E-22014 Electricity Demand Side Management Plan Evaluation Reports
82 passages
DEFINITIONS Base case A base case details the information on how assumed gross savings used in the tracking sheet have been established. Usually, these savings are calculated with a series of variables such as hours of operation, wattage o...
AI summary The document defines key terms related to energy efficiency program evaluation, including concepts like base case, billing calibration, distortion effects, free-ridership, gross and net energy savings, and net-to-gross ratio. These definitions are crucial for understanding how energy savings are measured and evaluated in regulatory contexts.
1.1 Evaluation Objectives The objectives of the 2014 evaluation of ENSC's DSM program components were to: - › Assess the effectiveness of program component design and delivery - › Determine the extent to which program component implementat...
AI summary The 2014 evaluation of ENSC's DSM program aimed to assess design effectiveness, implementation progress, energy savings, NTGR, and net savings. Key objectives included verifying technology performance, calculating gross and net energy savings, and analyzing the net-to-gross ratio.
Table 6: 2014 Evaluated Results, Targets and Tracked Energy Savings at the Generator 2014 Energy Savings (GWh) ENSC DSM Program DSM Component Initial Gross Savings Installed/ Adjusted Gross Savings Evaluated Installed/Adjusted Gross Saving...
AI summary Table 6 presents the 2014 energy savings results, targets, and tracked savings for various energy efficiency programs in Nova Scotia. It includes data for residential and business programs, such as appliance retirement, instant savings, home energy assessments, and business energy rebates. The table also highlights the Net-to-Gross Ratio (NTGR) and net savings for each program.
Instant Savings In 2014, Instant Savings generated 9.360 GWh in net electricity savings, and 1.479 MW in net peak demand savings. The evaluated net energy savings were found to be 38 percent lower than the corresponding tracked value, whil...
AI summary In 2014, Instant Savings achieved 9.360 GWh in net electricity savings and 1.479 MW in net peak demand savings. However, evaluated savings were 38% and 31% lower than tracked values, respectively. Adjustments to baseline wattage for LED lamps and changes in free-ridership levels contributed to the discrepancies.
Green Heat The evaluation of Green Heat demonstrated that in 2014, the program had a total of 235 participants and generated net energy savings of 1.472 GWh and net peak demand savings of 0.594 MW. The net energy savings calculated through...
AI summary The Green Heat program in 2014 had 235 participants and achieved net energy savings of 1.472 GWh and peak demand savings of 0.594 MW. However, these figures are lower than those in the tracking report due to factors like a lower NTGR, reduced unitary savings for geothermal heat pumps, and adjustments for heat pumps used as primary heating systems.
Residential Direct Install Residential Direct Install had a total of 13,945 participants in 2014, and achieved net energy and peak demand savings of 24.552 GWh and 5.721 MW respectively. In addition to the regular Residential Direct Instal...
AI summary The Residential Direct Install program achieved significant energy and peak demand savings in 2014, with additional savings from a CBSM Pilot. Evaluated savings were slightly lower than tracked values due to adjustments in unitary savings, installation rates, and free-ridership levels, which were offset by increased internal spillover effects.
Custom Retrofit In 2014, the Custom Retrofit component had a total of 100 projects implemented, which was lower than the previous years. Custom Retrofit generated net energy savings of 20.292 GWh and net peak demand savings of 1.599 MW in...
AI summary In 2014, the Custom Retrofit program had 100 projects, achieving 20.292 GWh in net energy savings and 1.599 MW in peak demand savings. EBC and EMIS contributed additional energy savings but no peak demand savings. Evaluated savings were lower than tracked savings due to changes in NTGR and adjustments to gross savings.
2.3 Net-to-gross Ratio As shown in Tables 6 and 7 above, the interactive effects factors and NTGRs were applied to the gross savings impacts in order to estimate net savings impacts. NTGRs were established based on the levels of free-rider...
AI summary The document discusses the calculation of the Net-to-Gross Ratio (NTGR) for Energy Efficiency Nova Scotia Corporation (ENSC) programs in 2014. It outlines the methodology used to estimate free-ridership and internal spillover effects, which were applied to gross savings impacts to determine net savings. The NTGR formula is provided, and exceptions for certain programs are noted.
nt of information regarding the process, time-consuming process, eligibility hard to ensure and communication issues. Participants also recommended that more information be provided about the program. Similar to last year, distributors exp...
AI summary The Business Energy Rebates (BER) program faces challenges with rebate tracking, reporting, and communication. Distributors are dissatisfied with the time required for rebate processing, financial responsibilities due to errors, and complexity in applying rebates. The Evaluator calculated net savings by adjusting gross savings estimates with free-ridership levels, resulting in an NTGR of 0.73 for energy savings.
