1 / 25

International performance Measurement Verification Protocol

5/1/2012. 2. IPMVP - Target Audience. Facility Energy Managers, particularly public buildingsESCOs (Energy Service Companies) WASCOs (Water Service Companies)Development BanksFinance FirmsUtility DSM ManagersBuilding ManagersState and Municipalities. 5/1/2012. 3. IPMVP - Objectives. Reduce tr

linore
Télécharger la présentation

International performance Measurement Verification Protocol

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

    1. Satish Kumar (Skumar@lbl.gov) Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory U.N. Energy Workshop United Nations Building, New York City February 1-2, 2000 IPMVP Web Site: www.ipmvp.org International performance Measurement & Verification Protocol

    2. 5/2/2012 2 IPMVP - Target Audience Facility Energy Managers, particularly public buildings ESCOs (Energy Service Companies) WASCOs (Water Service Companies) Development Banks Finance Firms Utility DSM Managers Building Managers State and Municipalities

    3. 5/2/2012 3 IPMVP - Objectives Reduce transaction costs by providing international, industry standard approach and methodologies to measure and verify energy savings and GHG emissions Replace multiple, incompatible protocols with single consensus approach Increase reliability and level of savings Project bundling and pooled financing Provide a way to update the standard for future needs

    4. 5/2/2012 4 IPMVP - Scope Addressing the M&V needs of parties in energy and water efficiency projects Providing industry consensus M&V options with varying levels of accuracy and cost for: Baseline and project installations conditions Long-term energy and water savings performance Providing techniques for calculating “whole-facility” savings, individual technology savings, and stipulated savings Defining procedures which are: Consistently applicable to similar projects Internationally accepted, impartial and reliable Defining a basis for GHG emissions calculations in building energy efficiency projects

    5. 5/2/2012 5 IPMVP - Int’l Participating Organizations Instituto Nacional de Eficiência Energética, Brazil (INEE) Bulgarian Foundation for Energy Efficiency, Bulgaria (Eneffect) Canadian Association of Energy Service Companies, Canada (CAESCO) Office of Energy Efficiency, Natural Resources Canada (NRC) Beijing Energy Efficiency Center, China (BECON) Electric Power Research Institute, China (EPRI) State Economic & Trade Commission, China Stredisko pro efektivní vyuzívání energie, Czech Republic (SEVEn) Comision Nacional para el Ahorro de Energia,Mexico (CONAE) Fideicomiso de Apoyo al Programa de Ahorro de Energia del Sector Electrico, Mexico (FIDE) Polish Foundation for Energy Efficiency, Poland (FEWE) Center for Energy Efficiency, Russia (CENEf) Tata Energy Research Institute, India (TERI ) Ministry Of International Trade and Industry, Japan (MITI) Swedish Natioanl Board for Technical and Urban Development, Sweden (NUTEK) Association for the Conservation of Energy, United Kingdom (ACE) Agency for Rational Energy Use and Ecology, Ukraine (ARENA)

    6. 5/2/2012 6 IPMVP - US Participating Organizations Association of Energy Engineers (AEE) Association of Energy Services Professionals (AESP) American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) American Water Works Association (AWWA) Building Owners Mangaement Association (BOMA) Department of Energy (DOE) Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) National Association of Energy Service Companies (NAESCO) National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners (NARUC) National Association of State Energy Officials (NASEO) National Realty Committee

    7. 5/2/2012 7 Uses of M&V Determine energy savings (Level, Persistence, and Variability) Integrated with commissioning can provide feedback on performance of ECMs Long term feedback for on-going fine-tuning of ECMs Documentation for evaluating (and justifying) future ECMs Enhances Indoor Environmental Quality Basis for documenting emissions reductions and securing credits

    8. 5/2/2012 8 Benefits of Good M&V Initial savings level Persistence of savings Variability

    9. 5/2/2012 9 M&V - Engineering Need Measurement of energy use (pre- and post-EEM installation) Verification of the potential to generate savings in future - persistence Quantify energy savings Energy Saved = Epre - Epost

    10. 5/2/2012 10 M&V - Contractual Need Define risk and relate it to required accuracy Mitigate risk Reduce uncertainties Allocate risk Share of financial institution Share of ESCO Share of client Common thread - M&V

