MEASUREMENT & VERIFICATION

METERING BILLING CRM/CIS
CONFERENCE 2005
Le Meridien at Rialto, Melbourne Australia
16 March 2005
PROVING THE SAVINGS:
MEASUREMENT & VERIFICATION
Presented by
Fred Nicolosi
© Copyright 2004 Energy Decisions Pty Ltd ABN 99 902 246 763

What I Will Talk About
Evolution of M&V Protocols and Guidelines
Australian Best Practice Guide to M&V
M&V Concepts and Methodologies
M&V Plan
M&V Options
Energy Savings Determination
Cost Avoidance
M&V Examples
Questions

About Fred Nicolosi
Electrical Engineer (light current)
BE, MEngSc, MBA, CMVP
Certified Measurement and Verification Professional
- http://www.ipmvp.org/cmvplist
25 years in Queensland electricity industry
- power system control, SCADA, metering and communications
5 years in Qld Govt
- Director of Queensland Telecommunications
2 years in Qld software company
– Utility Customer Information and Billing Systems
Provider of Energy Information Products and Service
since 1998

Evolution of M&V Protocols & Guidelines

Australian Best Practice Guide for M&V
BPG-M&V Objectives
• Improved M&V Understanding – especially Energy Users
• Improved M&V Precision and Quality
• Improved M&V Cost/Benefit/Value
• Establish Minimum Acceptable M&V Implementation
• Facilitate Operational Implementation
• Promote M&V for Public and Private Sector Use
BPG-M&V
- Applicable Parts for Australia
• IPMVP – ”The Bible”
http://www.ipmvp.org/
• ASHRAE Guideline 14-2002
– Measurement of Energy and
Demand Savings
• FEMP - Federal Energy Management Program M&V Guidelines
• Other Overseas M&V Publications

BPG-M&V Project Status and Funding
The Australian Government's Innovation Access Program - Industry
provides grants for industry-led projects as part of it's support for
innovation, investment and international competitiveness of
Australian businesses. Industry and Customer Consultation
Funds provided by AusIndustry to AEPCA
Contracted to AEPCA to author BPG-M&V
Stakeholder’s s Group for guidance and consultation
Current Status – Final Release in January 2005
Future updates to incorporate continuing M&V
developments and user feedback
Visit http://www.aepca.asn.au/

M&V for Energy Savings Projects
Any Type, EPC, In-House or Multi-Site
Projects
Site-specific energy savings projects
Different to Rating, Benchmarking, and
Targeting
Savings Over Time Pays for Retrofit Costs
EPC Process
Project Implementation Phases
• Baseyear Period – Planning & Design - M&V Plan and
Baselines
• Installation Period – Construction & Commissioning
• Performance Period – Savings Reconciliation

Simplified Energy Savings Project Scenario

Measurements for Energy Savings Projects

Energy Savings Determination

Energy Savings Determination
During Baseyear Period, Create and Agree
• Baseyear Measurements & Calculation Methods
• Baseyear Conditions and Assumptions
• Create Baseyear Model to be used to calculate Baseline Energy for
Performance
During Performance Period
• Calculate Baseline Energy that Would Have Been Consumed
If ECMs Had Not Been Installed
• Adjust Baseline Energy for Other Changes in Conditions and
Assumptions
• Measure Actual Energy Consumed with ECMs Installed
For Current Period
• Achieved Savings = Adjusted Baseline – Post-Retrofit Actual
• Savings Reconciliation = Guaranteed Savings – Achieved Savings

Importance of M&V Plan
An M&V Plan is mandatory
When should the M&V Plan be
developed
How to develop an M&V Plan
Who should prepare the M&V Plan
Who should verify the M&V Plan
adherence

IPMVP M&V Options
Realized Savings = f (Performance, Operation)
Responsibility Sharing for Performance and Operation
Option A - Partially Measured Retrofit Isolation
• Partial short-term/continuous term/continuous measurements – some but not all stipulated
• For Separable ECM Savings Determination - Lighting
Option B - Retrofit Isolation
• Full short-tern tern or continuous field measurement - no stipulations
• For Separable ECM Savings Determination - HVAC subsystem
Option C - Whole (or Part) Building
• Full continuous energy use and demand measurement during Baseline e and
Post- Retrofit Periods
• Collective Savings of all ECMs for Area monitored by a Single Meter
Option D – Calibrated Simulation
• Computer-based simulation of energy use of building components
• Simulation Calibration, Considerable skills, Costly ????