APPENDIX II NTGR CALCULATIONS This appendix presents some examples of how the Evaluator has made the calculations to establish the free-ridership, internal spillover and net-to-gross ratio values in the 2014 evaluation. To demonstrate how...
AI summary This appendix provides examples of how the Evaluator calculated free-ridership, internal spillover, and net-to-gross ratio values for the 2014 evaluation, focusing on the Custom Retrofit and Residential Direct Install program components. A similar approach was used for other program components.
Key Findings Econoler reviewed the content of the 2014 ARet tracking system. A total of 7,408 appliances were retired in 2014, including 4,745 refrigerators, 2,540 freezers and 123 air-conditioners. As for the 2013 evaluation, the Evaluato...
AI summary Econoler evaluated the 2014 ARet program, retiring 7,408 appliances and estimating energy savings using the UMP methodology. Net energy savings were 3.841 GWh and peak demand savings were 0.611 MW, with a net-to-gross ratio (NTGR) of 0.60 for refrigerators, 0.58 for freezers, and 0.55 for air-conditioners.
3.8 NTGR Calculation This year, the net-to-gross ratio cannot be calculated as an addition of percentage for each distortion effect. To comply with the UMP calculation methodology, it is required to calculate the savings associated with ea...
AI summary The document explains the calculation of the net-to-gross ratio (NTGR) for energy efficiency programs, emphasizing the need to account for both unitary savings and spillover effects. It describes a methodology involving weighted averages and the use of a specific equation to determine the equivalent NTGR.
Energy Savings The impact evaluation was conducted on the basis of the data and information gained from three main activities: a review of the unitary savings used to estimate gross savings; the CFL and LED lampbuyer intercept survey; and...
AI summary The impact evaluation of energy savings considered data from unitary savings reviews, a lampbuyer intercept survey, and retailer interviews. The Econoler team calculated gross and net savings, factoring in free-ridership and spillover for CFLs and LED lamps. A NTGR of 1 was applied to other products due to insufficient buyer data.
Table 1: Distortion Effects and Net-to-Gross Ratio Product Category Free-ridership Spillover NTGR Regular CFLs 54% 28% 0.74 LED Lamps 0% 20% 1.20 All Other Products - - 1.00 The evaluation has revealed that Instant Savings generated net en...
AI summary Table 1 presents the distortion effects and net-to-gross ratio (NTGR) for different product categories, including Regular CFLs, LED Lamps, and All Other Products. The evaluation highlights that the Instant Savings program achieved significant energy and peak demand savings in 2014.
5.3 Net-to-gross Ratio This section presents the evaluation of NTGR for Instant Savings, which included the assessment of free-ridership and spillover (through market effects) for two specific products: regular CFLs and LED lamps. These pr...
AI summary This section evaluates the net-to-gross ratio (NTGR) for the Instant Savings program, focusing on free-ridership and spillover effects for regular CFLs and LED lamps, which account for 69% of total tracked gross savings.
Table 31: Net-to-Gross Ratios Product Category Free Ridership Spillover NTGR Regular CFLs 54% 28% 0.74 Specialty CFLs - - 1.00 LED Lamps 0% 20% 1.20 All Other Products - - 1.00
AI summary Table 31 presents net-to-gross ratios for various product categories, including Regular CFLs, Specialty CFLs, LED Lamps, and All Other Products. The table highlights free ridership, spillover, and NTGR (Net Take-Up Growth Rate) for each category, with LED Lamps showing the highest NTGR at 1.20.
CONCLUSION The 2014 evaluation of Instant Savings demonstrated that most of the recommendations made specifically for Instant Savings in the previous evaluations were implemented. The Evaluator commends ENSC on the efforts it made to impro...
AI summary The 2014 evaluation of Instant Savings highlights improvements in the program, including the removal of CFLs and the promotion of LED lamps. However, challenges remain, such as retailer engagement and communication delays. Energy savings declined compared to previous years, partly due to budget cuts and lower unitary savings for certain products.
Table 2: Validated Savings at the Generator 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 GWh - 5.7...
AI summary Table 2 presents validated energy and peak demand savings at the generator level, including gross and net savings after applying a net-to-gross ratio (NTGR) of 0.75. Total validated energy savings amount to 7.020 GWh, with net savings of 5.785 GWh. Total validated peak demand savings are 1.727 MW, with net savings of 1.423 MW.
3.2 Net-to-gross Ratio The NTGR evaluation is based on a self-report approach which relies on a series of questions designed to measure the influence of HEA on the decision of participants to implement eligible energy efficiency upgrades a...
AI summary This section discusses the methodology for calculating the Net-to-Gross Ratio (NTGR) based on self-reported data from participants regarding the influence of Home Energy Assessments (HEA) on their decision to implement energy efficiency upgrades. It also addresses the assessment of two distortion effects: free-ridership and internal spillover.
