer were dropped. Data was dropped if: - Any meter reading with duration longer than 90 days - Electricity meter reading with a usage less than 2 kWh/day or greater than 300 kWh/day The initial methodology would have involve...
AI summary The selection of participants involved dropping data based on meter reading duration and usage thresholds. Due to confidentiality issues, the Evaluator could not access the raw and treated databases. However, the Evaluator believes the participants were properly selected and recommends further analysis once confidentiality issues were resolved in 2015.
Energy Savings Opower makes a billing analysis every month to determine the amount of savings achieved by the participants for that month. The results of these billing analyses are presented to ENSC in a monthly report, detailing the energ...
AI summary Opower provides monthly billing analyses to ENSC, detailing energy savings from the Home Energy Report (HER) program. From April 2013 to the end of 2014, savings ranged from 0% to 2%, with an average of 1.3%. Total net energy savings at the meter were 31.362 GWh, and 34.498 GWh at the generator, using a line loss factor of 1.100 provided by Nova Scotia Power.
Table 9: Paper-based Component Evaluation Results – Total Net Energy Savings Energy Savings 2013 2014 Total Number of Participants 93,119 93,119 Total Net Energy Savings – at Meter (GWh) 8.329 23.033 31.362 Line Loss Factor 1.100 1.100 1.1...
AI summary Table 9 presents the paper-based component evaluation results for total net energy savings, including the number of participants, energy savings at the meter and generator, and the line loss factor for the years 2013 and 2014.
Table 10: Paper-based Component Evaluation Results – Total Net Peak Demand Savings Peak Demand Savings 2013 2014 Total Number of Participants 93,119 93,119 Total Net Peak Demand Savings – at meter (MW) 0.951 2.629 3.580 Line Loss Factor 1....
AI summary Table 10 presents the results of a paper-based component evaluation for total net peak demand savings from 2013 to 2014, including the number of participants, savings at the meter and generator, and the line loss factor. The data shows an increase in savings over the two years.
6.1.2 Energy-efficient Room Air-conditioner In 2014, for Appliance Retirement, the Evaluator reviewed the estimated annual energy consumption and the unitary savings value for retired room air-conditioners. The average annual usage was 310...
AI summary In 2014, an evaluation of energy-efficient room air-conditioners was conducted, analyzing energy consumption and savings from retired units. The average annual energy consumption for standard units was calculated as 279 kWh, while energy-efficient units consumed 199 kWh, resulting in an average annual savings of 80 kWh. A survey found that 4.7% of participants purchased energy-efficient models.
Table 11: Heating Degree Days below 15°C in Representative Cities in Nova Scotia Halifax Truro Sydney Nova Scotia Average Heating Degree Days (15°C.day) 3,071.8 3,536.9 3,573.1 3,393.9 The difference between the Nova Scotia average and the...
AI summary Table 11 provides Heating Degree Days below 15°C for representative cities in Nova Scotia, showing that the provincial average is within 10% of each city's value, making it applicable across the province.
Table 14: Revised Unitary Savings Value for Low-flow Showerheads 14 Parameter Unitary Savings (kWh/year) Source Number of People Whose Behavioural Change is Accounted for 1 Flow Rate of the Showerhead (F) 2.4 gpm 2014 RDI Database Average...
AI summary Table 14 presents the calculation of the revised unitary savings value for low-flow showerheads based on data from the Home Energy Report (HER) and other sources, including parameters such as flow rate, shower time, and water heater efficiency.
Water-heating Energy Usage per Load Econoler used the total energy consumption value for a clothes washer from the 2013 Instant Savings evaluation report; this value was established based on the average Modified Energy Factor (MEF) of all...
AI summary The document discusses the calculation of water-heating energy usage per load for clothes washers, using data from Hydro-Québec and the Canadian Standard Association (CSA). It applies a 24.8% water-heating energy proportion and adjusts for regional differences in laundry behavior, resulting in an estimated 0.51 kWh of water-heating energy consumption per load.
6.1.7 Hang Laundry to Dry To calculate the unitary savings value associated with this behaviour, the energy consumption of the clothes dryer was estimated for each laundry load. Using the results of the 2014 annual survey for RDI, the aver...
AI summary This section calculates the energy savings from hanging laundry to dry instead of using electric clothes dryers. It uses data on appliance energy consumption, survey results showing increased hanging of laundry, and the proportion of electric dryers in Nova Scotia to estimate savings of 46.5 kWh/year per participant.
6.2 Gross Savings This section presents the gross savings associated with HER's web-based component.
AI summary This section outlines the gross savings linked to the web-based component of the Home Energy Report (HER). It focuses on the financial implications of this aspect of the program.
Table 19: Web-based Component Evaluation Results for 2013 – Total Gross Energy Savings Ca f Pr du te t g or o o c y En er g y f f ic ie t e n D is hw he as r En er g y f f ic ie t e n Ro A ir om d i t io co n ne r In la te su W in do i t h...
AI summary Table 19 presents web-based component evaluation results for 2013, focusing on total gross energy savings. It includes categories such as energy-efficient dishwashers, air conditioners, windows, and other components. The table lists participation numbers and evaluation energy savings data.
The net energy savings were estimated by applying the NTGR to the gross energy savings value in the following equation. Net Energy Savings = Gross Energy Savings × NTGR Since each product category's NTGR was different, the net energy savin...
AI summary The document calculates net energy savings by applying the NTGR to gross energy savings for each product category, resulting in total net energy savings of 0.194 GWh at the meter and 0.213 GWh at the generator.
CONCLUSION Launched in 2013, HER is an innovative program intended to promote behavioural changes towards greater energy efficiency. Since its inception, a total of 93,119 participants have taken part in the paper-based component of HER, a...
AI summary The Home Energy Report (HER) program, launched in 2013, has achieved significant energy savings through its paper-based component, while the web-based component has had limited impact. The 2014 evaluation showed that the paper-based component generated 34.498 GWh in net savings, while the web-based component generated only 0.291 GWh. Behavioral changes were observed in participants, though the web-based component had less influence on energy-efficient behaviors.
DEFINITIONS Reflects the proximity of measurements to the true value. Systematic deviations of measurements from the true value. A base case details the information on how assumed gross savings used in the tracking sheet have been establis...
AI summary The text defines various terms related to energy efficiency program evaluation, including concepts such as gross and net savings, distortion effects, interactive effects, and the evaluation process. It outlines key components like base cases, evaluation plans, and the impact of energy efficiency measures on overall energy consumption.
either did the lighting worksheets provide the Evaluator with the existing-equipment data for many sampled projects. In addition, a few HVAC projects with air-source heat pumps of a capacity below 65 kBtu/hr used the AHRI capacity data, in...
AI summary The evaluation of the lighting and HVAC projects identified issues with data accuracy and documentation completeness. The use of AHRI capacity data for heat pumps and manual entry of savings led to errors. Recommendations include using formulas for savings calculation and ensuring complete project documentation in the DSMDS.
Table 8: Reasons for Participating 2012 2014 Motivations Most Important Motivation Second Most Important Motivation Most Important Motivation Second Most Important Motivation Sample Size 56 56 27 27 Save on energy costs/bills 55% 32% 59% 2...
AI summary Table 8 presents data on participants' motivations for joining energy efficiency programs in 2012 and 2014. The primary motivation was saving on energy costs, with a significant decline in the percentage of participants citing this reason over time. Other motivations included taking advantage of program incentives, updating equipment, and environmental concerns.
e projects sampled included equipment specifications sheets. It was discovered that some of the equations in the tracking sheet included user input errors, which also resulted in savings adjustments. As stated in the 2013 evaluation report...
AI summary An evaluation found that heat pump models installed in Nova Scotia may exceed their working limits at temperatures higher than the typical minimum. Adjustments were made to demand savings calculations using capacity and COP values at -15°C, leading to a 48% revised demand savings ratio for ASHP measures in the HVAC category.
