AFTER IEE-10-344 SI2.589424 - D2.3 - Common Evaluation Protocol for Testing Live on Pilot Sites...

7/31/2019 AFTER IEE-10-344 SI2.589424 - D2.3 - Common Evaluation Protocol for Testing Live on Pilot Sites (Guidelines)

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/after-iee-10-344-si2589424-d23-common-evaluation-protocol-for-testing 1/38

The sole responsibility or the content o this publication lies with the authors. It does not necessarily reect the opiniono the European Union.

Neither the EACI nor the European Commission are responsible or any use that may be made o the inormationcontained therein.

COMMON

EVALUATIONPROTOCOL FORTESTING LIVEON PILOT SITES

D2.4



common

evaluationprotocol



4

partner Date content

DelpHiS

Julien BonnetFrancis Deplace

07.06.2012 Version 1.0Drat

aaa

Elsebeth Terkelsen

12.06.2012 Version 2.0Drat

iWu

Iris BehrBritta Stein

20.06.2012 Comments

ZrmK

Marjanna Sijanec-ZavrlMarta Skubic

22.06.2012 Comments

ScHole/Siti

Arianna Dongiovanni

22.06.2012 Comments

Stu-K

Tomas Vimmr

25.06.2012 Version 2.0.Comments.

cStB

Pierre Boisson

27.06.2012 Commentsand suggestions

aaa

Elsebeth Terkelsen

01.07.2012 Version 3.0

aaa

Elsebeth Terkelsen

06.08.2012 Version 4.0

protocolCONTENT



5

0. id 6

0. Introduction 61. IPMVP: Background 62. IPMVP: Content 72.1. IPMVP Global Approach2.2. IPMVP Options2.3. IPMPVP Measurement and Verifcation Process steps.3. AFTER characteristics 9

3.1. Diversity o the ESMs3.2. Timeline specifcities3.3. Assessing the social perormance in a residential context4. AFTER Common Evaluation Protocol: Pilot ESMs Matrix 104.1. Sub-table #1: ESM Identifcation4.2. Sub-table #2: Pilot Site identifcation4.3. Sub-table #3: Intervention suggested in order to optimize the ESM4.4. Sub-table #4: Actions suggested in order to optimize the ESMConclusion 12

1. egy fy s 14

0. Identifcation o the building 141. Project Intent 152. Selected IPMVP Option and Measurement Boundary 163. Baseline : Period, Energy and Conditions 184. Reporting period 195. Basis or Adjustment 206. Analysis Procedure 217. Energy prices 228. Meter Specifcations 239. Monitoring Responsabilities 24

10. Expected Accuracy 2511. Budget 2612. Report Format 2713. Quality Assurance 28

2. ts sy ss, sby d bh 30

1. Identifcation 322. General satisaction 323. Satisaction with comort 32

4. Satisaction with economy 335. Satisaction with inormation 346. General behaviour 34

protocolCONTENT



6

protocol0. INTRODUCTION

th aFter Hdbk s h sg h aFter gb hdgy .

ths Hdbk w b sd h iyhs d d iD hd eSms d by h sd s s h sfsgdg h .

th Hdbk w b h dgdg h hss h 18 peSms. ths hss w b kdwh h df h eSms d hds g sg h

fy.

0.0. introDuction

The International Perormance Measurement

and Verifcation Protocol (IPMVP) providesstandardized methods and tools to assessthe results o energy saving investments andmeasures.In order to ensure the comparability o the pilotsites outcomes, AFTER Project partners willhave to use a same ramework to evaluate theimpact o the ESMs tested «live» on pilot sites.A simplifed version o the IPMVP will be used inorder to build a common methodology.

This «Common Evaluation Protocol» ollows thegeneral structure o the IPMVP, simpliying someo its aspects.AFTER Project collects dierent types o ESMs.As a consequence, the common protocol is a verysimple version which will be customized with theinputs o every WPs.Its main objective is to illustrate a processo assessment that will adapted regardingspecifcities o every type o intervention on thehousing stock.