3.2.3 NTGR Calculation The NTGR is calculated using the following equation: NTGR = (1 – % free-ridership + % internal spillover) Using the free-ridership and spillover levels established for HEA, the NTGR value is estimated at 0.75.
AI summary The Net-to-Gross Ratio (NTGR) is calculated using the formula (1 – % free-ridership + % internal spillover). Based on established free-ridership and spillover levels from the Home Energy Assessment (HEA), the NTGR is estimated at 0.75.
3.3 Net Savings The net savings were estimated using the NTGR presented above. The equation below was used to calculate both peak demand and energy net savings. Net Savings = Gross Evaluation Savings × NTGR The 2014 net energy savings for...
AI summary Net savings were calculated using the Net-to-Gross Ratio (NTGR) with the equation Net Savings = Gross Evaluation Savings × NTGR. The 2014 net energy savings for HEA are estimated at 3.370 GWh at the meter and 3.707 GWh at the generator, with peak demand savings of 0.829 MW and 0.912 MW respectively.
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.
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.
Table 2: Comparison of Tracked and Evaluated Savings at the Generator Initial Gross Savings NTGR Net Savings Energy Savings Tracked Savings from ENSC 2.393 GWh 0.66 1.580 GWh Evaluation Results 2.299 GWh 0.64 1.472 GWh Peak Demand Savings...
AI summary Table 2 compares tracked and evaluated energy and peak demand savings at the generator level. Net savings are seven percent lower than tracked savings, attributed to a lower NTGR, reduced unitary savings for geothermal heat pumps, and adjustments for heat pumps used as primary heating systems before conversion.
5.2 Net-to-Gross Ratio To measure the influence of Green Heat on participants' decision whether or not to install eligible heating systems, a self-report survey was conducted using a set of questions. Based on an analysis of the responses...
AI summary A self-report survey was conducted to assess the influence of Green Heat on participants' decisions to install eligible heating systems. The survey focused on free-ridership as a distortion effect, and the results were used to determine an appropriate net-to-gross ratio (NTGR).
5.2.2 NTGR Calculation The NTGR has been calculated using the following equation: $$NTGR = (1 - \% \text{ free-ridership}).$$ Using the free-ridership level established for Green Heat, the NTGR value has been established at 0.64.
AI summary The NTGR (Net-to-Gross Ratio) is calculated as (1 - % free-ridership), with a value of 0.64 established based on the free-ridership level for Green Heat.
5.3 Net Savings The net peak demand and energy savings for Green Heat have been calculated by applying the NTGR value just described and the following equation. Net Savings = Gross Evaluation Savings × NTGR The total net energy savings are...
AI summary The net savings from Green Heat programs are calculated using the Net-to-Gross Ratio (NTGR) applied to gross evaluation savings. Total net energy savings are 1.338 GWh at the meter and 1.472 GWh at the generator, with corresponding peak demand savings of 0.540 MW and 0.594 MW.
Table 18: Comparison of Tracked and Evaluated Savings at the Generator Initial Gross Savings NTGR Net Savings Energy Savings Tracked Savings from ENSC 2.393 GWh 0.66 1.580 GWh Evaluation Results 2.299 GWh 0.64 1.472 GWh Peak Demand Savings...
AI summary Table 18 compares tracked and evaluated energy and peak demand savings from the Efficiency Nova Scotia Corporation (ENSC). Evaluated net energy savings are 7% lower than tracked savings, with the Net-to-Gross Ratio (NTGR) also slightly lower than in the 2013 evaluation. The difference is attributed to reduced unitary savings for geothermal heat pumps and adjustments for heat pumps used as primary heating systems.
Table 1: 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 1 presents validated savings at the generator, 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.
2.3 Net-to-Gross Ratio LIH offers no-cost energy assessments and implementation of energy efficiency measures for lowincome homeowners. Due to the specific characteristics of the measures proposed and the target customers, the distortion e...
AI summary The Low Income Homeowner (LIH) program provides no-cost energy assessments and energy efficiency measures for low-income homeowners. The distortion effects of the program are considered insignificant, leading to a Net-to-Gross Ratio (NTGR) of 1.
2.4 Net Savings Net savings were estimated by applying the interactive effects and the NTGR to the gross energy savings, using the equation below. Net savings = Gross Evaluation Savings × (1 + Interactive Effects Factor) × NTGR As with pre...
AI summary Net savings for LIH were calculated using the NTGR and interactive effects factor. Due to the transfer of certain measures to RDI, the interactive effects factor was not applied, leading to a simplified calculation. Total net energy and peak demand savings were estimated at 2.101 GWh and 0.490 MW at the meter, and 2.311 GWh and 0.539 MW at the generator.
3.3 Net-to-Gross Ratio The net-to-gross ratio (NTGR) evaluation is based on a self-report approach which relies on a series of questions designed to measure the influence of New Home Construction on the decision of participants and builder...