5.1.2 Commercial Lighting Measures A total of 25 on-site visits were conducted for the lighting measures category; however, as mentioned above, three projects were eliminated from the data analysis because they were incomplete at the time...
AI summary The document discusses the evaluation of commercial lighting measures, including on-site visits, adjustments to tracked savings, and the impact of ballast factors on energy savings calculations. Over 80% of projects involved LED measures, and the evaluation highlights the importance of considering ballast factors in calculating energy savings.
l those projects that do not function properly as expected, a site visit should be conducted to validate what was modified to the initial installation and calculate the savings based on the new setup. Only one project this year included on...
AI summary The Evaluator recommends adding a question about redundancy in the worksheet to prevent reduced VSD measure savings. The default energy and demand savings factors in the CIRx tool are outdated, and the Massachusetts 2013-2015 TRM methodology is suggested as a more accurate alternative. This methodology considers motor efficiency, building type, and equipment function, but ENSC currently does not collect motor efficiency data, which needs to be added to the application package.
5.1.5 Compressed Air Measures The compressed air measure category was evaluated by conducting four on-site visits. Adjustments were made to the tracked energy and demand savings of three of the four projects. Similar to 2013, the hours of...
AI summary The compressed air measure category was evaluated through four on-site visits, leading to adjustments in energy and demand savings for three of the four projects. Adjustments were made due to differences in hours of operation and airflow values, resulting in a 7.1% decrease in total energy savings and a 6.1% decrease in total demand savings.
5.1.6 Agricultural Measures The agricultural measure category was evaluated by conducting five on-site visits in 2014. The number of cows was decreased for two of the projects. For one project, the reduction was made because the number of...
AI summary The agricultural measure category was evaluated through five on-site visits in 2014, leading to several adjustments in energy and demand savings calculations. Issues included incorrect cow numbers, discrepancies in VSD installations, and algorithmic errors. The overall energy savings were reduced by 7.8%, and demand savings by 8.6%, due to these adjustments.
5.1.10 Solar Measures One solar thermal project was implemented in 2014. The RETScreen ® file provided for the project indicated a 50 percent occupancy rate. The participant declared that the building would be utilized all year round this...
AI summary A solar thermal project implemented in 2014 had its energy savings adjusted based on occupancy rate changes. The Evaluator adjusted the occupancy rate from 50% to 100%, increasing tracked energy savings from 0.004 GWh to 0.005 GWh, while demand savings remained unchanged at 0.008 MW.
Table 14: Evaluation Results – Revised Net Savings – BER Mail-in Category of Measure HVAC Lighting Refrige ration Motors and VSDs Compressed Air Agricultural Energy Savings Total Gross Energy Savings – at Meter (GWh) 3.013 4.786 0.128 1.26...
AI summary Table 14 presents evaluation results for the Revised Net Savings from the BER Mail-in program, detailing energy and peak demand savings across various categories of measures, including HVAC, Lighting, and Compressed Air, with calculations involving Net-to-Gross Ratio and Line Loss Factor.
Tracked Savings In the 2013 impact evaluation, the Evaluator considered the displaced wattages used for HP-T8 and RW-T8 lamps to be valid. The baseline lamp is still a 34-watt T12 lamp, with the more efficient lamps having wattages of 25,...
AI summary The 2013 impact evaluation validated the displaced wattages for HP-T8 and RW-T8 lamps, with baseline lamps being 34-watt T12 lamps. More efficient lamps had wattages of 25, 28, or 32 watts, and the hours of operation were validated in 2012 through a metering study under the BES program.
Table 17: Unitary Savings Values for High-performance Ballasts Type of Ballast Demand Savings (W) Hours of Operation (hrs/year) Energy Savings (kWh/year) 1-lamp ballast 13.46 3,400 45.76 2-lamp ballast 13.46 3,400 45.76 3-lamp ballast 24.3...
AI summary Table 17 presents unitary savings values for high-performance ballasts, including demand savings, hours of operation, and energy savings per year for different types of ballasts. The table includes 1-lamp, 2-lamp, 3-lamp, and 4-lamp ballasts with corresponding energy savings values.
Table 18: Revised Displaced Wattages for Each Ballast Type New Ballast and Lamp Systems Baseline Wattage New Wattage Lamp ΔW Ballast ΔW Proportion of T8 Lamps Average Ballast ΔW 1-lamp ballast with HP-T8-32 W lamp 43 27 2 14 61.4% 1-lamp b...
AI summary Table 18 presents revised displaced wattages for various ballast and lamp systems. The data includes baseline and new wattage values, differences in lamp and ballast wattages, and the proportion of T8 lamps. The table is used to calculate revised unitary savings values for 2014, using the same annual hours of operation as in 2013.
Table 28: Overall Comparison of Tracked and Evaluated Savings at the Generator for BER Initial Gross Savings Adjusted Gross Savings Adjusted Gross Savings with Interactive Effects NTGR Net Savings Energy Savings Tracked Savings from ENSC 3...
AI summary Table 28 compares tracked and evaluated savings from the BER program, showing discrepancies between initial and adjusted gross savings for energy and peak demand. The table highlights the impact of interactive effects and NTGR on net savings, with evaluation results differing from tracked savings.
Sections Recommendations 15 The Evaluator recommends again this year adjusting the baseline values for both lamps and ballasts, in a manner consistent with other jurisdictions' baseline values. Also, a ballast factor of the new fixtures sh...
AI summary The Evaluator recommends adjusting baseline values for lamps and ballasts to align with other jurisdictions and using on-site evaluation results for LED downlights. Controlled wattage values for occupancy sensors are also recommended for adjustment based on sensor type and values from Vermont's technical reference manual.
ASK IF LED DOWNLIGHTS WERE REBATED THROUGH THE PROGRAM I have a few questions about your sales of LED downlights that are promoted by the Business Energy Rebates Program. LED downlights include LED screw-in lamps, LED pin-based lamps, LED...
AI summary The text asks whether LED downlights were rebated through the Business Energy Rebates Program, inquiring about sales trends, the impact of the program on sales, and the percentage of sales attributed to residential users. It also explores the potential effect of removing the incentive on sales.
On-site Visit Protocol The 2013 on-site visit protocol was followed when conducting this year's visits, with some minor adjustments made to account for the changes in eligible measures in 2014. The protocol document contains fields for ent...
AI summary The 2013 on-site visit protocol was used with minor adjustments for 2014 changes. The protocol includes fields for measure-specific data, site occupancy schedules, and operating hours, based on parameters from the 2014 CIRx Screening Tool v1.3. Data collected includes measure type, quantity, wattage, manufacturer, model, and equipment characteristics.
Sample Calculation for Revised Savings The table below presents a summary of the revised parameters used in the savings calculations for the aforementioned project. The annual full load heating hours were revised to 2,750, as recommended i...
AI summary The revised savings calculation for the project includes updated parameters such as annual full load heating hours, rated heating capacity, and the addition of cooling energy savings. These changes were made based on recommendations from the 2013 BER Evaluation and equipment specifications, resulting in increased energy and demand savings.
3.3 Program Documentation and Design Custom Retrofit is by far the most complex component of ENSC's program portfolio. This type of program is usually capital and labour-intensive since it involves supporting and tracking custom projects w...
AI summary Custom Retrofit is the most complex component of ENSC's program portfolio, requiring significant capital and labor due to its non-standard nature. A 2012 process evaluation led to changes in the program, and the 2014 evaluation focused on whether these changes aligned with international best practices. The program aims to support projects that do not fit into standardized programs, offering tailored technical, financial, and management support.
Lighting Retrofit Projects In 2014, 36 of the 100 projects included lighting retrofit measures, which accounted for approximately 24 percent of the verified energy savings. In order to paint an accurate picture of Custom 2014, 11 of the 25...
