1 / 29

Northwest Ductless Heat Pump Pilot Project Impact & Process Evaluation: Billing Analysis

Northwest Ductless Heat Pump Pilot Project Impact & Process Evaluation: Billing Analysis. Ecotope, Inc. February 20 , 2013. Agenda . Introduction Research Objectives Recap of Metering Results Methodology Highlights of Findings Conclusions Q & A. Introduction.

toshi
Download Presentation

Northwest Ductless Heat Pump Pilot Project Impact & Process Evaluation: Billing Analysis

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. Northwest Ductless Heat Pump Pilot ProjectImpact & Process Evaluation: Billing Analysis Ecotope, Inc. February20, 2013

  2. Agenda Introduction Research Objectives Recap of Metering Results Methodology Highlights of Findings Conclusions Q & A

  3. Introduction

  4. DHP Impact & Process Evaluation Overview

  5. DHP Evaluation Timeline

  6. Research Objectives

  7. Billing Analysis Research Objectives • Assess the overall savings and the space heating savings from the DHP installations in the pilot project • Establish savings in electric space heating brought on by this equipment • Determine the impact of occupancy and other “takeback” effects on observed savings • Assess the impact of supplemental fuels on DHP savings • Confirm results of previous metering study and lab testing

  8. Recap of Metering Results

  9. Metered Analysis Summary • Total savings derived from the heat output of the DHP • Billing savings derived from the pre and post installation bills and metered heating use • Simple regression analysis (CDA) to develop determinants of savings • SEEM calibration based on metered and baseline heating estimates • Temperature adjustments, 66.8° to 69.5° • Calibrated to heating energy use and savings

  10. DHP Total Savings Results

  11. DHP Bill Savings Results

  12. Modeled Savings Estimates, SEEM

  13. Billing Analysis Methodology

  14. Distribution of DHP Pilot Sites (n=3,899)

  15. Data Collection • Bills requested for all pilot sites (3,899) • 3,748 sites received, 3,629 sites with useable pre and post installation records • PRISM (VBDD) analysis • Estimated heating energy, savings with DHP installation • Include R2 measure of the quality of the heating estimate • All sites that had adequate bills evaluated • Installation questionnaire • House size and customer demographics • Supplemental heating • Installation cost

  16. Highlights of Findings

  17. All Useable Cases

  18. Supplemental Fuels • High incidence of supplemental fuels in pilot program • Overall 33.2% of participants report supplemental fuels • RBSA region wide electric heat customers report 35.9% reported supplemental fuels • Clear indications of large impact on savings • Larger incidence of supplemental fuel use in Eastern market clusters • Western Montana 67% • Other rural areas (Western and Eastern) wood heat saturation of ~40% • Supplemental fuels assigned based on installation questionnaire • Similar to the screening process in selecting the metering sample

  19. Supplemental Fuels

  20. Screened VBDD Results

  21. CDA Regression • Specified as an alternative to screening • n=3621 • Use robust regression specs to reduce impact of scatter • Specification: SHsaved=c1SHpre+c2SuppFuel+C c1 and c2: estimated coefficients C: constant term

  22. Definitions of CDA Variables • The coefficient on pre-installation space heat (c1) predicts the space heating savings (controlling for other factors). • The coefficient on supplemental fuel use (c2) predicts reduction in savings. • The constant term accounts for the other factors that reduce savings (thermostat settings, erratic occupancy, etc.). • Supplemental fuels coefficient and the constant term account for the savings reduction due to occupant effects: non-energy and supplemental fuel benefits.

  23. Regression Results SHsaved=c1SHpre+c2SuppFuel+C

  24. CDA Predicted Space Heating Savings

  25. Segmented Regression Results

  26. CDA Observations • CDA regression recovers the mean savings estimated • The CDA analysis conducted on themetered sample: • c1= .470 for western climates .240 for eastern climates • c2 is essentially zero (the sample was screened) • Constant term in this sample is zero • 20% difference between the billing analysis results and measured DHP heat output

  27. Conclusions

  28. Conclusions • Once similar screening for supplemental heat is done: results agree with metered analysis results. • Supplemental fuels reduce savings ~1000 kWh • W. Montana requires more severe adjustments • The impact of DHP on space heat without the take back effects: • 48% in the western climates • 22% in the eastern climates • Program design may need to be modified for more severe climates

  29. Questions & Answers

More Related