AI summary The net-to-gross ratio (NTGR) evaluation uses a self-report approach to assess how new home construction influences participants' and builders' decisions to implement energy efficiency measures. The methodology includes evaluating free-ridership and spillover effects, such as market effects.
3.4 Net Savings The net savings were estimated using the NTGR presented above. The equation below was used to calculate the net savings. Net savings = Gross Evaluation Savings × NTGR This equation was used for calculating both peak demand...
AI summary The net savings were calculated using the NTGR equation, resulting in estimated energy savings of 4.156 GWh at the meter and 4.572 GWh at the generator, along with peak demand savings of 1.068 MW and 1.175 MW respectively.
Energy Savings To calculate the net savings of RDI in 2014, the Econoler team reviewed the gross savings estimated by ENSC and conducted 50 on-site visits to establish the installation rates for each category of products installed through...
AI summary The Econoler team calculated the net savings of the Residential Direct Install (RDI) program in 2014 by adjusting gross savings estimates from ENSC with factors for free-ridership and spillover effects. A 15% free-ridership and 6% spillover were identified for non-low-income participants, while low-income participants had negligible distortion effects, resulting in an overall net-to-gross ratio (NTGR) of 0.93.
Table 1: Distortion Effects and Overall Net-to-Gross Ratio Calculation Group of Participants Non-Low-Income Low-Income Free-ridership Level 15% - Spillover Level 6% - NTGR 0.91 1.00 Proportion1 77% 23% Overall NTGR 0.93 The evaluation reve...
AI summary Table 1 presents distortion effects and the overall net-to-gross ratio (NTGR) for non-low-income and low-income participants. The evaluation shows that the Residential Direct Install (RDI) program achieved net energy savings of 24.552 GWh and peak demand savings of 5.721 MW in 2014.
Table 2: 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 32.001 GWh 32.00...
AI summary Table 2 compares tracked and evaluated energy and peak demand savings from Efficiency Nova Scotia (ENSC) programs. It shows discrepancies between initial gross savings and net savings after accounting for interactive effects and the net-to-gross ratio (NTGR). The table highlights differences in energy and peak demand savings between tracked data and evaluation results.
Project No. 5870 x The evaluated values calculated for the program are slightly lower than those calculated from the tracking system. This can be explained by the differences in some of the parameters used by ENSC and the Evaluator to esti...
AI summary The evaluated program savings are slightly lower than tracked values due to revised unitary savings estimates, updated installation rates, and higher NTGR. The CBSM Pilot generated additional energy and peak demand savings.
fficulty retrieving this information, which is used to establish the line loss factor. It should also be noted that this percentage is an improvement from last year's evaluation, down from 35 percent. RDI targets both low-income and non-lo...
AI summary The tracking system used for the RDI program includes features to calculate energy savings, apply income-based net-to-gross ratios, and capture product details. The Evaluator found the system complete and noted that some 2012 recommendations have been implemented, though further improvements are suggested.
5 IMPACT EVALUATION FOR RDI The objective of the 2014 RDI impact evaluation is to determine the gross and net energy savings generated by the energy-efficient products installed in participating households. Both electrical energy and peak...
AI summary The 2014 RDI impact evaluation aims to assess the gross and net energy savings from energy-efficient product installations in participating households, considering factors like unitary savings values, installation rates, and free-ridership.
5.3 Net-to-Gross Ratio The net-to-gross ratio (NTGR) evaluation is based on a self-report approach which relies on a series of questions designed to measure the impact of RDI on the participants' decision to implement eligible energy effic...
AI summary The net-to-gross ratio (NTGR) evaluation uses a self-report approach to assess the impact of the Residential Demand Response Initiative (RDI) on participants' decisions to implement energy efficiency upgrades. The methodology includes assessing distortion effects such as free-ridership and internal spillover.
5.3.3 NTGR Calculation The NTGR is calculated using the following equation: NTGR = (1 – % free-ridership + % internal spillover) Using the free-ridership and internal spillover levels established for non-low-income participants, the NTGR v...
AI summary The NTGR is calculated using a formula that accounts for free-ridership and internal spillover. For non-low-income participants, the NTGR is estimated at 0.91, while for low-income participants, it is assumed to be 1.00. The overall NTGR for the program is calculated as 0.93, which is used in the gross savings calculation.
Table 26: Overall NTGR Calculation for RDI Group of Participants Non-low-income Low-income NTGR 0.91 1.00 Proportion32 77% 23% Overall NTGR 0.93 5.4 Net Savings
AI summary Table 26 presents the Net-to-Gross Ratio (NTGR) calculation for the Residential Demand Response Initiative (RDI), showing different values for non-low-income and low-income participants. Section 5.4 discusses Net Savings, indicating a focus on financial metrics related to the RDI.