AI summary This section discusses the verification process for lighting retrofit projects in 2014, highlighting factors such as unitary wattage, installation rates, hours of operation, diversity factors, and M&V procedures. These factors were used to calculate energy savings and ensure accuracy in the verification process.
Parties Responsible for Specifying Measures 2012 (%) 2013 (%) 2014 (#) Sample Size 27 29 11 Outside design professional 15% 31% 4 Someone within the organization 30% 21% 3 Utility account manager 4% 3% 2 Contractor 33% 17% 1 Manufacturer r...
AI summary The document presents data on the parties responsible for specifying energy efficiency measures from 2012 to 2014, along with the importance of various factors influencing the implementation of energy efficiency measures through a program. The data includes percentages and sample sizes for different groups and ratings on a scale from 0 to 10 for the importance of factors such as financial incentives, technical assistance, and corporate policies.
The figure below illustrates the methodology used to calculate the internal spillover level. SO1. Since the time that you participated in Custom Retrofit, have you implemented one or more additional energy efficiency measures on your own?...
AI summary The figure outlines a methodology for calculating internal spillover levels, which measures the influence of the Custom Retrofit program on participants implementing additional energy efficiency measures. It involves assessing the influence of the program experience, quantifying savings from additional measures, and calculating the spillover effect.
APPENDIX VI CALCULATION EXAMPLE This appendix describes the step-by-step calculations that have produced the results for one of the projects in the 2014 Custom Retrofit impact evaluation. The algorithm described concerns the adjustments ma...
AI summary This appendix outlines a calculation example for a 2014 Custom Retrofit impact evaluation, focusing on adjustments made to a lighting project. It describes the equations used for savings calculations, the tracked savings claimed by ENSC, and the project-specific adjustment ratio established during the evaluation.
Tracked Savings Calculation This project involved replacing high bay metal halide fixtures with more efficient high bay T8 fixtures. ENSC calculated the tracked savings for this project by applying the lamp wattage of the existing fixtures...
AI summary This project involved replacing inefficient high bay metal halide fixtures with more efficient T8 fixtures. Tracked savings were calculated based on lamp wattage, annual hours of operation, and the absence of heating and cooling adjustments. The results of consumption measurements are summarized in a table.
Adjustments to the energy savings were made based on a minor correction of the count of lights a modification of the hours of operation (HOUs) (based on the facility manager's declaration), and a correction to the base equipment wattages t...
AI summary Adjustments to energy savings calculations were made based on corrections to the number of lights, hours of operation, and equipment wattages. The revised demand savings were calculated using a diversity factor of 0.40, leading to an increase in savings of 28,963 kWh/year and 3.28 kW before applying the diversity factor.
Table 15: Revised Gross Savings Values Revised Gross Peak Savings (kW) 5.648 Diversity Factor Applied 0.40 Revised Gross Demand Savings before Diversity Factor (kW) 14.120 Post-retrofit Demand (kW) 10.560 Baseline Demand (kW) 24.680 Revise...
AI summary Table 15 presents revised gross savings values, including peak and energy savings, post-retrofit demand and energy consumption, and baseline values. The table also includes a diversity factor applied to the revised gross peak savings.
Sampling Methodology The sampling selection was made based on the tracking sheet provided by ENSC in October 2014. This tracking sheet contained a tab showing all the projects expected to be claimed and evaluated in 2014. ENSC made the sel...
AI summary The sampling methodology for energy efficiency projects in 2014 was based on a tracking sheet provided by ENSC, selecting 44 projects that met implementation criteria. The sample of 25 sites was chosen using three criteria: energy savings, project type, and program track, with energy savings being the most important factor.
10. Energy and Demand Savings Adjustments Energy Savings from Tracking Sheet: #REF! ##### kWh/yr Project Estimated Finish Month: Demand Savings from Tracking Sheet: 0,0 kW #REF! Diversity Factor Used by ENSC: - Notes on Project Status: #RE...
AI summary This section discusses energy and demand savings adjustments, including tracking sheets, evaluator adjustments, and final project impacts at the meter. It includes notes on project status and diversity factors used by ENSC and Econoler.
Table 1: Comparison of Tracked and Evaluated Savings at the Generator Initial Gross Savings Adjusted Gross Savings Net-to-Gross Ratio (NTGR) Net Savings Energy Savings Tracked Savings from ENSC 7.122 GWh 7.122 GWh 1.00 7.122 GWh Evaluation...
AI summary Table 1 compares tracked and evaluated energy and peak demand savings from ENSC and the Econoler team. Evaluated savings are 6.5% and 3.9% lower than tracked savings, mainly due to adjustments in one LEED project. ENSC included a diversity factor in peak demand calculations this year, reducing the need for large adjustments.
2014 Custom NC-R1. Gather more data to conduct a conclusive calibration billing analysis in 2015. Despite the fact that 23 projects were completed in 2012 and 2013, it was only possible to obtain sufficient energy billing data for seven pr...
AI summary The document discusses the need for more data to conduct a conclusive calibration billing analysis, the adoption of the NECB 2011 as a baseline for new projects, and the explanation of diversity factor values used in peak demand savings calculations. Issues with data sufficiency and the need for improved evaluation practices are highlighted.
Measures by Project The Measures by Project tab in the tracking report includes the project ID, project name, status, categories of measure/codes and description, as well as the verified energy and peak demand savings at the generator. Thi...
AI summary The Measures by Project tab in the tracking report includes project details, energy efficiency measures, and verified savings. It addresses 2013 recommendations by providing more information on implemented measures and adding diversity factors and savings values for better evaluation and on-site verification.
4.1.2 Billing Calibration with Past Participants As part of this year's impact evaluation, seven past participants of Custom NC were selected to validate the accuracy of the building energy simulations against actual billing data. The buil...
AI summary This section discusses the validation of building energy simulations against actual billing data for seven past participants in the Custom NC program. The evaluation used regression analysis and compared results to ASHRAE and IPMVP guidelines to assess the accuracy of energy consumption predictions.
Table 2: Comparison of Regression Analysis Statistics Participant (#) R-squared1 CV(RSME)2 t-statistic3 Significance Reg Diff. 4 Real Diff. Bldg Function 1 0.84 0.07 9.84 Highly 60% 52% Office Bldg 2 0.19 0.08 -0.84 Not 3% -13% Lab, office...
AI summary The results indicate that the regression analysis statistics vary significantly among participants, with some showing high R-squared values and significant t-statistics, while others show low values and no significance. These differences suggest varying levels of model fit and statistical significance across different building functions.
4.1.3 Adjusted Gross Savings The 2014 gross energy savings presented in the ENSC tracking sheet for each project visited were individually revised according to the adjustments identified by the Evaluator. Adjustment calculations were perfo...
AI summary The 2014 gross energy savings for the Custom NC program were adjusted based on on-site evaluations. Adjustments were made to nine of thirteen projects, including a significant adjustment for a LEED® NC certified building and another for incorrect lighting installation. Peak demand savings were difficult to evaluate due to limited information in simulation reports.
Calculation of Adjusted Gross Savings To calculate the adjustment ratio, the Evaluator used eight of the nine projects reviewed. The LEED project savings that had not been adjusted to take into account the LEED energy performance requireme...
AI summary The document discusses the calculation of an adjustment ratio for gross energy and peak demand savings, excluding a LEED project due to its unique certification requirements. The adjustment ratios calculated were 0.982 for energy savings and 0.976 for peak demand savings, based on eight projects. The savings at the meter and generator levels are also detailed, with specific values provided for Custom NC.
This Appendix presents all recommendations made by the Evaluator throughout the report as well as the sections from which the recommendations originated. Sections Recommendations Executive Summary 1 Gather more data to conduct a conclusive...
