Non-Residential Lighting Protocol - Retrofits

1. Non-Residential Lighting Protocol - Retrofits Regional Technical Forum September 16, 2014

2. When did this effort start? • March, 2012 • Charlie still had brown hair! • Significant work on protocol in subcommittee • Brought before the RTF several times • Working through provisional protocols at the time • Never complete with regards to clear research needs and adherence to Guidelines • January 16, 2013 – Sent back for major revisions

3. Since then… • Staff re-wrote protocol • Separated research plan content and split protocol into retrofits and “non-retrofits” • Held 4 subcommittee meetings after substantial progress made on certain sections • Received final comments on September 4th, 2014 and incorporated them into current version

4. Why all this effort? 42% 20% Source: BPA 2010-2012 Regional end-use achievement data

5. Outline for today Overview of protocol key terms and application Explanation of research needs Outstanding items from last call Changes made since last subcommittee meeting Decision

6. Key Definitions Hours of Use (HOU) and Hours of Occupancy (HOO) • HOU is what is metered on-site during research phase • HOO is what is gathered by site interview; used as a proxy for HOU. Space Use Type (SUT) • For retrofits, SUT is used to define a space inside/outside the building with a specific use and hours of occupancy (HOO) • SUT is linked to code LPA nomenclature when possible Base-case or Efficient-Case Lighting System • Combination of fixtures associated with a single control type within each SUT • Takes into account individual controls effects on different fixtures • Many fixtures within a SUT can be considered a single lighting system if they have the same control types (i.e. multiple occ sensors in open office can be one system) • Lighting calculator requires line item entry of fixtures and controls, (i.e. a system) with a SUT and HOO for each lighting system Project • Sum of all SUT’s and their lighting systems is considered the project • HVAC interaction factor based on primary equipment used to condition entire project Controls Savings Fraction (CSF) • The percent reduction on a fixture wattage or HOU (or both) specific to individual control type

7. SUT SUT SUT SUT PROJECT SUT Lighting System* Lighting System Lighting System Lighting System SUT *If HOO are the same for all fixtures/controls. Lighting systems cannot cross a SUT.

8. Protocol Applicability

9. HOO Interview Guide • Developed in Excel to streamline calculations and data entry • Seeks to prove out simplified method 2 ways • Collecting project level HOO data • Historically done in programs this way • Collecting space level HOO data • Results will be compared to metered data • Will help inform what level of interviewing is necessary and reliable for a proven protocol

10. Protocol Calculator • Used for protocol savings estimation; • Programs likely to continue to use utility-specific calculators • Accepts input from HOO Interview Guide to streamline data entry • Accepts metered data entry from data loggers • Compares Best Practice to Simplest Reliable Methods

11. Provisional Research plan

12. Comparison of Methods Need to collect provisionally

13. Research objectives Want to estimate… Relationship (ratio?) between HOO and uncontrolled HOU; CSF for different control types. Don’t expect knowledge of these to carry over much between space use types and building types. Plan calls for independent samples for different control-/space-/building-types.

14. Research assumptions • Separate CV estimates for each control-/space-/building-type. • Values made up, based on patterns we expect to see in each scenario. Reasoningdescribed in research plan appendix. • Sample sizes will move around if we get better information. • Plan calls for pre- and post- metering at most sampled sites.

15. Sample targets

17. Research cost estimates

18. Outstanding Items • Technical Subcommittee largely agreed with Protocol Content • Clarification was made to protocol cost, CSF applicability in protocol vs. research plan, and data collection for ballast factors • Technical subcommittee requested re-evaluation of cost for research; draft numbers considered “optimistic at best” • No other major outstanding items in protocol identified

19. R&E Subcommittee Feedback • R&E Subcommittee feedback and responses summarized posted • Key research items addressed: • Limitations to how the research plan addresses feedback • Clarification within the document around: • Rationale behind focus on hours of use • Rationale for sample size • Clarifications around sampling requirements

20. Changes Made • Restructure protocol to limit applicability to only items in research plan • Intent is to avoid confusion • Protocol may be expanded following research • Removed obsolete equipment table

21. Decision “I _______ move to approve Provisional Standard Protocol for Lighting Retrofits, the associated Research Plan, and the Protocol Calculator, and set the sunset date to September, 2016.”

22. Backup slides

23. Example Space Data Collection • Baseline data collection • Identify a SUT based on HOO and use of the space • Identify each lighting system within a SUT • A lighting system is associated with a particular control type • These lighting systems all occur within the same SUT therefore HOO should be the same • Note: Lighting systems cannot cross SUT • Eventually determine controlled HOO for each lighting system • Apply CSF and results of site interview Gathered by interview

24. Example Space Data Collection • Determine baseline power of each lighting system • CSF is used to apply an adjustment to HOO for each lighting system to arrive at HOU • Interview answers used to roll up to annual savings Calculator does this based on inputs

25. Example Space Data Collection • Efficient Case Data Collection & Consumption • Utilize same SUT boundaries when applicable • Note: Major change in SUTs means retrofit protocol N/A • Same method as baseline for fixture count, quantity, etc. for each control type within a lighting system • Calculator can determine savings allocation • Controls savings vs. wattage reduction savings

26. Questions that came to mind • Q: Do you conduct HOO interview separately from site audit? • A: Intent is to have them occur at the same time to minimize effort • Q: Is the Interview Guide paper based or electronic? • A: Electronic would be easiest for projects with multiple space types. For simple projects (one space, or <5 spaces) paper printouts might also work fine • Q: What needs to be done pre and post? • A: HOO interview should be done concurrently with site audit during pre period. Controls savings based off site audit form (ex. lighting calculators). Logging pre & post during provisional phase • Q: Who should be asked about HOO during site visit? • A: Protocol states someone “…knowledgeable of lighting HOO at the site.” Essentially left up to practitioner to decide who that is.

27. Questions that came to mind • Q: What if metered data doesn’t match HOO interview data? • A: Need to determine another candidate simplified method. Important to get interview questions correct during provisional phase. • Q: Why not just use EMS to do pre/post logging? Why the need for metered light output and controls on individual systems? • A: Aggregate savings are fine for a custom measure, but for a simplified approach you need to take into account site variance – all will not have an EMS and intent is to allow for no on-site metering once protocol is proven • Q: What happens after provisional phase? • A: Analyze results that ideally prove out candidate simplest reliable method (i.e. interview for HOO, use CSF table for controls) • Revise interview method if necessary based off results • Proven protocol only requires metering on a sample* of projects going forward * Sample size likely determined by program evaluator