Net energy savings are estimated by applying the interactive effects and the NTGR to the gross energy savings, using the equation below. Net Energy Savings = Gross Energy Savings × (1 + Interactive Effect Factor) × NTGR The net energy savi...
AI summary The document explains how net energy savings are calculated using the interactive effects and the Net-to-Gross Ratio (NTGR) applied to gross energy savings. The calculation is performed separately for each product due to varying interactive effects. Overall net energy savings and peak demand savings are reported at both the meter and generator levels.
Table 28: 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 32.001 GWh 32.0...
AI summary The evaluated energy and peak demand savings from the program are slightly lower than the tracked savings. The evaluator adjusted unitary savings downward for some products, and installation rates have decreased. However, lower free-ridership and higher spillover levels increased the NTGR, partially offsetting these reductions, resulting in a 2% decrease in net energy savings.
6.3 Net-to-Gross Ratio The unitary savings value obtained by a direct comparison of the CBSM Pilot participants with a control group can be directly applied to the number of CBSM Pilot participants to establish net savings. This unitary sa...
AI summary The unitary savings value from the CBSM Pilot, derived by comparing participants with a control group, accounts for distortion effects and is used to calculate net savings for all CBSM Pilot participants.
DEFINITIONS Accuracy Reflects the proximity of measurements to the true value. Bias Systematic deviations of measurements from the true value. Confidence interval The estimated range of values which is likely to include the unknown populat...
AI summary This section provides definitions of key terms related to energy efficiency program evaluation, including concepts like accuracy, bias, confidence interval, distortion effects, free-ridership, gross and net energy savings, and net-to-gross ratio. These definitions support the analysis and measurement of program impacts.
Table 1: Validated Gross and Net 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 Dema...
AI summary Table 1 provides validated gross and net savings at the generator level for energy and peak demand, including initial and installed savings with interactive effects. The table includes metrics such as NTGR (Net-to-Gross Ratio) and net savings for both energy and peak demand.
2 VALIDATED SAVINGS In 2014, a full-scale evaluation of Solar was not carried out. The evaluation of Solar involved validated ENSC's tracked savings and applied the parameters established in the 2013 evaluation. This section presents the g...
AI summary In 2014, a full-scale evaluation of Solar was not conducted. Instead, validated ENSC tracked savings were evaluated using parameters from the 2013 evaluation. This section outlines the gross and net savings for Solar in 2014.
2.2 Net-to-Gross Ratio The net-to-gross ratio (NTGR) evaluation is based on a self-report approach which relies on a series of questions designed to measure the influence of Solar on the participants' decision to install solar heating syst...
AI summary The net-to-gross ratio (NTGR) is calculated using a self-report approach and considers free-ridership, where participants may have installed solar heating systems without the program. A 35% free-ridership rate from a 2013 survey is used, resulting in an NTGR of 0.65.
2.3 Net Savings The net savings were estimated using the NTGR presented above. The equation below was used to calculate the net energy savings. Net Savings = Gross Evaluation Savings × NTGR The 2014 validated net energy savings for Solar a...
AI summary The net savings were calculated using the Net-to-Gross Ratio (NTGR) and the equation Net Savings = Gross Evaluation Savings × NTGR. For Solar, the 2014 validated net energy savings are estimated at 0.0561 GWh at the meter and 0.0617 GWh at the generator.
Table 5: Validated Net Savings Category of Measure DHW Air Space Heating Total Energy Savings Total Gross Energy Savings – at meter (GWh) 0.0829 0.0035 0.0864 NTGR 0.65 0.65 0.65 Total Net Energy Savings – at meter (GWh) 0.0539 0.0023 0.05...
AI summary Table 5 presents validated net energy savings across different categories of measures, including Domestic Hot Water and Air Space Heating. It shows gross and net energy savings at the meter and generator, along with the Net-to-Gross Ratio and Line Loss Factor.
Table 1: Comparison of Tracked and Evaluated Savings at the Generator Initial Gross Savings Gross Savings with Interactive Effects NTGR Net Savings Energy Savings Tracked Savings from ENSC 0.246 GWh 0.246 GWh 1.00 0.246 GWh Evaluation Resu...
AI summary The table compares tracked and evaluated energy and peak demand savings from the LED Holiday Light Exchange (LHLE) program. Evaluated net energy savings are lower than tracked savings due to a reduction in unitary savings value and an interactive effect factor not considered in the tracked data. These findings are based on a 2014 ENSC in-field survey and are deemed reliable.
6.3 Net-to-gross Ratio This section discusses HER web-based component's NTGR evaluation, which included the assessment of the free-ridership level associated with each product category.
AI summary This section evaluates the net-to-gross ratio (NTGR) of the Home Energy Report (HER) web-based component, focusing on the assessment of free-ridership levels for each product category.