AI summary The Evaluator recommends gathering more data to conduct a conclusive calibration billing analysis in 2015. In 2014, only seven out of 23 completed projects had sufficient energy billing data, leading to inconclusive results. The Evaluator suggests continuing this evaluation and implementing measures like requiring final energy simulation submissions and enhanced building commissioning.
APPENDIX II ALGORITHM FOR IMPACT CALCULATION This appendix provides a sample of the step-by-step calculations used to adjust the tracked savings results for one of the sample projects reviewed in the impact evaluation of New Construction....
AI summary This appendix outlines the algorithm used to adjust tracked savings results for a sample project in the New Construction impact evaluation. The adjustment was applied to tracked appliance energy savings values, calculated separately from building energy simulation files. Similar adjustments were made to four of nine projects in the Custom NC sample.
重 ECC NOL≣R Net-to-gross ratio The ratio between the net energy savings and gross energy savings. Non-sampling error Errors arising during the course of all survey activities other than sampling. Non-sampling errors tend to lead to bias in...
AI summary The document defines several key terms related to energy efficiency and measurement, including net-to-gross ratio, non-sampling error, peak demand savings, precision, random sampling error, sample size, tracked savings, and unitary savings. These concepts are relevant to program evaluation and data collection in energy efficiency initiatives.
g projects. As it would be beneficial to participant satisfaction, this information should be systematically given to customers during the installation process and should be part of ENSC's procedures. 2014 BES-R3. Eliminate adjustment of o...
AI summary The document discusses recommendations for improving participant satisfaction and ensuring accurate energy savings calculations. It suggests that ENSC should directly follow up with participants instead of relying on third-party contractors and recommends not adjusting operating hours for burnt-out lights, safety considerations, or delamping. It also calls for adding information about cooling systems and hot water heat pumps to the non-lighting measures tracking report.
Non-lighting Measures Tracking Report As for the other data captured in the non-lighting measures tracking report, the contact information has been entered for all the participants. The heating load hours have been set at 2,200 hours for a...
AI summary The Non-lighting Measures Tracking Report includes participant contact details, project information, and details about non-lighting measures such as heat pumps. The report lacks information on cooling systems, which limits accurate savings calculations. The Evaluator recommends adding cooling system data and developing a validation process for savings calculations.
Revised Savings The Evaluator conducted six on-site visits for this year's evaluation. Adjustments were made to four of the six visits. The adjustments were due to the following reasons: 6 Efficiency Vermont, "Technical Reference User Manu...
AI summary The Evaluator made adjustments to six on-site visits, resulting in changes to gross energy and peak demand savings. Cooling savings were applied to two projects based on heat pump replacements, and the SEER calculation was used to determine annual energy savings.
Where: - > Capacity: The nominal cooling capacity of the heat pump. - > SEER: The SEER of the existing unit is derived from the technology assessment documentation prepared by the US Department of Energy for units over 10 years old. The SE...
AI summary The document discusses adjustments to energy savings calculations for heat pumps, emphasizing the use of operating hours and HSPF values corresponding to AHRI Region V. It highlights the importance of using correct climatic region data for accurate evaluations and recommends consistent application of these standards by ENSC.
5.3.3 Revised Gross Savings for RP&C Common Areas The annual gross savings for each type of product installed in RP&C Common Areas are presented in in [Table 18.](#page-120-0) They were calculated using the unitary savings values presented...
AI summary This section discusses the revised gross savings for RP&C Common Areas, calculated using unitary savings values. The total gross energy and peak demand savings at the meter are 0.425 GWh and 0.052 MW, respectively. Adjusted for line loss, the generator-level savings are 0.467 GWh and 0.057 MW.
Table 19: Evaluation of Gross Energy and Peak Demand Savings Associated with RP&C Common Areas Measures (Other Products) Category of Product 12-Watt BR30 7-Watt MR16 LED Exit Lights Low-flow Faucet Aerator Low-flow Showerhe ad Low-flow Sho...
AI summary Table 19 presents an evaluation of gross energy and peak demand savings associated with RP&C common areas measures for various products, including LED lights, low-flow faucets, and pipe insulation. The table details the number of units installed, energy savings, and peak demand savings at both the meter and generator levels.
Table 22: Interactive Effects Calculation for Indoor Lighting Products Building Conditioning Category Proportion of Buildings Interactive Effects Electric Heating with Air Conditioning 10.3% -43.4% Electric Heating without Air Conditioning...
AI summary Table 22 presents interactive effects calculations for indoor lighting products based on building conditioning categories. The weighted interactive effect coefficient is -5.4%, adjusted to -5.2% when considering outdoor installations. Exit signs, installed only indoors, retain the -5.4% coefficient.
Table 24: Interactive Effect Factor for Hot Water Tank Wraps, Pipe Insulation, Hot Water Heat Pumps, and Vending Machine Misers Parameters % of Facilities Interactive Effects During Heating Period Interactive Effects During Cooling Period...
AI summary Table 24 presents the interactive effect factors for various energy efficiency measures, including hot water tank wraps, pipe insulation, heat pumps, and vending machine misers, across different heating and cooling scenarios. The weighted interactive effect factors are calculated as -8.7% during the heating period and +4.7% during the cooling period.
5.4.3 Interactive Effects for RP&C Common Areas Because savings for RP&C are only being tracked this year, no revision of the interactive effects was performed. The same interactive effect factors as last year—based on the BES values—were...
AI summary The document discusses the use of interactive effect factors for RP&C common areas, noting that no revision was performed this year as savings are only being tracked now. Factors from last year, based on BES values, were reused, with specific percentages provided for lighting measures and hot water tank wraps.
Table 25: Evaluation of Net Energy and Peak Demand Savings Associated with BES Lighting Measures LED s Fluoresc ent T8 , Total Category of Product Reballast (linear) Other Reballast Other CFLs Custom Т5 Exit Signs Metal Halide Others Energ...
AI summary Table 25 presents an evaluation of net energy and peak demand savings associated with BES lighting measures, including LED, fluorescent, and other lighting technologies. The table provides data on gross and net energy savings, interactive effect factors, NTGR, line loss factors, and peak demand savings at both the meter and generator levels.
Table 26: Comparison of Tracked and Evaluated Savings Associated with BES Lighting Measures at the Generator Initial Gross Savings Adjusted Gross Savings Gross with Interactive Effects NTGR Net Savings Energy Savings Tracked Savings from E...
AI summary Table 26 compares tracked and evaluated savings from BES lighting measures. Evaluated net energy savings are 4% higher than tracked savings due to reduced interactive effects and a revised NTGR value, though the increase is limited by a revision to the ballast factor.
Table 27: Evaluation of Net Energy and Peak Demand Savings Associated with BES Non-lighting Measures Category of Product Heat Pumps Hot Water Tank Wraps Pipe Insulation Vending Machine Misers Hot Water Heat Pumps Total Energy Savings Total...
AI summary Table 27 evaluates the net energy and peak demand savings from non-lighting measures under the Building Energy Standards (BES). It shows energy savings across categories such as heat pumps and pipe insulation, with adjustments for interactive effects and line loss factors, resulting in total net energy and peak demand savings at both the meter and generator levels.
Table 28: Comparison of Tracked and Evaluated Savings Associated with BES Non-lighting Measures at the Generator Initial Gross Savings Adjusted Gross Savings Gross Savings with Interactive Effects NTGR Net Savings Energy Savings Tracked Sa...
AI summary Table 28 compares tracked and evaluated savings from BES non-lighting measures. Evaluated energy savings are 23% higher than tracked savings, while evaluated peak demand savings are 1% lower. This highlights discrepancies between actual and reported savings from energy efficiency initiatives.
Table 32: Evaluation of Net Energy and Peak Demand Savings Associated with LED Blitz (Lighting Measures) Category of Product LED A Lamp 8 W LED A Lamp 12 W LED MR16 10 W LED GU10 5 W LED BR30 11 W LED BR30 13 W LED BR40 11 W LED BR40 18 W...
