Webinar #3 - How and what can we learn from verifying energy savings first estimated with engineering calculations?

Webinar #3 - December 14, 2018 - 11:00 to 12:15 am CET

The analysis of the EPATEE case studies showed that engineering calculations (including deemed savings, but also more detailed engineering calculations) are the methods the most frequently used to evaluate energy savings for regular reporting. This result is similar to the conclusions of Wade and Eyre (2015) and Labanca and Bertoldi (2016). This can be explained because methods based on measured (direct measurements) or metered (billing analysis) data need more time to provide results, as pointed in some case studies (see e.g., case on Warm Front). Whereas engineering calculations can be applied directly to data collected along the monitoring of the policy measure. Therefore, the need to report annually (or even more frequently) about energy savings often leads to choose to use engineering calculations.

At the opposite, billing analysis is the method the most frequently used for ex-post evaluations when the objective is to verify actual energy savings. The results from the billing analysis can then be compared to the results from the regular reporting, to improve the data or assumptions used in the engineering calculations. This is for example the approach that has been used in Ireland (Better Energy Homes), UK (Supplier Obligations) or in the US (Weatherization Assistance Program).

This experience sharing webinar aims at providing a practical feedback from two ex-post evaluations that compared energy savings based on engineering calculations with energy savings determined from metered energy consumption:

  • Case 1: Green Investment Scheme in the Czech Republic
  • Case 2: Kirklees Warm Zone Scheme in UK

Both cases were analysed in scientific papers, respectively (Valentova et al. 2018) and (Webber et al. 2015).

Please, click on this link to access the webinar video.

Further readings: