Library: Evaluation Measurement

2 results


Uniform Methods Project (DOE)

Date Published: May 1, 2013     Document Type: Presentation
Fuel Type:Electric, Gas Sectors: Evaluation, Measurement and Verification - M&V, Research, Evaluation, & Behavior

This presentation outlines the current goals, protocols, and structure of the Uniform Methods Project as presented by Michael Li of the DOE. The Uniform Methods Project is an initiative created to increase transparency and credibility of energy savings calculations.

Common EM&V Methods and Savings Assumptions Project

Date Published: May 1, 2010     Document Type: Evaluation Study / Report, Report
Sectors: Evaluation, Measurement and Verification - M&V, Research, Evaluation, & Behavior

In mid-2009, Northeast Energy Efficiency Partnerships, Inc. (NEEP) engaged KEMA to execute this Common EM&V Methods and Savings Assumptions Project (“the Project”) on behalf of the Regional Evaluation, Measurement and Verification Forum (“the Forum”). The Forum is a regional consortium that is facilitated and managed by NEEP and represents states in New England, New York, and the mid-Atlantic.
This project is comprised of three fundamental tasks or “Parts”:
A. Review and document common evaluation, measurement and verification (EM&V) methods;
B. Review and compare energy and demand savings assumptions; and
C. Develop related advisory guidelines and recommendations.
In a broad sense, the project is intended to help improve and ensure the understanding, transparency, and credibility of both electric and gas energy efficiency resources implemented in the Northeast and mid-Atlantic region as well as the processes used to determine their savings. It is hoped that the advisory guidelines will promote greater consistency and
collaboration by highlighting existing commonalities and areas with potential for more compatible savings approaches.
This Common EM&V Methods and Savings Assumptions Project is a study of current practice that culminates in advisory guidelines and EM&V methods for the Forum region. The recommended method is intended to be a basic level of EM&V rigor: the level at which one would achieve parity with prevailing, accepted practice. Alternative methods offer the means of
achieving higher levels of rigor, acquiring information necessary for specific measure, program or regulatory environment. These alternative methods may be particularly well suited to more complex or uncertain applications. Program administrators may benefit from selecting a combination of the two approaches to meet a range of regulatory, wholesale market, and environmental objectives/requirements.