1. Model Energy Efficiency Program Impact Evaluation Guide - Basics of EM&V
Steve Schiller. Schiller Consulting
NARUC Workshop
February 2008

2. Topics Evaluation objectives Categories of programs and evaluations
Some more on the Action Plan Guide
Calculating energy savings and avoided emissions
Issues to think about when designing evaluation efforts and issues for discussion today
Resources - references

3. Why Evaluate Energy Efficiency Programs?
Accountability. Document and measure the effects of a program in order to determine how well it has met its intended outcomes (goals).
Improvement. Understand why those effects occurred and identify ways to improve current and future programs

4. Efficiency Program Categories - by their primary objectives
Resource acquisition. Directly achieve energy savings, and possibly avoid emissions, through specific actions.
Market transformation. Change the way in which energy efficiency markets operate and achieve either naturally occurring efficiency or incremental codes/standards. Can also include support for emerging technologies.
Codes and standards. primary objective is to define and enforce mandated levels of efficiency in buildings and products.
Education and training. primary objective is to inform consumers and providers about energy efficiency and encourage them to act on that information.

5. Efficiency Evaluation Categories
Impact evaluations. Determine the impacts (usually energy savings) and co-benefits that directly result from a program.
Process evaluations. Assess how efficiently a program was or is being implemented.
Market effects evaluations. Estimate a program’s influence on encouraging future energy efficiency projects because of changes in the marketplace.
Cost-effectiveness analyses. Typically seen as an extension of impact evaluations, but may also take into account market evaluation results considering market penetration over the expected lifetime of the measures.

6. Back to the NAPEE Guide - Why a Program Guide?
Programs are different from projects
There are widely recognized protocols for the measurement and verification (M&V) of energy savings from single projects
e.g., International Performance Measurement and Verification Protocol (IPMVP at
Policy neutral guides for determining savings from programs must be interpreted from existing specific program protocols

7. Guide Scope: Programs Addressed
Primary focus (i.e., includes detailed guidance):
Resource acquisition, downstream energy efficiency programs - directly achieve energy and/or demand savings, and possibly avoid emissions, through specific actions
Secondary focus (i.e., addressed, but no detailed guidance):
Other demand-side programs: Market transformation, codes and standards, demand response, and upstream efficiency programs
Supply-side programs: renewable energy and combined heat and power (CHP) program

8. Guide Scope: Evaluation Focus
Primary focus:
Impact evaluation, including: kWh, kW, therm savings and avoided emissions
Three basic gross savings analysis approaches
Four basic net savings analysis approaches
Two basic avoided emission analysis approaches
“Very” Secondary focus:
Process and market evaluations
Potential studies
Cost-effectiveness evaluation

9. Guide Contents Also includes about 40 “sidebars” of examples/clarifications and 25 figures and tables
Part 1
Executive Summary
Part 2
Chapter 1: Introduction
Chapter 2: Energy Efficiency Program Evaluation
Chapter 3: Impact Evaluation Basics
Part 3
Chapter 4: Calculating Gross Energy and Demand Savings
Chapter 5: Calculating Net Energy and Demand Savings
Chapter 6: Calculating Avoided Air Emissions
Part 4
Chapter 7: Planning An Impact Evaluation
Part 5
Appendix A: Leadership Group List
Appendix B: Glossary
Appendix C: Other Evaluation Types
Appendix D: Uncertainty
Appendix E: Resources and References
Appendix F: Renewables and Combined Heat and Power Program Evaluation
Appendix G: References

10. Guide Audience Policy-makers: Program evaluation managers:
Information about the basic principles of efficiency evaluation
Program evaluation managers:
Resources and background on evaluation and statistical analyses
Guidance, or a roadmap, on process and key issues relating to documenting energy/demand savings and avoided emissions
Program designers:
Understanding of how their programs will be evaluated
Energy efficiency community:
Common terminology definitions
A central reference document
References for publicly available best practices resources
Understanding of efficiency’s potential value as an emissions control strategy

11. Impact Evaluation Results Reported
Estimates of gross savings. Gross energy (or demand) savings are the change in energy consumption and/or demand that results directly from program-promoted actions taken by program participants regardless of the extent or nature of program influence on their actions.
Estimates of net savings. Net energy savings refer to the portion of gross savings that is attributable to the program. This involves separating out the impacts that are a result of other influences, such as consumer self-motivation. Given the range of influences on consumers’ energy consumption, attributing changes to one cause (i.e., a particular program) or another can be quite complex.
Estimates of co-benefits. A co-benefit commonly documented and reported is avoided air emissions: the air pollution or greenhouse gases that would have been emitted if more energy had been consumed in the absence of the energy efficiency program.

