In This Issue
EVO Position Statement on Deemed Savings
A Two-Tier Approach to Affordable M&V
October 2019 - M&V Focus Issue # 5
In this issue of M&V Focus, we present the full text of a May 2019 position statement issued by EVO regarding deemed savings. Mark Stetz offers a solid perspective on the use of the R2 value in M&V and reminds readers that the real goal of M&V is to minimize the uncertainty in the reported savings. Greg Anderson discusses his experience performing measurement and verification of energy savings in real-world buildings, which suggests that using a baseline period longer than 12 months can offer improvements in reliability when quantifying occupancy impact. Colin Grenville offers some practical perspective of finding the right balance between cost and accuracy as a critical consideration in designing an M&V strategy that provides adequate certainty. Alex Rathmell shows how the IPMVP is used for evaluating a new generation of nearly-zero-energy building renovations in Europe. Paul Calberg-Ellen explains how a risk-cost calculation allows quantitative risk management for measurement and simulation uncertainties. Finally, we present the second part in Portuguese (Brazil) of the article on measurement boundary by Agenor Garcia and Bruce Rowse.
EVO Position Statement on Deemed Savings
EVO Corporate Statement*
EVO is issuing this position statement to clarify that deemed savings is not a measurement and verification (M&V) method, and that it should not be relied upon to reflect an energy efficiency (EE) project’s achieved savings.
Why r2 Doesn't Matter
By Mark Stetz,* P.E. CMVP
When developing regression models for Option B or C methods, M&V practitioners often place too much emphasis on developing models with high r2 values and too little on minimizing uncertainty. A high r2 value does not guarantee that a particular model can (or should) be used; having a low r2 value does not necessarily preclude a model from being used.
Modeling Relative Occupancy
By Greg Anderson*
Monthly changes in building relative occupancy - percent of space leased - can greatly affect energy use in large commercial buildings, and especially in multi-tenant office buildings. Our experience performing measurement and verification of energy savings in real-world buildings suggests that using a baseline period longer than 12 months can offer improvements in reliability when quantifying occupancy impact.
A Two-Tier Approach to Affordable M&V
By Colin Grenville*
Finding the right balance between cost and accuracy is a key consideration in designing an M&V strategy which provides adequate certainty of measurement without wholly cannibalising the avoided energy cost. This is particularly an issue on complex multi-ECM projects where some ECMs interact, and where isolation of performance of remaining ECMs cannot be undertaken using pre-existing metering.
M&V for Deep Retrofit Projects in Europe
By Alex Rathmell*
IPMVP is proving essential to evaluating a new generation of nearly-zero-energy building renovations in Europe.
Évaluation du coût du risque pour le maître d’ouvrage et le fournisseur de services dans le cadre d’un contrat avec garantie de résultats énergétiques – Article de synthèse
Par Paul Calberg-Ellen*
Dans le cadre de projets de construction ou de rénovation énergétique de bâtiments, les maîtres d’ouvrage font appel à un certain nombre d’outils et de méthodes qui permettent de contrôler les consommations énergétiques après travaux afin d’en évaluer la performance.
Fronteira de Medição (Parte 2)
Por Agenor Gomes Pinto Garcia* e Bruce Rowse**
5. Modelagem
Agora podemos generalizar os conceitos para ter uma visão mais abrangente da questão.