    11. 5/2/2012 11 The Mechanics of Financing

    12. 5/2/2012 12 Benchmarking Performance

    13. 5/2/2012 13 Ways to Calculate Energy Savings Agreed-upon stipulations Engineering calculations Metering and monitoring Utility meter billing analysis Computer simulations, (example: DOE-2 analysis)

    14. 5/2/2012 14 Sources of Uncertainty Errors associated with input parameters Biases in calculation algorithms Missing site-specific weather data Meter accuracy Short/long-term data extrapolation Sampling error

    15. Defining the Baseline Are existing conditions at facility stable? Operating conditions, e.g. occupancy Maintenance Is the load variable or constant? Can variables affecting load be identified? How long does the baseline have to be measured? What is the term of the contract

    16. Adjusting the Baseline Most baselines are not really constant and thus the baseline is usually defined as a “model” Define (before the fact) what influences the baseline and when will it be modified, e.g.: Existing lighting, thermal, indoor environment quality conditions Typical vs. actual weather Typical vs. actual occupancy Define how baseline will be adjusted, e.g. lighting levels to conform to IES standards thermal comfort parameters to comply with ASHRAE 55

    17. Three Typical Time Periods

    18. Actual vs. Baseline Scenarios

    19. 5/2/2012 19 M&V Options in the IPMVP Option A: stipulated baseline and savings Verified equipment performance (Watts, kW/ton) Option B: measured/stipulated baseline, verified performance Estimating tool calibrated with end-use data Option C: comparison of similar buildings with and without ECMs using whole building data (hourly or monthly) Utility billing analysis Option D: stipulated baseline, verified performance Simulation model calibrated with whole building data

    20. 5/2/2012 20 Overview of M&V Options - 1 Option A (1-5% of project construction cost) Properly defined baseline conditions Focuses on physical assessment of equipment changes Reliance on historical data for operational factors (run time hours etc.) Use of spot or short-term measured data to estimate performance factors Option B (3-10% of project construction cost) Properly defined baseline conditions Verifying energy and cost data obtained during term of agreement Use of long-term or continuously measured data for both performance (Watts, kW/ton) and operational factors M&V can be performed at the equipment or system level and goes on for the term of the project

    21. 5/2/2012 21 Overview of M&V Options - 2 Option C (2-5% of project construction cost) Properly defined baseline conditions Savings are determined at the “whole-building” level Reliance on a combination of utility billing analysis and sub-metered data for calculations. Option D (1-3% of project construction cost) Properly defined baseline conditions Savings are determined through simulation of individual system or “whole-building” Simulation model is calibrated with hourly or monthly utility billing data and/or end-use metering Used for new buildings and complex existing building systems

    22. 5/2/2012 22 Examples - Lighting Retrofits (Efficiency & Control Improvements) kWhsavings = (kWpre – kWpost) x (hrspre – hrspost)

    23. 5/2/2012 23 Sample Example - Load Reduction Pre-retrofit Conditions Building - 100,000 sq. ft. Initial Lighting Load = 3 watts per sq. ft. Assumed lighting energy to heat conversion = 80% Cooling Load = 240 kW or 67 tons. Post-retrofit (Energy Efficient Lighting) conditions Initial Lighting Load = 1.2 watts per sq. ft. Cooling Load = 96 kW or 27 tons. Cooling Load Reduction = 144kW or 40 tons

    24. 5/2/2012 24 IPMVP Uses ESCO industry standard Federal buildings through FEMP Adoption by states By multi-lateral development banks as a key design element in large scale energy efficiency loans For determining reduction of greenhouse gasses

    25. 5/2/2012 25 IPMVP Translation Bulgarian Chinese Czech Japanese Korean Polish Portuguese Russian Spanish Ukrainian

    26. 5/2/2012 26 How to Get a Copy of IPMVP For hard copies, call Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Clearinghouse (EREC) 1800-DOE-EREC Electronic download (in Word and PDF) www.ipmvp.org/download.html For miscellaneous information SKumar@lbl.gov 202-484-0884 x110

More Related