Table 21: Net-to-gross Ratios Product Category Free Ridership NTGR Energy-efficiency Dishwasher 73% 27% Energy-efficiency Room Air-conditioner 54% 46% Insulate Windows with Heat-shrink Film 83% 17% Reducing Shower Time 41% 59% Turn off the...
AI summary Table 21 presents net-to-gross ratios for various energy-efficiency programs, showing the percentage of free ridership and the corresponding net-to-gross ratio (NTGR) for each product category. Section 6.4 discusses net savings related to these programs.
Energy Savings To calculate the net savings of the mail-in rebate approach in 2014, the Econoler team reviewed ENSC's estimate of gross savings by analyzing the results of 58 on-site visits and measuring the distortion effects associated w...
AI summary The document discusses the calculation of net savings for the mail-in rebate approach in 2014, using a free-ridership level of 25% and a net-to-gross ratio (NTGR) of 0.75, except for LED tubes with promotional rebates. For the instant rebate approach, the free-ridership level was calculated for three major product categories based on distributor interviews.
Table 1: Distortion Effects and Net-to-gross Ratio 2014 Instant Rebate 2014 Mail-in Rebate LED Outdoor Wallpacks LED Downlights Free-ridership Level 25% 46% 29% 35% NTGR 0.75 0.54 0.71 0.65
AI summary Table 1 presents the free-ridership levels and net-to-gross ratios for various rebate programs in 2014, including the Instant Rebate, Mail-in Rebate, LED Outdoor Wallpacks, and LED Downlights. The data highlights the distortion effects of these programs and the efficiency of rebate distribution.
Table 2: Overall Comparison of Tracked and Evaluated Savings at the Generator for BER Initial Gross Savings Adjusted Gross Savings Gross Savings Adjusted with Interactive Effects NTGR Net Savings Energy Savings Tracked Savings from ENSC 32...
AI summary The evaluation of the Business Energy Rebates (BER) program in 2014 showed slightly higher net energy savings compared to tracked savings, but lower peak demand savings. Adjustments in savings calculations for HVAC and lighting increased gross energy savings, while a lower NTGR and lack of diversity factors in tracking reduced net and peak demand savings, respectively.
(Continued) Category of Measure Kitchen Water Heating Laundry Solar LED Promotion Total for All Categories Tracking System Savings Tracking System Savings Tracked Energy Savings (GWh) 0.309 0.057 0.003 0.004 2.671 12.376 Tracked Demand Sav...
AI summary The text presents a table detailing energy and demand savings across various categories, including kitchen, water heating, laundry, solar, and LED promotion. It includes metrics such as tracked energy savings, adjustment ratios, and line loss factors. The section 'Net-to-Gross Ratio' is mentioned, indicating a discussion on efficiency metrics.
Table 15: Comparison of Tracked and Evaluated Savings at the Generator – BER Mail-in Initial Gross Savings Adjusted Gross Savings NTGR Net Savings Energy Savings Tracked Savings from ENSC 13.218 GWh 13.218 GWh 0.82 10.839 GWh Evaluation Re...
AI summary Table 15 compares tracked and evaluated savings from the Business Energy Rebates (BER) program. Evaluated gross energy savings exceeded tracked savings in 2014, primarily due to adjustments in HVAC and lighting categories. Although the Net-to-Gross Ratio (NTGR) decreased, net energy savings were still higher than tracked values by one percent.
6 IMPACT EVALUATION FOR EMIS AND EBC 28 6.1 EMIS Review 28 6.2 Existing Building Commissioning Review 29 6.2.1 Validated Gross Savings 31 6.3 Net-to-Gross Ratio 31 6.4 Overall Savings for Custom Retrofit 32 CONCLUSION 33 APPENDIX I 2014 RE...
AI summary The document outlines an impact evaluation for EMIS and EBC, including sections on EMIS review, existing building commissioning review, validated gross savings, net-to-gross ratio, and overall savings for custom retrofit. It also includes appendices with recommendations, survey questionnaires, results, and methodology for free-ridership and internal spillover calculations.
Table 1: Distortion Effects and Net-to-Gross Ratio for Custom Retrofit 2014 Free-Ridership Level 10% Spillover Level 0% Net-to-Gross Ratio 0.90 Project No. 5870 viii
AI summary Table 1 presents the distortion effects and net-to-gross ratio for a custom retrofit in 2014, including a free-ridership level of 10% and a net-to-gross ratio of 0.90. This data is associated with Project No. 5870.
Table 2: 2014 Net Savings at the Generator of Custom Retrofit, EMIS and EBC Initial Gross Savings Adjusted Gross Savings NTGR Net Savings Energy Savings Tracked Savings from ENSC 29.353 GWh 29.353 GWh 0.93 27.314 GWh Evaluation Results 29....
