Create Energy Efficiency EACs Using Pre and Post Measurements.md #3
Conversation
|
|
||
| **Measure Upgrades** | ||
|
|
||
| 1. LED Lighting and / or Lighting Controls (including dimming) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Does this mean that there will be more use-cases of this methodology in the future? The content below is quite lighting-specific, but the title sounds quite generic. You might want to make an explicit choice about this.
| </td> | ||
| </tr> | ||
| <tr> | ||
| <td>Proposed Fixture/Retrofit Manufacturer & Model |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
You might want to add serial numbers of the fixtures (if realistic) - as this would help mitigating the risk of double counting in case of iterative fixtures on a building by defining a clear boundary of what is and isn't part of a given EAC.
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
Sorry, something went wrong.
| P = desired precision (10%) | ||
|
|
||
|
|
||
| and then determine the adjusted sample size based on the population; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The namings are a bit cryptic at times. Would it make sense to call N the "number of installed fixtures" and n* the "Minimum number of fixtures to sample" ?
The confidence formula has an underlying assumption that all circuits have the same power, which might not be the case (or at least isn't specified in the method as is). You might want to add a condition on the rated power covered or the like (imagine a somewhat-unlikely situation where you cover 90% of the fixtures but only 20% of the total power consumed - that approach would most likely not yield good results).
Moreover, is it realistic (in your target buildings) to measure pre/post per circuit in a cost-effective manner?
| The combination of the pre and post intervention details will collectively form a comprehensive line by line audit to serve as the basis for calculated energy savings. For each line in the audit, the following will be calculated in a spreadsheet: | ||
|
|
||
|
|
||
| _Baseline Annual Electricity (kWh/yr) = Baseline Fixture Quantity * Baseline Fixture Wattage * (1 kW / 1000 W) * Baseline Hours of Operation_ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There seems to be an implicit expectation that all of the fixtures have the same nominal power (wattage). Does that assumption really hold?
(further related comments below)
| Where baseline data logging is conducted, the same circuits will be monitored post retrofit for side-by-side comparison. In such cases, the difference between measured post energy consumption to baseline energy consumption will be used to verify the true reduction; | ||
|
|
||
|
|
||
| _Saved Annual Electricity (kWh/yr) = Measured Baseline Annual Electricity – Measured Proposed Annual Electricity_ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Are you certain that lighting isn't weather-dependent (I mean, beyond the usual day-length which is obviously the same per year) in all of your use-cases? Similar comment to occupancy changes (e.g. the covid shutdowns or reduction in economic activity) which are also assumed not to happen here.
If adaptive lighting (e.g. in combination with adaptive blinds) is used in some facilities as part of the baseline, then this approach wouldn't necessarily yield good results.
Regarding changes in occupancy between periods, you may want to have a way to account for this in the method.
Or did I get the formulas wrong, so that you use an ON/OFF pattern in the "Measurement Interval (minutes) / 60 minutes per hour" as a multiplier on both pre/post factors? If so, my comment is no longer valid, but it would then be good to make it more explicit than it currently is. Also, that wouldn't work too well with dimmers (or variable output, as it seems that the power is assumed to be constant)
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
Sorry, something went wrong.
| </td> | ||
| </tr> | ||
| <tr> | ||
| <td>Baseline Hours of Operation |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
For the WEATS Registry, we require electricity savings to be hourly. Would it be possible to also request an "estimated schedule" of some sort so that we could estimate which hour of the day to attribute these savings to?
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Also is this number something measured or estimated? If estimated, is there guidance around how to make that estimation?
|
|
||
| **Project Stakeholders** | ||
|
|
||
| Provide contact information for relevant stakeholders which may include Asset Owner. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hypothetically this EAC might be a tradable asset, moving beyond the project team. Does it make sense to have the contact information in here? What's the benefit of the contact info being here?
|
|
||
| _Measured Proposed Annual Electricity = ∑ Measured Baseline Circuit Amperage x Baseline Circuit Voltage / 1000 W per kW x Measurement Interval (minutes) / 60 minutes per hour <span style="text-decoration:underline;">if current</span>_ is measured | ||
|
|
||
| Measurements will be taken for a full year during the Proposed period, and optimally for a full year in the Baseline period. However, if the baseline monitoring period is not one full year, the Baseline Period Electricity will be extrapolated to annual consumption; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Would recommend including either a minimum time or how the extrapolation might work.
| If only post retrofit data logging is available, the data will be validated against the Proposed Annual Electricity, and compared to the calculated Baseline Annual Electricity_ _for the same fixtures monitored to verify savings; | ||
|
|
||
|
|
||
| _Saved Annual Electricity = Baseline Calculated Fixture Demand (kW) * Annual Hours of Operation (hrs/yr) - Measured Proposed Annual Electricity (kWh/yr)_ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
How long will we assume that this project generates EACs? As building codes improve, at some point I imagine the counterfactual would be also LED lights. Should there be a limit on the "EAC mintable" lifetime of this project to take that into account? Or is there another way to account for the changing counterfactual of the base case?
C3 Carbon Funding's initial methodology for review.