1. ipmvp : BacKGrounD.

IPMVP has been launched in 1995 by the USDepartment o Energy («North American EnergyMeasurement and Verifcation Protocol»). Itsaim was to provide a general tool to quantiy andassess energy savings created by ESCOs

The use o this document has spread to

national and government agencies in the U.Sbeore becoming an international tool used inseveral countries and translated in 10 dierentlanguages.



7


The original protocol has been regularly updated.Since 2002, IPMVP has been transormedinto an independant non-proft corporation to

encourage an international dissemination. Privatecorporation Efciency Valuation Organization(EVOs) manages today the registered trademarkIPMVP© (www.evo-world.com). Its websiteprovides a complete library o documentsgathering dierent translated volumes o theProtocol.

2. ipmvp : content.

IPMVP has to be considered as a guidancedocument. Its dierent volumes presents«Concepts and Options or Determining Energyand Water Savings» (vol.1) «Concepts and Optionsor Improved Indoor Environmental Quality (vol.2)).

IPMVP gives a methodological ramework thathas to be adapted into concrete Measurement andVerifcation Plans by users.The IPMVP presents three major elemnts that will

led users in their assessment process :

- a global approach to calculate energy savingsintegrating «adjustement» to ponderate theobtained results beore and ater the EnergySaving Measures.- our options to describe methods or estimatingthe energy savings.- a model or a Measurement and VerifcationPlans divided into a several steps.

2.1. ipmpvp GloBal approacH

Energy savings are determined according to aglobal equation :

egy Sgs = (Bs-y egy us) - (ps-

rf egy us) +/- adjss

«Adjustments» allow to assess two time periodsaccording to a same set o conditions.Adjustments can be separated into :

- «routine adjustments» or changes inparameters that can be expected to happen

through the post-retroft period and or whicha relationship with energy use/demand can beidentifed (seasonal or cyclical changes - weatheror occupancy variations).

- «non-routine adjustments» or changes inparameters that can not be expected to happenthrough the post-retroft period.

This approach is simplifed in the ollowingdiagram

eSm

Bs d rg d

Bs d + adjs

e n e r G Y u S e

time

egysgs



8

- o c : «whole acility approach». Measuresare taken at the dwelling’s system or sub-system

- o D : «computer simulations using asotware calibrated on a data collection»

Every ESM user will have to defne his level oassessment regarding the type o ESM he wantsto implement.

2.3. ipmpvp meaSurement anD veriFicationproceSS StepS.

As presented in introduction, IPMVP presents aprocess. An M&V assessment plan should coverdierent steps and topics.

The 2007 IPMVP version presents 13 major topicsor a M&V plan to complete in order to have abetter overview o the equation :

egy Sgs = (Bs-y egy us) - (ps-

rf egy us) +/- adjss

The 13 descriptive steps/ topics are the ollowingones :

1. Project Intent2. Selected IPMVP Option and Measurement

Boundary3. Baseline : Period, Energy and Conditions4. Reporting period5. Basis or Adjustment6. Analysis Procedure7. Energy prices

8. Meter Specifcations9. Monitoring Responsabilities10. Expected Accuracy

The bs is defned as the period necessaryto assess the dwelling energy consumption beore

the implementation o the ESM.The g d is defned as the time aterthe implementation o the ESM.o h eSm hs b d, the energyconsumption or the dwelling is supposed todecrease. In order to calculate the savings, thebaseline period has to be projected onto thereporting period timeline and to be ponderated bythe same conditions (in order to be «adjusted»).

The relevancy o the savings assessment will behugely correlated with rules or the Adjustmentprocess.IPMVP sets up dierent options to fx theboundaries o an evaluation. 4 options highlightdierent methodology to identifcate savingsaccording to dierent scale o parameters.