AI summary Table 2 presents net savings data from 2014 for energy and peak demand savings generated by Custom Retrofit, EMIS, and EBC initiatives. The data includes initial and adjusted gross savings, the net-to-gross ratio (NTGR), and net savings for both energy and peak demand categories.
Table 10: Evaluation Results – Revised Savings for Custom Retrofit Program Path Lighting Retrofit Projects Other Energy Efficiency Projects Total for all Custom Retrofit Projects Number of Projects 36 64 100 Program Tracking Sheets Total T...
AI summary Table 10 provides evaluation results for revised savings from custom retrofit programs, including energy and peak demand savings tracked at the meter and generator, along with adjustment ratios and line loss factors. Section 5.2 discusses the Net-to-Gross Ratio.
5.2.3 NTGR Calculation The NTGR was calculated using the following equation: NTGR = (1 – % free-ridership + % internal spillover). Using the free-ridership and spillover levels established for Custom Retrofit, the NTGR value was estimated...
AI summary The NTGR was calculated using the equation NTGR = (1 – % free-ridership + % internal spillover), with an estimated value of 0.90 based on free-ridership and spillover levels established for Custom Retrofit.
5.3 Net Savings The net savings for the program were estimated using the NTGR calculated, as described above. The following equation was used to calculate both the net peak demand savings and the net energy savings. Net savings = gross eva...
AI summary The net savings for the program were estimated using the net-to-gross ratio (NTGR), with the formula Net savings = gross evaluation savings × NTGR. The results are presented in Table 11.
Table 12: Tracked Savings for EMIS and EBC Components Custom Retrofit Sub-component EMIS Retrocommissioning Total Number of Projects 2 7 9 Tracked Savings Total Tracked Energy Savings – at the Meter (GWh) 4.795 1.591 6.386 Average Line Los...
AI summary Table 12 presents tracked energy savings for EMIS and EBC components, including the number of projects, total energy savings at the meter and generator, and the average line loss factor. Section 6.3 discusses the Net-to-Gross Ratio, a key metric in energy efficiency evaluations.
Table 13: 2014 Net Savings at the Generator of Custom Retrofit, EMIS and EBC Initial Gross Savings Adjusted Gross Savings NTGR Net Savings Energy Savings Tracked Savings from ENSC 29.353 GWh 29.353 GWh 0.93 27.314 GWh Evaluation Results 29...
AI summary The table presents 2014 net savings data from energy efficiency programs, including Custom Retrofit, EMIS, and EBC. The Evaluator made minor adjustments to energy savings, with a 1.2% difference between tracked and evaluated net energy savings. Peak demand savings were adjusted downward by about 14%, largely due to changes in diversity factors and a reduction in the NTGR ratio.
DEFINITIONS Billing calibration An activity that consists in adjusting the expected energy savings based on the relative difference between the results of the building energy simulations and the actual energy consumption of the building. D...
AI summary The text defines key terms related to energy efficiency program evaluation, including billing calibration, distortion effects, free-ridership, gross and net energy savings, and net-to-gross ratio. These definitions are used to measure and evaluate the impact of energy efficiency initiatives.
Table 3: Evaluation Results – Gross Energy and Peak Demand Savings Program Path Total for all NC Projects Number of Projects 13 Program Tracking Sheets Total Tracked Energy Savings – at meter (GWh) 6.696 Total Tracked Demand Savings – at m...
AI summary Table 3 presents evaluation results for gross energy and peak demand savings from NC projects. It includes tracked and adjusted energy and demand savings at both the meter and generator levels, along with line loss factors and adjustment ratios.
4.3 Net Savings As explained in the previous section, in 2014, savings were obtained in a way that directly yielded net savings. Consequently, the net-to-gross ratio has a value of 1.00. The following table compares the net energy savings...
AI summary This section discusses net savings from 2014, where savings were achieved directly, resulting in a net-to-gross ratio of 1.00. A table compares calculated net energy savings with program-tracked net savings for that year.
Table 4: Comparison of Tracked and Evaluated Savings at the Generator Initial Gross Savings Adjusted Gross Savings NTGR Net Savings Energy Savings Tracked Savings from ENSC 7.122 GWh 7.122 GWh 1.00 7.122 GWh Evaluation Results 7.122 GWh 6....
AI summary Table 4 compares tracked and evaluated savings from Energy Efficiency Nova Scotia Corporation (ENSC) projects. Adjustments to gross energy and peak demand savings were minimal, with only two of nine projects experiencing significant adjustments. The table highlights the Net-to-Gross Ratio (NTGR) and Net Savings for both energy and peak demand.
5.5 Net-to-Gross Ratios 49 5.5.1 Net-to-Gross Ratio for BES49 5.5.2 Net-to-Gross Ratio for RP&C Common Areas50 5.5.3 Net-to-Gross Ratio for the LED Blitz Pilot51 5.6 Net Savings51 5.6.1 Net Savings for BES Lighting Measures51 5.6.2 Net Sav...
