1 / 23

June 1, 2010

GrocerSmart TM Energy Modeling Software -Revision Status Report- Jeremy Litow, Associate Director David Murphy, Program Manager. June 1, 2010. Agenda. Why we’re here today History Clarity on direction we’re going Plan to ask in August 2010 Plan to ask in Q2 2011 Plan to ask by Q4 2011

noleta
Download Presentation

June 1, 2010

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. GrocerSmartTM Energy Modeling Software -Revision Status Report-Jeremy Litow, Associate DirectorDavid Murphy, Program Manager June 1, 2010

  2. Agenda • Why we’re here today • History • Clarity on direction we’re going • Plan to ask in August 2010 • Plan to ask in Q2 2011 • Plan to ask by Q4 2011 • Review project constraints • Plan and schedule • Discussion

  3. Future requests for approval from RTF • Request full RTF approval for direction of GrocerSmart 4.0 at August 2010 meeting • Methodology (DOE 2.2r as reasonable live model, template) • Data sets • Phases • Return to RTF Q2 2011 for final request for approval of new version • Return to RTF by Q4 2011 for approval of improvements

  4. Current situation • Existing version software 3.0 • Summit Blue and other market players give good marks on energy savings but “black box” is an issue • Recommendations for revision similar • Better baseline data • Fewer key assumptions • Baseline revision • Interactivity • More transparency

  5. High Low FHPC w/VFD .84 FHPC w/o VFD 1.19 Efficient Cases 1.27 ECM case motors 1.39 Low High Relationship of Complexity to GS savings accuracy: +@1.5m kWh Measure complexity Realization rate

  6. Current situation • Focus of the subcommittee • So far: Key criteria and data sets • Still to come: Template • Better documentation, addressing transparency • These are our Phase 1 revision goals • Baseline revision Phase 2

  7. Constraints • Programmatic – requires template • <.5 day audit time for data gathering and processing • Auditor skills • Practical and maintain transparency • Data libraries • QC/QA • Size • Vetting for relevance • Updating • Model function • Resources (@ 5.5 FTE for 1 year) • Result – break project into phases

  8. Project direction – Phases • Phase 1 • Overhaul of interface, processing method, basic benchmarking, interactivity included • Phase 2 • Revise baseline during post install checks, sophisticated benchmarking • Phase 3+ • Other building templates/envelope, etc.

  9. Project direction - Phase 1 • Subcommittee focus - key criteria • What’s important • Mostly agree on what’s important • Sensitivity where uncertain • What values should we use? • Actual set points, strategies, data from spec sheets, etc. • Sensitivity analysis to limit size of data sets

  10. Methodology What’s important Values we should use

  11. Key Improvements to GrocerSmart™ by Phase

  12. Task list and future requests of RTF by Phase

  13. Refrigeration systems

  14. Cases

  15. New interface sample mock up

  16. Key Improvements to Transparency by Phase

  17. Summary of immediate project direction • Work toward subcommittee recommendation for: • Method • Interface drives inputs of key criteria • Key criteria drive inputs to live DOE2.2r model • Data in libraries and selection/filtering method • Model runs vs. fixed efficient scenario • Phased approach for further improvements

  18. Larger project plan • Business requirements gathering (done) • Design (now) • 3rd party review of method and data sets? • Coding (post RTF approval of direction) • Method and key criteria • Phased approach • Testing QC/QA (Q 3&4 2010, Q1 2011) • Calibrate model and vet savings (Q1 2011) • Summit Blue evaluation of GrocerSmartTM 3.0 • GrocerSmartTM 3.0 • New construction • Custom calculations • Prescriptive/DEER • Other • 3rd party review and calibration? • Beta test (Q1 2011) • Submit for RTF approval of new version for rollout (Q2 2011) • Full deployment (Q2 2011) • Phase 2

  19. Challenges • Subcommittee attendance irregular • High level of complexity on refrigeration • Need evaluator focus • No outside professional review • Cascade reviewed 3.0 • 3.0 evaluation not fully leveraged

  20. Thoughts on addressing challenges… • Address attendance and engagement at RTF • Regular engagement of utility EM&V staff • Join subcommittee or separate meetings • RTF or utility funding of review ASAP • Use details of 3.0 evaluation

  21. Discussion

More Related