AI summary Table 32 evaluates the net energy and peak demand savings associated with the LED Blitz (Lighting Measures) for various LED products. The table includes energy savings at the meter and generator, peak demand savings, and factors such as interactive effects, NTGR, and line loss.
Table 37: Tracked Gross Energy Savings for Each Lamp Type Implemented 18 Lamp Type LED Т8 Custom Т5 All-Start Retrofit CFL Total Total Savings (MWh) 5,507 2,089 741 282 239 163 9,021 % of Total Savings 61.0% 23.2% 8.2% 3.1% 2.7% 1.8% 100%...
AI summary Table 37 shows the tracked gross energy savings for different lamp types implemented by BES lighting measures. LED and T8 lamps account for 84% of total savings, and the sample selection included projects with at least these two lamp types to ensure a range of savings are represented.
ge Air conditioners and Heat Pumps 3.5.1 Market Size Estimate 3.5.2 Portion of the Market Impacted by the Regulation 3.5.3 Unitary Savings Values 3.5.4 At-meter Energy Savings 3.5.5 At-meter Peak Demand Savings gle Package Vertical Air-con...
AI summary The document outlines various sections related to market size estimates, regulation impact, and energy savings for different products such as air conditioners, heat pumps, and light bulbs. It includes detailed subsections on unitary savings values and peak demand savings.
Table 3: Specific Products Regulation in Nova Scotia Products Existing MEPS prior to Provincial Initiative Reference Standard LED street lights6 No CAN/CSA C653-13 National Energy Code for houses and small buildings – NBC – Revision 2012 –...
AI summary Table 3 outlines specific products regulated in Nova Scotia, including LED street lights and the National Energy Code for buildings. Efficiency Nova Scotia commissioned an evaluation of the impact of new regulations on these products. The evaluation excluded residential boilers and digital television adapters due to lack of data and negligible market size.
Table 4: 2014 Evaluated Energy and Peak Demand Savings at the Generator Products Total Energy Savings at Generator (GWh) Total Peak Demand Savings at Generator (MW) Electric motors 0.686 0.154 General service incandescent reflector lamps 1...
AI summary Table 4 presents energy and peak demand savings at the generator in 2014 from various products and programs. Savings from Codes & Standards (C&S) are attributed to increased minimum efficiency standards, distinct from other Efficiency Nova Scotia (ENSC) components, which focus on product efficiency improvements relative to current baselines.
RECOMMENDATIONS Based on international experience and our own, evaluating the energy impact of regulations or policies is usually more difficult than calculating the impact of a DSM program, which has a list of participants and a range of...
AI summary The document discusses the challenges of evaluating the energy impact of regulations and policies compared to DSM programs, emphasizing the importance of industry associations in collecting up-to-date market data for accurate C&S impact evaluations.
Table 7: Specific Products Regulation in Nova Scotia Products Existing MEPS Prior to Provincial Initiative Reference Standard LED street lights14 No CAN/CSA C653-13 National Energy Code for houses and small building – NBC – Revision 2012 –...
AI summary Table 7 outlines specific products regulated in Nova Scotia, including LED street lights and the National Energy Code for buildings. Efficiency Nova Scotia commissioned an evaluation of energy savings from these regulations, which excluded residential boilers and digital television adapters due to lack of data.
2.3.2 Secondary Data Search This evaluation made extensive use of market data provided by industry associations, particularly Electro-Federation Canada (EFC) and the Heating, Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Institute of Canada (HRAI). T...
AI summary The evaluation used market data from industry associations like EFC and HRAI to estimate market sizes in Nova Scotia. Shipments were analyzed by province and region, with Nova Scotia's share estimated at 39.6% of Atlantic Canada's total. Statistics Canada data was used to improve accuracy, particularly for electric motors, standby power, and external power supplies.
2.3.3 Interviews with Associations and Regulators From early December to end of January, representatives from associations were instrumental in numerous exchanges by explaining the data, confirming its reliability and indicating how best t...
AI summary Interviews with associations and regulators from early December to the end of January were conducted to explain data, confirm its reliability, and provide insights on its use. Regulators such as NRCan and CSA were interviewed to understand energy savings, market activity, and compliance issues related to LED street lighting and building codes.
3.1.1 Market Size Estimate In a report prepared for NRCan, Nielsen Engineering analyzed sales data supplied by the Electrical Equipment Manufacturers Association of Canada (EEMAC).18 Formerly, shipments were estimated by extrapolating Cana...
AI summary This section discusses the methodology used to estimate the market size of three-phase electric motors in Nova Scotia, utilizing Statistics Canada's International Merchandise Trade Database and data from Nielsen Engineering's report, which analyzed shipments and imports.
Table 21: Unitary Savings Values for Three-phase Dry-type Transformers Product Class Annual Energy Savings (kWh/unit) Demand Savings (W/unit) Three Phase <750 kVA – 1.2 kV Class 4,320 493 Three Phase 500–2500 kVA – >1.2 kV 8,034 917 Three...
AI summary This section discusses energy savings at the meter for three-phase dry-type transformers, providing unitary savings values for different product classes based on annual energy and demand savings.
3.4.1 Market Size Estimate Caneta Research produced a report in 2010 for NRCan on the market situation and economics of the commercial refrigeration equipment market in Canada.30 Although this report did not provide data or information abo...
AI summary Caneta Research estimated the commercial refrigeration equipment market size in Canada in 2009 using data from the U.S. DOE and HRAI, resulting in an estimated 19,300 shipments. For self-contained commercial ice cream-type freezers, the report estimated 72 opaque and 1,494 transparent units. Provincial shipment levels for Nova Scotia were derived using demographic weight and historical import data.
3.6.1 Market Size Estimate With regard to the market size of SPVAC and SPVHP, NRCan mentions that the majority of the appliances sold "are less than 65,000 Btu/h in cooling capacity."44 Shipments to Canada were first estimated by Caneta Re...
AI summary The document discusses the market size estimate for single package vertical air conditioners and heat pumps in Nova Scotia in 2014, using data from HRAI Canada and demographic weightings within Atlantic Canada. It references prior research and data sources, including shipments and cooling capacity statistics.
The Econoler team estimates that 0.003 MW was saved at the meter in Nova Scotia in 2014 as a result of introducing the regulation on large air conditioners and heat pumps. A diversity factor of 0 percent was applied to air conditioners sin...
AI summary The Econoler team estimated that 0.003 MW was saved in Nova Scotia in 2014 due to regulations on large air conditioners and heat pumps. A 0% diversity factor was applied to air conditioners, while a 98% diversity factor was applied to heat pumps, based on the 2014 BER evaluation report.
3.11.4 Unitary Savings Values NRCan carried out some analyses on HOT2000 simulations to establish the average energy performance level reached by the 2012 Revision of Part 9 of the NCB. As a result of these analyses, NRCan concluded that t...
AI summary NRCan analyzed HOT2000 simulations to determine the average energy performance level of the 2012 Revision of Part 9 of the NCB, concluding it corresponds to an EnerGuide rating of 78 using version 10 of HOT2000 software. Supporting calculations and data sources are referenced.
Table 56: Energy Savings Associated with the Introduction of the Building Code Regulation in the Nova Scotia Market Product Class Number of Single Houses Noncompliance Rate (%) Percentage of Total Units to Nova Scotia with Electricity Used...
AI summary Table 56 presents energy savings data from the introduction of the Building Code Regulation in Nova Scotia, focusing on single houses. The data includes noncompliance rates, energy savings per unit, and total incremental energy savings for 2014. The section 'At-meter Peak Demand Savings' discusses additional energy savings related to peak demand.
Energy savings for the program at the meter were calculated by taking into account all product categories, for which the necessary information on market size, noncompliance rates and unitary savings values was available. As for the savings...