2.2. ipmvp optionS.

The 4 IPMVP options defne 4 scales andparameters basis to assess the savings or an

ESM. The aim o this 4 options is to presentdierent methodology to isolate/integrateparameters in order to calculate ESMsperormances.

Options will be detailled in this document.A simple overview highlights 4 major options :

- o a : «isolation o a simple system andpartial measurement, only o key-parameters,including stipulations on the other parameters.

- o B : «isolation o a simple systemand exhaustive measurement, including allparameters»




9

11. Budget12. Report Format13. Quality Assurance

The IPMVP-based adapted protocol or theAFTER Project will detail or every Pilot Siteimplementation these dierent topics.The objective is to give a simple ramework orthese 13 topics ocusing on the most relevantinormations to collect in order to insure thequality o assessment or an ESM and its impact.

3. ipmvp : aFter cHaracteriSticS

AFTER will use the IPMVP has common basis toelaborate its own testing protocol. IPMVP is themost commonly used tool or assessing energysavings, nevertheless some particular points haveto be precised concerning the AFTER Project onsome points.

3.1. DiverSitY oF tHe eSmS

The AFTER project collects dierent types oEnergy Saving Measures. All these investmenthave to be assessed according to a same processin spite o their dierences.On ESM regarding a «contract review» (WP3)can’t be assessed with the same tools used byan ESM associated with some small technicalinterventions on the heating system. AFTERocuses on economic, energy and socialperormance o the tested ESMs. These threemain indicators will be less or more important

regarding the characteristics o the ESMs. Otherperormance indicators will be also needed

in order to improve the understanding o theefciency or one particular ESM.{c. point 4. AFTER COMMON EVALUATION

PROTOCOL: PILOT ESMs MATRIX}

As a consequence, WP3, WP4, WP5, WP6 andWP7 will not be assessed using the sameindicators even i the process will be the sameone, based on the IPMVP objectives and routines.The IPMVP-based protocol or AFTER will be, ina frst time, used as a simple guideline in orderto detail the main step o a same protocol. All thespecifcations linked to the variety o ESMs willbe detailed urthermore by WP leaders ater the

Pilot ESM and Pilot Sites selection regarding thenature o the dierent types o ESMs.

The objective is to allow the IPMVP-based to beas exible as possible in order to be adapted orevery dierent types o implementation.

3.2. timeline SpeciFitieS

Due to the diversity o ESMs collected within

the AFTER Project, the relevancy o thereporting period are not the same or everyimplementation.

The implementation period has been determinedto be one-heating season long in the AFTERProject. This time will not be sufcient tocalculate the relevancy and perormance o all thetypes o ESMs.For example, some WP3 ESMs will need moretime to see their energy impacts evaluated.As investments are dierent by nature, energysavings calculation will be sometimes harder toassess.




10


presenting an overview o how a measure can beassessed on site.

Due to the diversity o ESMs covered by theAFTER project, this process is o course a largeapproach o the assessment. The main elementsto collect are presented in a global rameworkthat will help to identiy the inormation tocollect in order to evaluate the efciency o oneoptimization solution.The Common Evaluation Protocol will be thegeneral document and guideline to reer in orderto have the same procedure between all the WPs.Nevertheless, this CEP will have to be customized

regarding the heterogeneity o the Pilot ESMscollected and tested. In order to make easierthis adaptation process to the characteristics oone ESM, Scientifc partners realized a commonExcel Matrix that will have to be customized andcompleted regarding the characteristics o everyESM.This reporting tool is the operational translationo the Common Evaluation Protocol adapted orevery ESM. The Excell Matrix is divided in severalsub-tables, that will help to have a general view

o the ESM, its optimization solutions and the waythese optimization solutions will be implementedand measured during the testing phase.

Overview on the structure o this document:

4.1. SuB-taBle #1: eSm iDentiFication

The ESM identifcation aims at presenting thePilot ESM implemented in the Pilot Site. Thisintroduction to the ESM is the basis to highlightoptimization solutions proposed both by Scientifcleaders o the WPs and by participating SHOs.