12. Approaches for Determining Gross Energy Savings
One or more measurement and verification (M&V) methods from the IPMVP are used to determine the savings from a sample of projects. These savings are then applied to all of the projects in the program.
Deemed savings, based on historical and verified data, are applied to conventional energy efficiency measures implemented in the program.
Statistical analyses of large volumes of metered energy usage data are conducted.

13. Approaches for Determining Net Energy Savings
The primary, but not exclusive, considerations that account for the difference between net and gross savings are free riders and participant and non-participant spillover.
Approaches (categories):
Self-reporting surveys
Enhanced self-reporting surveys
Statistical models that compare participants’ and non-participants’ energy and demand patterns
Stipulated net-to-gross ratios

14. Approaches for Determining Avoided Emissions
Applying emission factors (e.g., pounds of CO2 per MWh) to net energy savings
Using emissions scenario analyses, e.g., using computer models to estimate the difference in emissions from power plants with and without the reduced electricity consumption associated with an efficiency program.

15. Issues Addressed in NAPEE Guide
Defining evaluation goals and scale and which benefits to evaluate
Setting time frame for evaluation and reporting expectations
Setting spatial boundary for evaluation (i.e. what energy uses, emission sources, etc. will be included in the analyses)
Defining baseline, baseline adjustments, and data collection requirements
Establishing a budget vis-à-vis expectations for quality of reported results
Selecting impact evaluation approaches for gross and net savings calculations and avoided emissions calculations
Selecting who (or which type of organization) will conduct the evaluation

16. Evaluation Issues for Discussion
Context:
Efficiency is the first resource and a critical part of cheap, reliable, clean and stable energy systems
Efficiency is the first mechanism for energy sector climate change mitigation
50- 80% GHG emissions reduction is required for climate stabilization
EE has a key role according to IPCC, IEA, McKinsey and other studies
Each jurisdiction's resource and climate impact evaluation requirements are not policy-neutral (but the Guide is)

17. Evaluation Issues for Discussion
How will efficiency savings be documented as real?
What is additional?
How does one attribute the savings to a particular activity?
How accurate is accurate enough and how do you balance quality of results and evaluation budgets
Will cross-jurisdictional, post-Kyoto, national or international requirements (standards) be established? Is that a good idea?
How will the data, tools and technology for cost-effective EM&V be developed and supported?
Who should do evaluation, the program administrator, the regulator, and/or third-parties?

18. References - Sample Resources - Program Evaluation
2007 NAPEE Model Energy Efficiency Program Impact Evaluation Guide.
2006 California Energy Efficiency Evaluation Protocols:
2004 The California Evaluation Framework.
2007 US DOE Impact Evaluation Framework for Technology Deployment Programs _main.pdf
2006 International Energy Agency. Evaluating Energy Efficiency Policy Measures & DSM Programmes.

19. References - Sample Resources - M&V
2007 International Performance Measurement and Verification Protocol (IPMVP). (
2000 Federal Energy Management Program M&V Guidelines. (
2002 ASHRAE Guideline 14 Measurement of Energy and Demand Savings. (

20. References - Sample Resources - EM&V Websites
Evaluation reports and guidance documents, they can be found at two web-accessible databases:
CALifornia Measurement Advisory Council (CALMAC):
The Consortium for Energy Efficiency’s Market Assessment and Program Evaluation (MAPE) Clearinghouse:
Other Sites:
Proceedings of the IEPEC Conference (
ACEEE Summer Studies (
Efficiency Valuation Organization (EVO) resource pages (

21. Time for questions Reprinted with permission from Don Piraro