Industrial programs have the potential to provide large energy efficiency savings, butwhen they don’t deliver as expected, the impact on attainment of utility savings goals can besignificant. A recent example surrounds the savings claimed through California’s IOU-sponsoredindustrial energy efficiency programs for 2006-2008. Though aggregate savings were stillsubstantial, ex-post evaluation estimates of the program savings were significantly lower than theutility-claimed savings. This paper examines how to bridge this gap and improve programclaimedsavings. Findings from a detailed analysis of many individual projects indicated that thesavings gap was largely due to a number of factors: improper baseline specification, lack ofproduction adjustments, modest program influence on project decisions, and limited informationon certain technologies with involved system interactions. The importance of each of thesefactors is detailed, considering the achieved results as measured in the impact evaluation. Theextent to which industry standards and common practices in an industry govern evolvingbaselines is highlighted, as is the importance of early and effective program influence. Useful lifeconsiderations, natural turnover, and the appropriateness of production level adjustments(particularly when enabled by newer industry-standard processes) are explored. The topic ofindustrial efficiency is especially relevant as utility energy efficiency goals increase andindustries focus on reducing energy costs as a way to increase profits in a tough economicenvironment.
展开▼
