ESCO Concept State of Israel Ministry of National Infrastructure

1
ESCO ConceptState of IsraelMinistry of
NationalInfrastructure

• Pierre Baillargeon
• December 11, 2004
• Jerusalem, Israel

2
Introduction to MV Protocol

• A MV protocol is a set of standardized
  procedures used to quantify the amount of energy
  savings generated by a project
• There are several sources that provide general
  protocols and approaches to MV
• These should be adapted for each specific project

3
Introduction to MV Protocol

• Essential component to insure success of energy
  efficiency projects (sustainability)
• Allows to perform energy and demand savings
  calculations with accuracy
• Proves that the guaranteed savings are achieved
• Demonstrates to financiers that a cash-flow is
  generated
• Awareness and information to customers employees
• Accuracy acceptable

4
Introduction to MV Protocol

• To allocate the risk related to variation in
  parameters affecting energy usage
• To determine the efficiency of implemented
  equipments
• To follow up the energy savings trend
• To establish the monetary savings amounts

5
Introduction to MV Protocol

• Principle of MV
• Baseline A term often used in MV to refer to
  the energy usage prior to the installation of an
  energy efficiency project

6
Introduction to MV Protocol

• It is then very important to assess a precise
  baseline
• Not only the consumption history
• Must include facility operation conditions
• Hours of operation
• Temperature maintained
• Occupancy level
• Production
• Etc.

7
Introduction to MV Protocol

• The adjustments take into account variation in
  parameters that affect consumption
• Ex Production for a plant
• The adjustments allow to see what would have been
  the consumption of the facility in the baseline
• Or the corrected actual consumption

8
Introduction to MV Protocol

• The energy savings cannot be measured directly
  (most often)
• Either the Baseline or the Post-Retrofit values
  are theoretical
• They represent what should have been the baseline
  consumption or the actual consumption without the
  energy consumption measures

9
Introduction to MV Protocol

• Baseline Historic data Adjustment for weather
  (the theoretical value)

10
Introduction to MV Protocol

• What is the scope of the measurement?

Measure Isolation
Whole building
11
Introduction to MV Protocol

• Whole building
• Usually the Baseline and the Post-Retrofit are
  based on the buildings utilities billing
• There could be adjustment factors to take into
  consideration various changes
• Changes between baseline period and actual period
  include occupancy, level of comfort, etc.

12
Introduction to MV Protocol

• General guidelines to prepare a protocol has been
  developed over the years by various organizations
• Most of them originate from US organizations

13
Well-Known MV Protocols

• IPMVP International Performance Measurement and
  Verification Protocol
• Collaborative effort of many countries. Initially
  funded by DOE
• Now an independent organization EVO
• Web site http//www.evo-world.org

14
Well-Known MV Protocols

• FEMP Federal Energy Management Program
• Provides guidelines and methods for measuring and
  verifying the savings associated with US federal
  agency performance contracts

15
Well-Known MV Protocols

• EPA / MERVC Monitoring, Evaluation, Reporting,
  Verification, and Certification
• EPA Environmental protection agency
• Designed to include environmental impact
  assessments

16
Well-Known MV Protocols

• ASHRAE 14P American Society of Heating,
  Refrigerating Air Conditioning Engineers
• International engineering association
  (headquarters in USA) closely involved in energy
  efficiency
• Covers well the cost-accuracy relationship for a
  protocol

17
Technical Aspects

• Approach
• The energy consumption before and after
  implementation of a measure can be determined by
  different methods
• Direct measurements of equipment consumption and
  demands
• Parameters agreed between the owner and the
  subcontractor/ESCO
• Engineering calculations
• Billing analysis
• Computer simulations, ex. DOE-2
• Or a mix of several above methods

18
The International Protocol (IPMVP)
Four Options

• Option A Partially Measured Retrofit Isolation
• Option B Retrofit Isolation with full
  measurement
• Option C Whole Building
• Option D Calibrated simulation

19
The International Protocol (IPMVP)
Four Options

• Options A and B
• Measure Isolation
• Options C and D
• Whole building approach

20
IPMVP - Option A Partially Measured Retrofit
Isolation

• Option A
• For simple measures where the hours of operation
  are considered constant
• Or where an ESCO does not want to guarantee
  variations in operating hours that are under the
  control of customers
• Or where the customer agrees with a simplified
  approach to reduce MV cost
• Only the power reduction is measured in Option A