As a consequence the classic IPMVP should haveto be completed by a complementary evaluationprotocol ocusing on the social perormance anduser reception o an ESM.

3.3. aSSeSSinG tHe Social perFormance ina reSiDential context

AFTER common evaluation protocol or thetesting «live» on sites will add to the originalcriterias o the IPMVP a «social perormance»assessment protocol.

This new topic will be particularly ocusedon a simple questionnaire helping to betterunderstand the impact o ESM or its users.Two aspects o this user-riendly perormancewill be particularly highlighted :

- the quality o use or every user determined bya common questionnaire.

- the impact on the user’s invoice (rent+charges)which will help us to assess the tenants’economic tolerance regarding an ESM.

4. aFter common evaluation protocol:pilot eSms matrix

The Common Evaluation Protocol preparedby the AFTER Scientifc partners proposes acommon approach in order to evaluate thePilot ESMs implemented during the testingphase o the project. This Common EvaluationProtocol presents a general process to ollow

the optimization solutions suggested or oneESM. Developping and explaining every step othe IPMVP, the CEP is a step-by-step method



11


The content o this table is:

1. Wk pkg h eSm

2. r hs eSm h g iy h aFter j.3. n h eSm gdg h tygydd dg h fs hs h aFterpj.4. Ds h eSm d s h ss.5. i s s eur.6. Sg d h h eSm.

4.2. SuB-taBle #2: pilot Site iDentiFication

The Pilot Site identifcation will present the Pilotbuilding where the Pilot ESM is implemented.This Pilot Site identifcation will be completeddurng the testing phase thanks to the datacollected by the participating SHOs.

The content o this table is:

1. n h bdg: Code-name o the buildingwithin the AFTER project.2. adss h bdg.3. Y s.4. nb dwgs.5. nb ss.6. cdd F as (excluding commonparts).7. nb hbs h bdg: to beollowed on the timeline o the baseline and thereporting period.8. vy : same remark than or the «Number oinhabitants».9. ts s + hgs: this indicator will help toidentiy the economic repercussion o the optimizationsolution on the tenants.

4.3. SuB-taBle #3: intervention SuGGeSteDin orDer to optimiZe tHe eSm

This table will help to highlight the optimizationsuggestions identifed by the scientifc partnerso the project and by the Social HousingOrganizations.These optimization suggestion will propose amethod adapted to the specifcity o the ESMand o its place within the Work Package. Theseveral optimization suggestions will be proposedin order using a priority order, the methodsproposed by the scientifc partners will lead tothe identifcation and validation by the SHO o one

optimization solution that will be implemented bythe participating Social Housing Organization.

The content o the table is:

1. th/og ds h sd d z h s h eSm d.2. objs h gdg /gy/s h sd

.

The Optimization suggestions proposed will helpto identiy how what range o interventions can beimplemented on one building in order to improvea special type o ESM.They will be precised with more technical inputson the last table o the Matrix: the interventiontable.



12


5. mg hss d s: Linked withthe questions o the parameters measured, themetering characteristics that will help to measure the

identifed parameters will be indicated. Schemes willbe added to precise this metering system.6. rd ds Db

For every parameter indicated in the table, ameasurement table will be integrated to theExcel Matrix in order to ollow the evolution o theparameter during the testing phase.

c. point 12 o the part «Tool» o this CommonEvaluation Protocol.

The fnal objective is, o course, to measureeconomic, social and energy objectives

concluSion

The AFTER Common Evaluation Protocol isseparated in two elements:

- one guideline translating the main aspects othe IMPVP in the AFTER context and presentinga step-by-step ramework in order to lead everypartner to identiy and collect the relevantinormation regarding an optimized ESM.- one reporting ormat (the EXcel fle) allowingto report the collected data and to precise thedierent interventions implemented in order tooptimize one ESM.

