![Show Menu](styles/mobile-menu.png)
![Page Background](./../common/page-substrates/page0033.jpg)
2
can be measured [4]. Performance and operations factors are taken
into account and these are factors that indicate equipment or system
performance characteristics such as kW/t, or W/fixture, for example,
while operating factors indicate equipment or system operating char-
acteristics such as hours of operation.
Option A: Stipulated and measured factors
The performance and operation factors are based on a combination
of measured and stipulated factors, for example, measurements can
be taken as spot measurements or short-term measurements at the
component or system level. Data can be used from rating plates of
suppliers and manufacturers, or the components’ historical data. The
cost of M&V would be dependent on the number of points measured,
and an estimated range could be between 1 and 3% of the energy
savings of the project.
Option B: Measured factors (retrofit isolation)
As with IPMVP Option A, spot or short-term measurements at com-
ponent or system level are used where variations in factors are not
expected. Option B applies to a retrofit or systemwhere the measure-
ments can be taken separately from other measures or performance
factors. No factors are stipulated in this option but it involves the need
for more end-use metering than Option A, which makes it both more
expensive and less subject to uncertainty. An estimate of 3 - 15% of
the energy savings of the project has been cited [4].
Option C: Utility billing data analysis
(whole facility)
With Option C the complexity of the whole building analysis deter-
mines the cost which could be in the region of 1 - 10% of the energy
savings of the project.
This option applies to the impact of a ‘bundle’ of retrofit measures
on a whole building or facility. Option C relies on total building energy
performance data obtained from metering at the point of entry to
the facility, from baseline period to post-installation of the retrofit.
A requirement is to utilise regression analysis so that performance
variables can be accounted for, such as the weather, production and
occupancy, etc. to ensure the correct baseline adjustments.
Option D: Calibrated computer simulation
(greenfields-type projects)
Computer simulation models of component or whole-system energy
consumption are used to determine the projected energy savings.
The simulation inputs are linked to the baseline and post-installation
conditions, or performance metering before and after the retrofit. The
simulation models can be calibrated by using whole-building long-term
energy use data from an existing building. As a guideline we suggest
the following when making a decision as to which option to use:
• Look at the total project cost
• Then at the expected savings to evaluate the ROI
• Consider the complexity of adjustments required (derived from
the complexity to measure and model the drivers)
• The cost of the type of measurement requirements related to the
option
• The anticipated changes to post-implementation usage patterns
or drivers
• The risks that have to be taken on by the stakeholders
• The uncertainties that need to be determined
Most importantly, choose the least complex method even if it means
realigning the project boundaries to be more cost-effective whilst
maintaining the least uncertainties that need to be determined.
Baseline
For each option, and for each specific project, agreement between
all stakeholders must be reached on the baseline definition (and
M&V plan) as it involves, quantifying energy consumption data whilst
specifying the factors that affect the energy consumption, taking into
account agreed upon variables.
To determine a baseline energy consumption data is required,
such as meter readings of bill information relating to the electric-
31
ENERGY EFFICIENCY MADE SIMPLE 2015