AI summary Energy savings for the Codes and Standards program were calculated using market size, noncompliance rates, and unitary savings values. Transmission and distribution losses were accounted for using line loss factors provided by Nova Scotia Power. The estimated energy and peak demand savings for 2014 are 28.743 GWh and 4.720 MW at the meter, and 31.433 GWh and 5.164 MW at the generator level.
DRY-TYPE TRANSFORMERS (CAN/CSA 802.2-06) TABLE A: NOVA SCOTIA MARKET SIZE Dry-type transformers Q7.Number of units sold in Nova Scotia in 2013 (actual) Q8. Number of units sold in Nova Scotia in 2014 (projected) Three-phase dry-type transf...
AI summary The document presents tables outlining the market size and expected compliance rates for dry-type transformers in Nova Scotia and Canada for 2013 and 2014. The tables categorize transformers by size and include projected and actual unit sales figures.
TABLE B: EXPECTED COMPLIANCE RATE IN NOVA SCOTIA (2014) External power supplies Expected compliance rate for 2014 Class less than 1 W Class 1 to 5W Class 6 to 10W Class 11 to 20W Class 21 to 50W Class 51 to 100W Class more than 100W Total...
AI summary The document presents tables related to market size and expected compliance rates for external power supplies in Nova Scotia and Canada for 2014, including projected and actual unit sales across different power classes.
E-7E1 (NSPI) RIR-1 to RIR-47
75 passages
NON-CONFIDENTIAL 1 conducted for the development of Fuel Substitution and Green Heat program component 2 have enabled energy savings of 4.5 GWh from 2012 through 2014. 3 4 The advancement of energy efficiency standards for devices and equi...
AI summary The text highlights energy savings from Fuel Substitution and Green Heat programs (4.5 GWh, 2012-2014), evaluations of energy efficiency codes by ENSC, research leading to a cold-water washing pilot (60% reduction in warm water use), and growth in Green Schools Nova Scotia participation (132 schools by 2014). Regulatory activities and education/outreach efforts are also noted.
Other Enabling Strategies 0.6 Total 38.5 127.3 133.1 20.4 1.9 3.6 0.5 Currency is expressed in 2016 dollars. Columns may not add correctly, due to rounding. Annual avoided costs, calculated using ENSC’s DSM Potential Study at the Base Leve...
AI summary The text discusses avoided costs from ENSC's DSM Potential Study, including energy and capacity costs, and defines TRC, PAC, and RIM as benefit/cost ratios. It references the 2015 DSM Resource Plan Settlement Agreement and a 2016-2018 EECA supply agreement. Metrics include lifetime net present value of benefits and participation by low-income customers.
Rebates (BNI) 48,468 jurisdictions supporting these products as a standard offering. ENS is one such jurisdiction. This measure serves to augment other energy efficiency measures LED Refrigeration Strip Lighting- offered for grocers. Groce...
AI summary The text discusses rebate programs for energy-efficient products, including LED refrigeration strip lighting for grocers and ground source heat pumps. It highlights the challenges of high installation costs and the potential for cost reduction through increased competition and promotion by ENS.
as well as reduced labour costs, as Nova Scotia represents a significant portion of the local market. New Residential 1 Thermostat options are important for obtaining energy savings for the Intelligent Thermostat hard-to-reach market of re...
AI summary The text discusses energy efficiency measures such as intelligent thermostats and solar space heating, highlighting their potential to reduce costs and improve energy savings. It also mentions indoor motion sensors and their impact on distribution costs through the Efficient Product Rebates program.
developed its proposed DSM Resource Plan at a lower investment level. 11 12 Ongoing refinement of assumptions and inputs into the EL-RAM (such as achievable 13 potential, market conditions, avoided costs, and historical results) provided v...
AI summary The document discusses the development of a proposed DSM Resource Plan with a lower investment level, focusing on the Home Energy Report as the only component within Energy Savings Actions included in ENS’s original $50 million plan. Refinements in assumptions and inputs into the EL-RAM influenced program-level investment and energy savings analysis.
NON-CONFIDENTIAL 1 Enabling Strategies: Enabling strategies build demand for, and support the long-term 2 sustainability of, energy savings. When ENS reduced its proposed investment level from 3 the $50 million plan to the current proposed...
AI summary The document discusses Enabling Strategies and their role in supporting long-term energy savings, noting reductions in investment levels by ENS. It also mentions the use of the EL-RAM model to determine program-level investments and highlights considerations for the overall DSM portfolio, including cost-effectiveness, affordability, and industry capacity.
NON-CONFIDENTIAL 1 f) Yes. As provided in Appendix F, Dunsky Energy Consulting’s memo “DSM Portfolio 2 Design Principles and Considerations,” which informed ENS’s approach to overall 3 portfolio offerings, maximizing equity, or social lice...
AI summary The document discusses the importance of social license in Demand Side Management (DSM) programs, emphasizing equitable access and customer participation. It references Dunsky Energy Consulting's principles and Tim Woolf's recommendations for promoting participation and addressing equity concerns. The EL-RAM model is mentioned in relation to energy savings calculations.
NON-CONFIDENTIAL 1 filed electronically, for the energy savings values, which can be found in column 2 E (column 5 in the printed version). 3 4 (ii) ENS does not have estimated measure-level participation rates, and the EL-RAM, 5 which has...
AI summary The document discusses the absence of estimated measure-level participation rates in the EL-RAM model, the importance of TRC, PAC, and RIM ratios in evaluating demand-side management programs, and references to EfficiencyOne's responses to NSPI IR-10 and IR-9 for detailed data on incentives and net-to-gross ratios.
NSPI IR-13 Attachment 1 Page 1 of 8 Achievable Potential and Associated Investment for the 2016-2018 Period
AI summary The document discusses the achievable potential and associated investment for the 2016-2018 period, likely in the context of energy efficiency or related programs. It is an attachment to a regulatory proceeding document from NSPI.
Base Low Mid High Program MWh MW $M MWh MW $M MWh MW $M MWh MW $M Efficient Products 61,957 9.0 17.8 18,036 1.9 7.7 72,891 10.4 18.6 76,859 11.0 19.6 Existing Homes 68,840 25.2 37.3 60,396 23.3 28.5 91,261 34.5 50.7 130,329 54.6 152.3 Ener...
AI summary The table presents program performance metrics across different scenarios (Base, Low, Mid, High) with data on energy savings in MWh, capacity in MW, and costs in $M for various energy efficiency programs. The data highlights the impact of different program levels on energy savings, capacity, and financial costs.
0.0 0 0.0 0.0 12 W LED 541 0.1 0.3 4 0.0 0.0 542 0.1 0.3 546 0.1 0.3 12 W LED 46 0.0 0.1 0 0.0 0.0 46 0.0 0.1 46 0.0 0.1 5W Chandelier LED bulb 563 0.1 0.3 4 0.0 0.0 564 0.1 0.3 567 0.1 0.3 1W LED Nightlight 470 0.1 0.2 3 0.0 0.0 471 0.1 0...
AI summary The text presents data on energy efficiency programs, including the number of units, costs, and savings associated with various products and initiatives. It includes details on LED bulbs, low-flow fixtures, insulation, and new home energy efficiency standards.
1.0 2.1 3,272 1.0 1.8 3,279 1.0 2.1 3,290 1.0 2.1 Energuide 85 New Home 3,820 1.1 3.2 3,817 1.1 2.5 3,825 1.1 3.2 3,838 1.1 3.3 Energuide 86 New Home 4,366 1.3 3.3 4,362 1.3 2.6 4,371 1.3 3.3 4,386 1.3 3.3 Energuide 87 New Home 4,912 1.5 3...
AI summary The text presents numerical data related to energy efficiency programs and their associated costs. It includes metrics for various initiatives such as Energuide New Homes, Energy Star® products, and motion sensors, along with associated figures and percentages.