This duality is explained by the diversity oour ESMs: i one document can be defne as aCommon Evaluation Protocol that propose a

same process or all these ESMs, the secondone is more adapted to the reality and the

4.4. SuB-taBle #4: actionS SuGGeSteD inorDer to optimiZe tHe eSm

This table objective is to describe the severalactions and adjustments implemented in order tooptimize the ESMs.This action table separates the dierent technicalrecommandations and the indicators that willhelp SHOs and scientifc partners to assess theefciency o the optimized measure.

The action is divided into several steps that willallow to understand the complete process settledthanks to it.

The content o this table (step-by-step) is:

1. Ds h : the implementedintervention is described with its technical andconcrete aspects. Technical documentation will beadded and attached to this description.2. eq/ h sys d: identifcation o the part o system impacted by theaction. The objective is to identiy the general system/equipment impacted by the action (heating system,ventilation system, etc...) and to speciy what particular

element o this system will be modifed/adjustedthanks to the intervention.3. pds d g s dby h : identifcation o the management andoperational aspects modifed due to the intervention.The contractual aspects, the sta organizationconsequences o the intervention will be mentioned.4. ps ss: This row will indicatethe relevant indicators to collect and evaluate in orderto assess the efciency o the ESM.This «Parameter measurements» will indicate theIPMVP option selected to measure the parameters,

the parameter measured and the time range betweenevery measurement.



13


characteristics o every ESM.

The fnal 18 completed Evaluation Protocol willoer a complete approach or the interventionsconcerning the management and themaintenance o the existing social housing stock.As the AFTER Project concerns dierent types ointerventions on existing buildings, the additiono these adapted-Evaluation Protocol will lead toa good overview o the dierent interventions thatcan be done related to a specifc ESM.

The optimization solutions implemented by the

Social Housing Organizations are detailled withsub-actions, identifed impacts and parametersrequested to measure its efciency.This workwill constitute a strengthened guideline coveringpotential interventions on our topics.As a consequence, the completed versions andExcel fle or the 18 ESMs will provide an adaptedcheck list or other Social Housing Companiesdescribing the actions implemented on the



14

protocol1. ENERGY EFFICIENCY

MEASUREMENT PROTOCOL

SHO :

Country :

Adress of the building :

Year of construction of the building :

Number of dwellings :

Surface of the ESM :

Number of inhabitants :

Responsible :

Contact :

Collected documents :

Name of the ESM :

WP ...

0. IDENTIFICATION OF THE BUILDING



16



2. IPMVP OPTION

Sd S : Select which measurement boundary will be used to determine energy savings.This selection has to be done according to the dierent criteria o the IPMVP rom option A tooption C. Option D will not be retained as relevant or the AFTER Project.Ater having selected your option, list the parameters you’ll analyzed.

dj

ipmvp optionHoWSavinGSare calculateD

tYpical

applicationS

retroFit iSolation : KeY

parameter meaSurement

Savings are determined byfeld measurement o the keyperormance parameter(s) whichdefne the energy use o the aectedsystem(s) and the success o theproject.

Measurement requency rangesrom short-term to continuous,depending on the expected variationsin the measured parameter, and thelenght o the reporting period.

Parameters not selected or feldmeasurement are estimated.Estimates can based on historicaldata, manuacturer’s specifcations,pr engineering judgment.Documentation o the sourceor justifcation o the estimatedparameter is required. Theplausible savings error arising romestimation rather than measurementis evaluated.

Indicated or equipment renovation

with the same behaviour.

Engineering calculation o baselineand reporting period energy rom :

- short-term or continuousmeasurements o key operatingparameter(s)- estimated values

Routine and non-routineadjustments as required.

- the perormance o only the systemsaected by the ESM is o concern eitherdue to the responsabilities assigned tothe parties in a perormance contractor due to the savings o the ESM beingtoo small to be detected using option C.

