1. Pre-Installation Evaluation of
Industrial Projects
Jonathan B. Maxwell and Betsy Ricker, ERS
Carley Murray, NYSERDA*
*Any opinions expressed, explicitly or implicitly, are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of the New York State Energy Research
and Development Authority
IEPEC Chicago August 2013
3. What is Pre-Installation Impact
Evaluation?
Core activity: Project engineering review
before savings claims are finalized
Pre‐installation savings calculation review
Baseline characterization
Pre‐installation metering
Also/possibly:
Early free ridership assessment
Early post‐retrofit review & metering
Training PA and their technical advisors
IEPEC Chicago 2013
4. Why Do It?
Benefits for evaluators
Evaluator inspection in pre‐retrofit state
Input regarding administrator M&V plan
•
Opportunity for independent direct M&V
Baseline perspective at time of decision‐making
Evaluator‐administrator convergence/training
Bottom Line:
Increased engineering rigor
less variability, greater confidence in results
IEPEC Chicago 2013
5. Why Do It?
Benefits for program administrators
Evaluator‐administrator convergence/training
Adjustment to savings estimates prior to incentive
calculation
Increased depth of engagement with facilitators
Less disturbance to customers
Bottom line:
Better realization rates
Fewer surprises
IEPEC Chicago 2013
6. Why Not Do It?
Added cost for evaluators and administrators
Planning
$2k to $10k per project evaluator cost; less but some admin
• Modest ex post savings later
Sunk evaluation costs on projects that don’t matriculate
Monthly meetings
Risks added calendar time to processing
Short notice rush analysis required
Baseline can require research. Admin waits?
Added bureaucracy before closing the deal
IEPEC Chicago 2013
7. How It Works
ID candidate projects
Evaluator review
New facility
Existing
facility
Pre-install site
visit. Possible
metering
Tracking
Evaluator & administrator meet on
analysis, baseline, and proposed preinstallation metering.
Evaluation review
memo
Evaluator &
administrator
meet
Post-install site
visit
IEPEC Chicago 2013
8. How It Works – Screening
Establish screening criteria in advance
Example:
All over 5 GWh/yr
or 10,000 MMBtu/yr
All over intermediate size range and process,
complex baseline, capacity expansion, controls, etc
Sample others in intermediate range
Evaluator or administrator can ID projects
IEPEC Chicago 2013
9. How It Works - Variations
Are early evaluator findings advisory or
definitive to program?
Is free ridership assessed? Is result shared? Is
it considered when setting incentives?
Formality of communication
Who does the M&V?
IEPEC Chicago 2013
10. Case Studies
Paper includes four case studies
Good
Working together on M&V approach
Evaluator influencing administrator on baseline
characterization, and vice versa
Bad
Lost sunk costs
No consensus on baseline
Timing challenges
IEPEC Chicago 2013
11. Summary
Pre-Installation Impact Evaluation
Advantages:
Better evaluation engineering & statistical quality
Better realization rates
Fewer bad surprises at end of evaluation
Costs:
More labor
Calendar concerns
IEPEC Chicago 2013