NSPI IR-13 Attachment 1 Page 2 of 8 Achievable Potential and Associated Investment for the 2016-2018 Period
AI summary The document outlines the achievable potential and associated investment for the 2016-2018 period, likely related to energy efficiency or resource planning initiatives.
NSPI IR-13 Attachment 1 Page 3 of 8 Achievable Potential and Associated Investment for the 2016-2018 Period
AI summary The document discusses the achievable potential and associated investment for the 2016-2018 period, likely related to energy efficiency or resource planning initiatives.
NSPI IR-13 Attachment 1 Page 4 of 8 Achievable Potential and Associated Investment for the 2016-2018 Period
AI summary This document page discusses the achievable potential and associated investment for the 2016-2018 period, likely in the context of energy efficiency or resource planning initiatives.
Base Low Mid High Measure MWh MW $M MWh MW $M MWh MW $M MWh MW $M T8 Dimmable Stairwell Lighting 56 0.0 0.0 23 0.0 0.0 79 0.0 0.0 94 0.0 0.0 T8 Dimmable Stairwell Lighting 28 0.0 0.0 11 0.0 0.0 40 0.0 0.0 47 0.0 0.0 T8 Dimmable Stairwell L...
AI summary The text presents a table with data on energy measures, including T8 Dimmable Stairwell Lighting and LED Lamps-Retrofit (dual baseline), across different scenarios (Base, Low, Mid, High) with metrics such as MWh, MW, and $M. The data shows varying levels of energy savings and associated costs for each measure.
.0 0.0 7 0.0 0.0 24 0.0 0.0 29 0.0 0.0 Induction Lamp 39 0.0 0.0 17 0.0 0.0 51 0.0 0.0 58 0.0 0.0 Induction Lamp 52 0.0 0.0 23 0.0 0.0 69 0.0 0.0 79 0.0 0.0 Induction Lamp 31 0.0 0.0 13 0.0 0.0 44 0.0 0.0 53 0.0 0.0 Photoluminescent Exit S...
AI summary The text presents data on the achievable potential and associated investment for the 2016-2018 period, including details on various lighting and exit sign technologies. The data is presented in a tabular format with numerical values and dates provided.
NSPI IR-13 Attachment 1 Page 7 of 8 Achievable Potential and Associated Investment for the 2016-2018 Period
AI summary The document provides information on the achievable potential and associated investment for the 2016-2018 period, likely related to energy efficiency or resource planning initiatives.
NSPI IR-13 Attachment 1 Page 8 of 8 Achievable Potential and Associated Investment for the 2016-2018 Period Base Low Mid High Measure MWh MW $M MWh MW $M MWh MW $M MWh MW $M
AI summary The text presents a table outlining achievable potential and associated investment for energy efficiency measures during the 2016-2018 period, with different scenarios (Base, Low, Mid, High) and metrics including MWh, MW, and $M.
NON-CONFIDENTIAL 1 Request IR-14: 2 3 (a) Please provide DSM resource plan scenarios (in a format similar to Figures 3.2 to 4 3.4 and the associated ELRAMs) that provide an average measure life greater than 5 10 years for programs that dir...
AI summary The document outlines a request for specific DSM resource plan scenarios and responses from ENS, explaining that such scenarios were not developed during the 2016-2018 DSM Resource Plan process. ENS argues that developing these scenarios would conflict with long-term energy savings goals and DSM portfolio design principles.
Filed: March 27, 2015 E1 (NSPI) IR-16 Page 2 of 2 2016-2018 Supply Agreement for EECA M06733 (E-ENS-R-15) E1 Responses to NSPI Information Requests NON-CONFIDENTIAL 1 Request IR-17: 2 3 Reference: EfficiencyOne, Evidence - Page 28, Lines 1...
AI summary The document outlines information requests related to changes in the methodology for estimating demand savings under the DSM plan, including the use of 8760 hourly savings profiles and a comparison of demand savings estimates between the current filing and prior studies.
NON-CONFIDENTIAL 1 Response IR-17: 2 3 a) This difference is a result of different modelling techniques used for ENSC’s DSM 4 Potential Study and its proposed 2016-2018 DSM Resource Plan. As a result of this 5 change in modelling technique...
AI summary The difference in demand savings values between ENSC’s DSM Potential Study and its 2016-2018 DSM Resource Plan is due to changes in modelling techniques. The new methodology, developed in collaboration with NSPI and Navigant, focuses more on capacity avoidance and uses building simulation software with detailed load profile data.
NON-CONFIDENTIAL 1 The building simulations were used to develop DSM Resource shapes in 8760 format. 2 This was made possible by running the simulation models using historical Nova Scotia 3 weather data. The results of these simulation mod...
AI summary The document discusses the use of building simulations to develop DSM resource shapes in 8760 format using historical Nova Scotia weather data. It also outlines evaluation methods for energy and demand savings, including the use of demand-to-energy ratios and system coincident peak diversity ratios. The verification process is determined by the UARB.
29 e) The 8760 model calculates resource savings profiles by measure type (e.g. Residential 30 Lighting), not by individual measure. Please refer to Attachment 2 for the comparison by Date Filed: March 27, 2015 E1 (NSPI) IR-17 Page 3 of 4...
AI summary The text discusses the 8760 model's calculation of resource savings by measure type, such as Residential Lighting, and mentions the EL-RAM model refinement discussions with Navigant. It also references the 2016-2018 Supply Agreement for EECA and the DSM Potential Study.
Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760...
AI summary The text presents a comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile between initial and final models, highlighting minor differences in kW/Annual kWh savings across various dates and times. The data shows consistent, minimal changes in the RES-Lighting category.
Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760...
AI summary The text presents a comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profiles between initial and final models, focusing on RES-Lighting metrics across different dates and times. The data shows minimal differences in kW/Annual kWh savings, indicating slight adjustments in the models.
Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760...
AI summary The document presents a comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profiles between initial and final models, showing minimal differences in kW/Annual kWh savings across various time points. This analysis likely pertains to energy efficiency modeling or demand-side management initiatives.
Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760...
AI summary The text presents a comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile data between initial and final models, showing minimal differences in kW/Annual kWh Savings for RES-Lighting across multiple dates and times. The data highlights very small variations in the savings profile, with consistent values across different time intervals.
Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760...
AI summary The text presents a comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile data between initial and final models, showing minimal differences in kW/Annual kWh savings across various dates and times, with a consistent reduction of -0.000000137 in the final model compared to the initial model.
Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760...
AI summary The text presents a comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profiles between initial and final models, showing minimal differences in kW/Annual kWh savings across various dates and times, with consistent decreases of approximately 0.000000137.
Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760...
AI summary The text presents a comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profiles between initial and final models, highlighting minute differences in kW/Annual kWh savings across multiple dates and times, with consistent negative differences observed.
Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760...
AI summary The text presents a comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profiles between initial and final models, focusing on RES-Lighting. It highlights minor differences in kW/Annual kWh savings across various dates and times, showing consistent reductions of -0.000000137 in the final model compared to the initial model.
Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760...
AI summary The document presents a comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profiles between initial and final models, focusing on RES-Lighting. The data shows minimal differences in kW/Annual kWh savings across various time points, indicating a slight decrease in the final model compared to the initial one.
Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760...
AI summary The text presents a comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profiles between initial and final models, showing minimal differences in kW/Annual kWh savings across various dates and times. The data highlights slight variations in the RES-Lighting model's performance over time.
Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760...
AI summary The text presents a comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profiles between initial and final models, showing minimal differences in kW/Annual kWh savings across multiple dates and times, with consistent reductions of approximately 0.000000137.
Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760...
AI summary The text presents a comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile data between initial and final models, showing minute differences in kW/Annual kWh savings across various dates and times, with consistent reductions of -0.000000137 in the RES-Lighting category.
Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760...