21
IPMVP - Option A Partially Measured Retrofit
Isolation

• Comparison of the baseline and demand after
  measure implementation
• Applicable to
• individual systems or equipment
• One or several equipments can be measured to
  obtain an average (sample size)
• Can be a one-time measurement or repeated at
  regular intervals (months, year)

22
IPMVP - Option A Partially Measured Retrofit
Isolation

• How
• Savings calculated by measuring the power of
  specific equipment before and after EE
  implementation
• Hours Estimated (agreed by contract for ESCO
  contract)
• Energy consumption is calculated mathematically

23
IPMVP - Option A Partially Measured Retrofit
Isolation

• Advantage low cost
• Disadvantage low accuracy, high uncertainties
• Often used for simple measures (light
  replacement, etc.) where hours of operation are
  easily estimated
• Allows to verify if the installed equipment
  performance is the same as specified

24
IPMVP - Option A Power Measurement

• The resulting savings can be affected by
• variation of equipment efficiency
• bad or non-functioning equipment
• of construction cost 1-5
• Accuracy 20

25
IPMVP - Option A Power Measurement
Example

• An industrial air compressor of 200 kW
• With hours of operation assumed to be 3,500
  hours/year
• Tariff USD 0.12/kWh

26
IPMVP - Option A Power Measurement

• Instantaneous measurement
• prior and after EE measures
• leaks and power reduced by 20
• Savings (200 kW x 20) x 3,500 hrs x USD
  0.12/kWh
• USD 16,800

27
Option B Retrofit Isolation

• Measured demand and consumption approach
• Demand and hours of operation are measured before
  implementation
• Demand and consumption are also measured after
  implementation

28
Option B Retrofit Isolation

• Applicable when the power varies
• e.g. motors load variation in a variable speed
  system
• Could be applied for short-term comparison (1
  hour, 1 week, 1 month)
• Or for long term (continuous with savings
  monthly evaluation)

29
Option B Retrofit Isolation

• How
• Savings are calculated by comparing energy
  consumption of a given period before and after EE
  project implementation

30
Option B Retrofit Isolation

• Advantage results are more accurate than in
  option A
• Real hours of operation
• Variation of demand accounted for
• Disadvantage More complex and more expensive
  than option A
• Require more equipment kW meter, hour meters or
  kWh loggers

31
Option B Retrofit Isolation

• Accuracy/cost
• of implementation cost 3-10
• Accuracy 10-20

32
Option B Retrofit Isolation
Example

• Same scenario as for option A
• Compressor 200 kW
• EE measures leak reductions
• Measurements for consumption
• Before
• After

33
Option B Retrofit Isolation

• Baseline
• Data logger installed on compressor
• For 1 entire week
• Weekly consumption 14,200 kWh
• Annual consumption calculated based on
  measurements
• Company closes during three weeks/year
• An. Cons. 14,200 x 49
• 695,800 kWh/year

34
Option B Retrofit Isolation

• Measurements after project implementation
• Data logger on compressor
• For two weeks 22,150 kWh
• An. Cons. 22,150 x (49/2)
• 542,675 kWh/year
• Savings
• (695,800-542,675) 153,125 kWh
• Monetary
• 153,125 kWh x USD 0.12/kWh
• USD 18,375

35
Option C Whole Building

• Whole facility approach using utility meter data
  (billing follow-up)
• Appropriate for large-scale projects
• Energy saving should be important (20 or more)
• Important parameters affecting energy usage can
  be clearly identified (baseline and after
  implementation)

36
Option C Whole Building

• Billing and adjustment factors are continually
  gathered
• For the baseline period
• After implementation
• Often used for commercial buildings with simple
  adjustment factors
• Industrial processes can also use this approach
  if adjustment factors are linear
• Difficult for diversified production

37
Option C Whole Building

• Appropriate to calculate the cumulative impact of
  projects in which components cannot be isolated
• If individual measure saving evaluation is not
  required
• Often the only approach to measure soft savings
  (training, awareness)

38
Option C Whole Building

• When independent variables linked to the use of
  energy are simple and easy to monitor
• Advantages C takes into account
• entire installation
• interactive effects between EE measures
• Disadvantages
• more expensive than option A or B
• require monthly calculation