- interactive eects between ESM withother equipment can be measured tobe non signifcant

- isolation o the ESM rom the rest othe building and stipulation may avoidpossible difcult non-routine BaselineAdjustments or the uture changes.

- independent variables that aectenergy use are not complex orexpensive to monitor

- submeters already exist to isolateenergy use o systems

- meters added or isolation purposeswill be used or other purposes such asoperational eedback or tenant billing

- uncertainty created by stipulations isacceptable

- continued eectiveness o the ESMcan be assessed by routine visualinspection o stipulated parameters

a



17



retroFit iSolation : allparameter meaSurement

Savings are determined by feldmeasurement o the energy use o

the aected system.

Measurement requency rangesrom short-term to continuous,depending on the expected variationsin the savings and the lenght o thereporting period.

Indicated or behavior change in theuse o equipment.

Short-term or continuousmeasurements o baseline and

reporting-period energy, and/orengineering computations usingmeasurements o proxies o energyuse.

Routine and non-routineadjustments as required.

B - interactive eects between ESM orwith other equipment can measured orassumed to be immaterial

- isolation o the ESM rom the rest othe building and stipulation may avoidpossible difcult non-routine BaselineAdjustments or the uture changes.

- independent variables that aectenergy use are not complex orexpensive to monitor

- submeters already exist to isolateenergy use o systems

- meters added or isolation purposeswill be used or other purposes such asoperational eedback or tenant billing

WHole FacilitY

Savings are determined bymeasuring energy use at the wholeacility or sub-acility level.

Continuous measurements o theentire acility’s energy use are takenthroughout the reporting period.

Indicated or energy efciencymeasurements applications withtotal energy savings potential higherthan 10%.

Analysis o the whole acilitybaseline and reporting period(utility) meter data.

Routine adjustments as required,using techniques such as simplecomparison or regression analysis.

Non-routine adjustments asrequired

- energy perormance o the whole acilityis to be assessed, not just the ESM

-dierent types o ESMs in one building

- ESM involve diuse activities whichcannot easily be isolated or the rest o theacility, such as operator training or walland window upgrades

- savings are large enough to beseparated rom noise in the baseyear dataduring time o the monitoring

- interactive eects between ESMs or withother equipment is substantial makingisolation techniques o Options A and Bexcessively complex

- reasonable correlations can be oundbetween energy use and other indepentvariables

c

2.1 o

2.2 ps sd

2.3 i sbyd h s bdy



18



thd S : Develop the baseline period and conditions in order to assess the uture energy savings.The baseline period is the time necessary to be representative o the dwelling energyconsumption beore the implementation o an ESM.In order to assess the energy savings, an energy audit is oten necessary in order to gather andto the necessary documentation the determine the conditions o the baseline period.

3.1 idf h bs d

3.2 a bs gy d

3.3 idd b ddg wh h gy d

- Legal temperature within the building.- HDD.

3.3 S s dgwh h gy d

- Occupancy.- Space being heated.- Change in the power or amount or use o equipment.

- Type o energy.- Time range between the evaluation.- Energy Consumption.

3. BASELINE PERIOD



19



Fh S : Select a reporting period. For the AFTER project, this period is intented to cover one heatingseason. Nevertheless, this reporting period should be precized and adapted according to everyESM.

4. REPORTING PERIOD

3.1 idf h bs d

3.2 a bs gy d

3.3 idd b ddg wh h gy d

- Legal temperature within the building.- HDD.

3.3 S s dgwh h gy d

- Occupancy.- Space being heated.- Change in the power or amount or use o equipment.

- Type o energy.- Time range between the evaluation.- Energy Consumption.



20



Fh S : List the sets o conditions to which the ESM will be adjusted. The objective is to identiy whatchanges could impact the energy savings induced by the ESM.