AI summary The text presents a comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile data between initial and final models, focusing on RES-Lighting metrics. The data shows minimal differences in kW/Annual kWh savings across various timestamps, indicating slight adjustments in the models.
Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760...
AI summary The text presents a comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile data between initial and final models, showing minimal differences in kW/Annual kWh savings across multiple time intervals. The data highlights consistent changes in the RES-Lighting model over three separate date/time sets.
Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760...
AI summary The text presents a comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile data between initial and final models, showing minimal differences in kW/Annual kWh savings across various time points. The data highlights slight reductions in savings for RES-Lighting over specific dates.
Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760...
AI summary The text presents a comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profiles between initial and final models, showing minimal differences in kW/Annual kWh savings across multiple dates and times, with a consistent decrease of -0.000000137 in the final model compared to the initial model.
Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760...
AI summary The text presents a comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profiles between initial and final models, showing minute differences in kW/Annual kWh Savings for RES-Lighting across various dates and times, with values decreasing slightly in the final model.
Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760...
AI summary The text presents a comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile data between initial and final models, showing minimal differences in kW/Annual kWh savings across multiple timestamps. The data highlights consistent values with slight variations, indicating stability in the models.
Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760...
AI summary The text presents a comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile data between initial and final models, focusing on RES-Lighting metrics. The data shows minimal differences between the two models, with a consistent decrease of -0.000000137 in kW/Annual kWh Savings across multiple time points.
Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760...
AI summary The text presents a comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile data between initial and final models, showing minimal differences in kW/Annual kWh savings across various time points. The data highlights slight variations in RES-Lighting metrics over specific dates and times.
Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760...
AI summary The text presents a comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile data between initial and final models, showing minimal differences in kW/Annual kWh savings across multiple timestamps. The data highlights consistent, minute variations in the RES-Lighting model over three distinct date/time intervals.
Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760...
AI summary The document presents a comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profiles between initial and final models, focusing on RES-Lighting. It provides detailed data on kW/Annual kWh savings across specific dates and times, highlighting a consistent minor difference between the initial and final models.
Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760...
AI summary The text presents a comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile data between initial and final models, showing minimal differences in kW/Annual kWh savings across multiple time points, with consistent values and a slight decrease in the final model.
Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760...
AI summary The text presents a comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile data between initial and final models, highlighting minute differences in kW/Annual kWh savings across multiple dates and times, with consistent negative differences observed.
Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760...
AI summary The text presents a detailed comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profiles between initial and final models, focusing on RES-Lighting. It includes data points showing minimal differences in kW/Annual kWh savings across various dates and times, indicating slight changes in the models.
Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760...
AI summary The text presents a comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profiles between initial and final models, showing minute differences in kW/Annual kWh savings across specific dates and times. The data highlights consistent, small variations between the two models.
Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760...
AI summary The text presents a comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile data between initial and final models, showing minimal differences in kW/Annual kWh savings across various time points, with consistent reductions of approximately 0.000000137 in the RES-Lighting category.
Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760...
AI summary The text presents a comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profiles between initial and final models, showing minimal differences in kW/Annual kWh savings across multiple dates and times, with consistent values of -0.000000137 for the difference in RES-Lighting metrics.
Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760...
AI summary The text presents a comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile data between initial and final models, showing minor differences in kW/Annual kWh savings across various time intervals. The data appears to be technical and focused on energy efficiency modeling.
Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760...
AI summary The text presents a comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profiles between initial and final models, highlighting minor differences in kW/Annual kWh savings across multiple dates and times. The data shows consistent small variations in the RES-Lighting model over three different time periods.
Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760...
AI summary The document presents a comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile data between initial and final models, focusing on RES-Lighting metrics. The data shows minimal differences between the initial and final models across various time points, with consistent negative differences indicating slight reductions in the final model.
Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760...
AI summary The text presents a comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profiles between initial and final models, focusing on RES-Lighting metrics. It shows minor differences in kW/Annual kWh savings across various time points, indicating slight adjustments in the models.
Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760...
AI summary The text presents a comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profiles between initial and final models, showing minimal differences in kW/Annual kWh Savings for RES-Lighting across multiple time points.
Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760...
AI summary The text presents a comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profiles between initial and final models, showing minimal differences in kW/Annual kWh savings across various time points. The data highlights slight reductions in savings, with consistent values across different dates.
Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760...
AI summary The text presents a comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profiles between initial and final models, showing minimal differences in kW/Annual kWh savings across multiple dates and times, indicating slight adjustments in the models.
Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760...
AI summary The text presents a comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profiles between initial and final models, showing minimal differences in kW/Annual kWh savings across various time points. The data indicates a consistent decrease in savings by approximately 0.000000137 across all listed times.
Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760...
AI summary The text presents a comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile data between initial and final models, focusing on RES-Lighting metrics across multiple dates and times. The data shows minimal differences between the initial and final models, with consistent values across all time points.
Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760...
AI summary The text presents a comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile data between initial and final models, showing minimal differences in kW/Annual kWh savings across multiple dates and times, indicating a consistent but slightly reduced savings profile in the final model.
Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760...
AI summary The text presents a comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profiles between initial and final models, focusing on RES-Lighting. The data shows minimal differences in kW/Annual kWh savings across various time points, indicating slight adjustments in the models.
Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760...
AI summary The text presents a comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profiles between initial and final models, showing minimal differences in kW/Annual kWh Savings for RES-Lighting across multiple dates and times.
Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760...
AI summary The text presents a comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profiles between initial and final models, focusing on RES-Lighting across different dates and times. The data shows minimal differences in kW/Annual kWh savings between the initial and final models, with a consistent decrease of -0.000000137 in the final model.
Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760...
AI summary The text presents a comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profiles between initial and final models, showing minimal differences in kW/Annual kWh savings across multiple dates and times. The data highlights slight decreases in savings values, suggesting minor adjustments in the models.
Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760...
AI summary The text presents a comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile data between initial and final models, showing minimal differences in kW/Annual kWh savings across various time points. The data highlights small variations in RES-Lighting metrics over time.
Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760...
AI summary The text presents a comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profiles between initial and final models, showing minute differences in kW/Annual kWh savings across multiple dates and times, with a consistent decrease of -0.000000137 in the final model compared to the initial one.
Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760...
AI summary The text presents a comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profiles between initial and final models, focusing on RES-Lighting metrics across different dates and times, showing minimal differences in kW/Annual kWh savings.
Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760...
AI summary The text presents a comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile data between initial and final models, showing minimal differences in kW/Annual kWh savings across various time points, with a consistent decrease of -0.000000137 in the RES-Lighting category.
Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760...
AI summary The text presents a comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile data between initial and final models, showing minimal differences in kW/Annual kWh savings across multiple time points, indicating a stable or slightly adjusted model outcome.
Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760...
AI summary The text presents a comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile data between initial and final models, showing minimal differences in kW/Annual kWh savings across multiple timestamps, indicating slight adjustments in the models.
Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760...
AI summary The text presents a comparison of the 8760 Resource Savings Profile between initial and final models, showing minimal differences in kW/Annual kWh savings across various dates and times, indicating slight changes in the models' efficiency outcomes.
Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profile Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760 Models Between Initial and Final 8760...
AI summary The text presents a comparison of 8760 Resource Savings Profiles between initial and final models, focusing on RES-Lighting, with detailed numerical differences across various dates and times. The data shows minimal variations in kW/Annual kWh savings between the two models.
27, 2015 E1 (NSPI) IR-32 Page 1 of 2 2016-2018 Supply Agreement for EECA M06733 (E-ENS-R-15) E1 Responses to NSPI Information Requests NON-CONFIDENTIAL 1 2 b) Yes, in ENSC’s DSM Potential Study. By utilizing the codes and standards time ve...
AI summary The document discusses how energy savings calculations are affected by the adoption of new energy codes and standards, particularly in the context of the DSM Potential Study. Savings from past DSM programs and codes are not revised even when new standards are implemented.