AI summary The document outlines sections related to Net-to-Gross Ratios and Net Savings for various energy efficiency programs, including BES, RP&C Common Areas, and the LED Blitz Pilot. It includes appendices with recommendations, sampling protocols, participant surveys, and calculation methodologies.
Table 1: Distortion Effects and Net-to-Gross Ratio BES RP&C Common Area LED Blitz Free-ridership Level 17% 17% - Spillover Level 0.3% - - Net-to-Gross Ratio 0.83 0.83 1.00
AI summary Table 1 presents the distortion effects and net-to-gross ratios for different programs, including BES, RP&C Common Area, and LED Blitz. The free-ridership level is 17% for both BES and RP&C Common Area, while the net-to-gross ratio is 0.83 for BES and RP&C Common Area, and 1.00 for LED Blitz.
Table 2: Overall Comparison of Tracked and Evaluated Savings at the Generator for BES Initial Gross Savings Installed Gross Savings Installed Gross Savings with Interactive Effects NTGR Net Savings Energy Savings Tracked Savings from ENSC...
AI summary Table 2 compares tracked and evaluated savings from Business Energy Solutions (BES) programs, including energy and peak demand savings. It shows discrepancies between initial gross savings and net savings after accounting for interactive effects, with Net-to-Gross Ratios (NTGR) indicating the efficiency of savings realization.
5 IMPACT EVALUATION The objective of the 2014 BES impact evaluation is to determine the gross and net energy savings associated with the measures implemented through BES, including the BES lighting and non-lighting measures, as well as mea...
AI summary The 2014 BES impact evaluation assesses energy savings from lighting and non-lighting measures, as well as common area and LED Blitz initiatives. It considers factors like unitary savings, installation rates, diversity factors, and free-ridership. Data from on-site visits, surveys, and previous evaluations are used to calculate net-to-gross ratios for the programs.
5.5 Net-to-Gross Ratios To evaluate the NTGR of BES measures and RP&C Common Area measures, a self-report survey was conducted using a set of questions designed to measure the influence of the program on participants' decision on whether o...
AI summary This section discusses the methodology used to calculate the Net-to-Gross Ratios (NTGR) by analyzing survey responses from participants regarding their decision to implement eligible energy efficiency measures.
5.5.1 Net-to-Gross Ratio for BES For BES lighting and non-lighting measures, to establish an NTGR, two kinds of distortion effects were assessed, namely free-ridership and internal spillover.
AI summary The Net-to-Gross Ratio (NTGR) for BES lighting and non-lighting measures considers distortion effects such as free-ridership and internal spillover in its calculation.
5.5.2 Net-to-Gross Ratio for RP&C Common Areas To determine the NTGR for RP&C Common Areas, one distortion effect was assessed, namely free-ridership.
AI summary The document discusses the assessment of a distortion effect called free-ridership in determining the Net-to-Gross Ratio for RP&C Common Areas.
5.5.3 Net-to-Gross Ratio for the LED Blitz Pilot For all lighting and non-lighting measures implemented through the LED Blitz pilots, an NTGR of 1.00 has been applied.
AI summary The LED Blitz Pilot applies a Net-to-Gross Ratio (NTGR) of 1.00 for all lighting and non-lighting measures implemented through the pilot program.
5.6 Net Savings The net savings for the program were estimated using the interactive effect factors and the NTGR mentioned above. The following equation was used to calculate the program net savings. Net Savings = Gross Evaluation Savings...
AI summary The net savings for the program were calculated using an equation that incorporates gross evaluation savings, interactive effect factors, and the net-to-gross ratio (NTGR). This method was applied to assess peak demand and energy savings for BES lighting, non-lighting measures, RP&C common areas, and the LED Blitz pilot.
Table 31: Comparison of Tracked and Evaluated Savings Associated with RP&C Common Area Measures at the Generator Initial Gross Savings Installed Gross Savings Installed Gross Savings with Interactive Effects NTGR Net Savings Energy Savings...
AI summary Table 31 compares tracked and evaluated savings from RP&C common area measures, focusing on energy and peak demand savings. The table includes metrics like initial gross savings, net-to-gross ratio (NTGR), and net savings, highlighting the impact of LED Blitz initiatives on energy efficiency.
Table 35: Overall Comparison of Tracked and Evaluated Savings at the Generator for BES Initial Gross Savings Installed Gross Savings Installed Gross Savings with Interactive Effects NTGR Net Savings Energy Savings Tracked Savings from ENSC...
AI summary Table 35 compares tracked and evaluated savings at the generator for Building Energy Standards (BES). It shows energy and peak demand savings from the Energy Efficiency Program (ENS) and the evaluation results, including the Net-to-Gross Ratio (NTGR) for each category.