Option C - Baseyear Model Creation
kWh = (34,609.8 x Days) + (4,666 x HDD) + (4,440.6 x CDD)

Importance of Measurements
Use Best Practice for each specific energy measurement
situation
Minimise inherent errors & avoid data management errors
Billing and Smart Meter Data from Utilities
- advantages and difficulties
Sub-metering may be required - advantages and disadvantages
Other Data – Weather, Areas, Occupancy, Production Levels
Need policies, practices and business processes to assure
completeness, timeliness and quality of the energy
measurements and other data

Cost Avoidance
Cost Savings = Quantity Savings x Price
• Baseline Adjustments Reduce Energy Quantity Risks
• Neither Party Controls Price Risk on Cost Savings
When Prices Go Down
• Customer Benefits from Reduced Billed Charges
• Cost Savings Reduced – Cost Savings Risk Impact ???
When Prices Go Up
• Customer Pays Higher Billed Charges
• Cost Savings Increased – Cost Savings Risk Impact ???
Selecting the Price – Use Current Price ???
Use Agreed Stipulated Prices to Remove Price Risk

Case 1: Water Savings Performance
Baseline kL = f (Days)
Goodness of Fit = 00.0%

Case 2: Gas Savings Performance
Baseline MJ = f (Days, Heating Severity)
Goodness of Fit = 96.0%

Case 3: Water Baseline Adjustment
Baseline kL = f (Days)
Goodness of Fit = 00.0%

Case 4: Energy Baseline Creation
Baseline kWh = f (Days, Cooling Severity)
Goodness of Fit = 57.3%

Case 4: Energy Baseline Creation
Baseline kWh = f (Days, Cooling, Occupancy)
Goodness of Fit = 85.3%

Case 5: Portfolio Energy Savings
Comparative Monthly Consumption
Base Year = 2000/2001 Reporting Year = 2001/2002

Cases 5: Portfolio Energy Savings Performance
Annual & Monthly Cooling Severity Comparison
Base Year = 2000/2001 Reporting Year = 2001/2002

Case 5: Portfolio Energy Savings – Base Year
Baseline Energy (kWh) = f (Days, Cooling Severity)
Goodness of Fit = 99.2%

Case 5: Portfolio Energy Savings - Reporting Year
Can Agency take credit for apparent energy reduction ???

Case 5: Energy Savings Reporting Errors
Non-Adjusted Energy Savings
Actual Consumption for 2000/2001 in kWh 1,605,138
Actual Consumption for 2001/2002 in kWh 1,197,135
Consumption Reduction before Weather Correction 408,003
Percentage Reduction relative to Base Reference Year………
………..…..25.42%..25.42%
Adjusted Energy Savings
Estimated Baseline Energy for 2001/2002 in kWh 1,079,412
Actual Consumption for 2001/2002 in kWh 1,197,135
Consumption Increase After Weather Correction 117,723
Percentage Increase relative to Weather-Corrected Baseline……
……..10.91%

Concluding Messages
Adopt proven and trustworthy M&V policies
and practices for energy savings projects
Adopt proven and trustworthy policies and
practices for determining Energy Baselines for
reporting energy savings
Adopt proven policies and practices to assure
the completeness, timeliness and quality of the
energy data
Use the Best Practice Guide for M&V as your
starting point – it is an AEPCA free issue

Questions ?