5.1 Wh djs

5.2 mdfd s bg hd dd

5.3 chgs h w//s qs

5.4 chgs y

5.5 chgs h bdg hss

(w s, wdws, ds, ghss)

- HDD.

5. BASELINE ADJUSTMENT



21



Sh S : Speciy the exact data analysis, procedure and assumptions to be used in each savings report.For each model used, report all o its terms and the range o variables over which is valid.

6. ANALYSIS PROCEDURE

6.1 S #1

6.2 Ds h

6.3 eq/p h sysd

6.4 pds d g sd by h

6.5 ps s

- HDD.

IPMVP Option

Parameter measured

Time Range

6.6 mg hss d s

6.7 rd ds Db



22



7.1 egy(s) d by h eSm

7.2 e h dgy s

- Time range.- Baseline period evolution.- Reported period evolution.

7.3 nssy djs h sgs h gy s

YES/NOT

7.4 adjsd s sdgs

Equation to complete.

Sh S : Indicate the energy prices that will be used in order to associate a fnancial value with energysavings and the the way to integrate them.

7. ENERGY PRICES



23



8.1 mg s s

8.2 pd g

8.3 m hssd ggd s

8.4 m dg ss - Steps.- Witnessing.- Deliverables.

8.5 r b ss

I relevant

eghh S :Speciy the dierent steps to complete a metering o the dierent energy consumptions.

8. METER SPECIFICATIONS



24



9.1 cd

9.2 rdgegy D

9.3 r,djs d yss

h egy D

9.4 rdg h ssdbk

9.5 r,djs d yss

h ss dbk

ctsks

nh S : List the dierent responsabilities or every dierent task o an ESM implementation on pilotsite. These responsabilities ocus on the dierent steps o the process and will allow every

partner to identiy the relevant stakeholder within every SHO.

9. MONITORING RESPONSABILITIES.



25



th S : The uncertainty is a key element in the calculation o an energy saving. The protocol willpresent the dierent potential sources o uncertainty and

10. EXPECTED ACCURACY.

10.1 mss s

10.2 n-gd -ss s

10.3 mdg s

Metering inaccuracyor errors in recording.

Metering excludes parto the population

or participation is missing.

Due to the selection o models andadjustments to the data to take into

account dierences between thebaseline and the test period.

10.4 rd s

TO COMPLETE



26



eh S : Defne a budget or the savings determination. This budget should include dierent lines :initial investment costs or the ESM, 0&M costs during the reporting period, sta costsrelating to the direct investment, metering set-up costs, sta costs or savingsdetermination.

11.1 i s ss h zd eSm

11.2 o&m ss dg hg d

11.3 S ss g h dss

Details.

Details.

Details.

11.3 mg s- ss

Details.

11.4 S ss sgs

d

Details.

11. BUDGET.



27



twh S : Defne a ormat to present how energy savings results will be documented and disseminated.c. Pilot Site Evaluation Excel fle.

12. REPORT FORMAT.



28



thh S : Speciy a common control ramework used during the implementation phase in order to

ensure eective operation and correct cost account.

13. QUALITY ASSURANCE.

13.1 t g d s Qy hks.

13.2 rwg ssbs

Monthly/weekly, etc... Major Steps.



29



30

protocol2. TENANT SURVEY

SATISFACTION, USABILITY AND BEHAVIOUR

th dbk gy s dd h dg s d hs sg gy gh kw hs’ ss d h sby h eSm. t b sss, h j ss h s d sbsh dgb h eSm. th j s hg h d bhsh wd d h ss ss. cs bw h

hsg d d s h shs d hj’s sss. F h s sy hs b dd

The tenants survey has - i possible - to beconducted beore the works, (during) and aterthe realization o the works.The survey provides a qualitative assessmentcomplementary to that o the savings in energy,including assessing the gains or tenant comort.

For each ESM and pilot site it is to be decided,which kind o tenants’ survey is adequate.