39
Option C Whole Building

• Accuracy/Cost
• of implementation cost 5-15
• Accuracy 5-10 (annual)
• Accuracy 20 (monthly)

40
Option C Whole Building

• A cement industry implements an EE project with
  three EE measures
• Burner replacement
• Insulation of furnaces doors
• Heat recovery system to produce hot water

41
Option C Whole Building

• Project implemented in 2000
• Baseline was 1999
• Production increased by 20 from 1999 to 2001
  (linear relationship)
• Energy bill of year 1999 was
• USD 4.5 million
• The adjusted baseline will be
• 4.5 x 1.2 USD 5.4 million
• Energy bill of 2006
• USD 3.9 million
• Savings for 2006
• 5.4 3.9 USD 1.5 million

42
Option D Calibrated Simulation

• Calibrated simulation approach
• Savings determined by simulation
• Computer model for the Baseline
• Post-Retrofit either
• Computer model
• Real billing data

43
Option D Calibrated Simulation

• For new constructions when the baseline cannot be
  established from history
• When option C is too expensive or difficult to
  apply
• Adjustment factor non linear
• Too many changes to allow tracking
• A calibrated model can be agreed between parties
  (customer ESCO)

44
Option D Calibrated Simulation

• Advantages
• Does not require field survey
• Including interactive effects of individual EE
  measures
• Disadvantages
• Expensive if a detailed analysis is required
• Simulation skills needed
• GIGO (Garbage IN, Garbage OUT)

45
Option D Calibrated Simulation

• Accuracy/Cost
• of implementation cost 5-15
• Accuracy 10

46
Option D Calibrated Simulation

• A school is planning to add more m2 of classes
• Two design approaches
• Use same design as existing (baseline scenario)
• Classes with EE lighting, ventilation with HE
  motors, VSD, high efficiency pumps
• Air conditioning interaction to be considered

47
Option D Calibrated Simulation

• Simulation for new extension
• Done with DOE 2 software
• Takes into account all operating parameters
• Power, consumption, tariff, real number of
  production hours, etc.
• Interactive effects of individual EE measures
• Efficient motor dissipates less heat
• Requires less air conditioning

48
Option D Calibrated Simulation

• Simulation - reference scenario
• Simulated energy bill of USD 160,000/yr
• Simulation - EE scenario
• Simulated energy bill of USD 130,000/yr
• Savings estimated by comparison of the two
  simulations USD 30,000/yr

49
IPMVP Summary

• Options
• For measure isolation A B
• For whole facility C D
• Measurement period (usually)
• One time (spot check) A, B, D
• Limited time A, B, D
• Entire Post-Retrofit Period C

50
MV Plan

• For each individual project, the generic MV
  protocol selected (for instance IPMVP) must be
  adjusted
• To exactly describe the steps, methods,
  measurements
• It should be a clear, precise document showing
  all individual steps needed to perform the MV

51
MV Plan

• Contents
• Identification of the options for the MV plan
  for a measure
• Baseline description
• Historic data
• Adjustment factors
• Detailed procedures to be followed for the
  measurement campaign
• Data to collect
• Frequency
• Sampling if large quantity of equipment
• Who measures?
• Who witnesses from the customers side?
• Who should provide additional data?

52
MV Plan

• Calculation method for savings
• Rate structure to be used
• In case of fuel switching, reference price
• Minimum, maximum prices
• MV cost vs accuracy analysis
• Report frequency
• Reporting format

53
Cost of Measurement and Verification

• Varies according to
• Selected MV option
• Number of individual equipment measured
• Frequency/duration of verification
• Complexity of energy savings measures
• Number of external factors affecting the results
  (adjustments)

54
Cost of Measurement and Verification

• Varies according to (contd)
• Number of similar energy savings measures
• Required accuracy
• Reporting requirement
• Staff experience

55
Precision vs Cost

• Higher precision means higher cost
• Larger Sampling larger quantity of equipment to
  measure means higher cost for MV
• Type of approach measuring power and
  kilowatt-hours (A) instead of partial isolation
  (B) need more equipment and resources
• Higher frequency checking the savings at regular
  intervals (e.g. monthly) is more expensive than
  spot checking

56
Cost vs Savings
Savings
Monthly check
Cost of MV/Savings
Simple 1 time check
MV cost
Complexity of the process
57
Thanks