Face to ace interviews are recommended(good applicable because o small number orespondents; but need o interviewers, record odata i it’s not computer assisted).

Telephone interviews are also appropriate (butneed o interviewers, o very clear and easycomprehensible questions, o record o data i it’snot computer assisted).

Portal users can also be interviewed online (no

data entry necessary, but need o programming overy clear and attractive survey; non-users o theportal will not be reached).

Postal interviews are less recommended orthe AFTER project (most non personal orm ointerviewing; need o very clear structure andflter questions, o data entry; costs or print)The content o a cover letter also is important.I another interview orm shall be used, theollowing contents should be mentioned asintroduction when asking the tenant to participate



31

on the survey. This introduction should containinormation about the importance o the providedESM and the project, the relevance and themain topics o the survey, the importance o theparticipation o every single tenant to increase thesignifcance o the data, warrant o data privacy,should invoke the tenant’s help or evaluatingthe ESM, show advantages or the tenant andmention rewards as incentives.





32

tenantS SurveY - SatiSFaction anDuSaBilitY

D:…………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………

1. iDentiFication

addss / n bdg :…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

Gd :

□ Male□ Female

ag: ............................

nb g h dwg:

……………………………………………………………………………………………………….

2. General SatiSFaction

1. a y gy ssfd wh hsbsh « eSm” ?

□ I’m very satisfed□ I’m rather satisfed

□ I’m neither satisfer nor dissatisfed□ I’m very dissatisfed

2. i y dsssfd, why?…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

3. D y hk h sbsh « eSm» wd y h gy sgs ?

□ Yes□ No

4. Dd y s y gy sb h sbsh « eSm»

□ Yes□ No

i ys - hw dd y s (, sh s , ict / ss, h s) ?…………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

3. SatiSFaction WitH comFort

5. Fwg h sbsh « eSm» : (sz dg h y s)

Yes No Don’t know





35

□ I wait until I have a ull load beore I use mywashing machine or my dishwasher.

□ I mostly tumble dry my clothes.

4. Ds y h h dgsys?□ Yes□ No

5. Hw d y s y dgsys h s?

□ Less than 1 hour a day□ 1-3 hours a day□ 4-8 hours a day□ More than 8 hours a day□ Don‘t know

6. Whh d y h hsd s d sd sd s s?(Please fll in)

□ Much used rooms:……………………...…………………….Degrees□ Little used or unused rooms:……….…………………….Degrees□ Don’t know

7. th d s b h dd h ssbs h d s gy. D y g wh hwg ss? (y y w h sw)

□ I think I should save more energy at home.

□ My amily or riends think that I should savemore energy at home.

□ In my opinion protecting the environment is avery important issue.

□ To ensure the decrease o carbon dioxideemissions is important or the protection o theenvironment.

□ I’m interested in my energy consumption athome.

□ I’m interested in possibilities o saving energyat home.

□ Energy conservation means I have to live lesscomortably.

□ Energy conservation will restrict my reedom.□ Don’t know

8. i y w b y gys d h ssbs s gy y h, wh kd wd bs y g?(you may write more than one answer)

□ Your monthly energy consumption fgures□ Your monthly energy consumption in

comparison with the average consumption othe building/neighbourhood?

□ The development o your monthly energy `consumption fgures in comparison withprevious years

□ Your monthly energy costs□ Energy saving tips□ Others - explain which:…………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………





36

Y h hd h d h sy - thks g!i y h h s wh s sy, s dd s kywds:

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………





The sole responsibility or the content o this publication lies with the authors. It does not necessarily reect the opiniono the European Union.

Neither the EACI nor the European Commission are responsible or any use that may be made o the inormation

AFTER IEE-10-344 SI2.589424 - D2.3 - Common Evaluation Protocol for Testing Live on Pilot Sites...

Documents

Transcript of AFTER IEE-10-344 SI2.589424 - D2.3 - Common Evaluation Protocol for Testing Live on Pilot Sites...