Energy Saving Measurement & Verification

WHITE PAPER Energy Saving Measurement & Verification: Understanding IPMVP速 the International Performance Measurement and Verification Protocol and the importance of third party verification

From: Camfil Farr Date: July 2012

Energy Saving Measurement & Verification: Understanding IPMVP® the International Performance Measurement and Verification Protocol and the importance of third party independent verification Executive Summary The UK Government’s carbon reduction commitment, EU legislation and a plethora of new energy efficiency financing schemes are all in some way encouraging organisations to evaluate and therefore reduce their energy consumption. As organisations focus in on the financials in the on-going recession, achieving carbon and energy savings must not be seen as a cost, but a long-term investment to reducing consumption and therefore achieving both cost and carbon reduction.

There is no doubt about it. Companies need to produce more for less in the current economic climate.

Being energy efficient is key to becoming more efficient in general, but how do you know which technologies to invest in or indeed how to rate the success of your energy conservation project or scheme?

Undertaking an energy audit will identify areas of improvement, and associated with that, some guestimate of the payback period – a desktop analysis of the cost of investment versus the energy saved. Traditionally, this is where the analysis used to usually end. In the past, organisations were content with this level of understanding, simply accepting the energy saving figures that went with an energy audit report.

However, with the emphasis on austerity and considered investment, organisations are asking the basic questions – did my investment actually make the return I was promised? How will I know which measures or products performed the best in order that I roll them out to the rest of my estate? Is there one technology or product supplier that outperforms another similar technology?

The art and science of undertaking energy savings verification is called Measurement and Verification (M&V for short). M&V requires the professional judgement of an M&V Practitioner- both in 1|P a g e

engineering terms and experience. The Practitioner should be able to judge what level of accuracy is required for the scope of savings and to provide a suitable Plan to measure and verify savings.

The agreement of an M&V Plan prior to the implementation of the project or scheme is vitally important. Following a suitable time period post-installation, a savings report is produced and appended to the back of the M&V Plan to demonstrate the actual level of savings achieved. As no one party knows what the actual saving will be until after the installation, there is no room to manoeuvre an unwelcome outcome – as the methodology to determine your savings has already been agreed.

Business Challenge

The need for energy savings verification or M&V is gathering momentum. Organisations are no longer prepared to accept face value estimated savings, but want to know whether their energy conservation project has actually saved them and what exactly was that figure.

Understanding your actual energy saving brings credence to your investment and allows a multitude of follow on decisions to be made such as which technologies to make further investment in. Or indeed, it may simply be about proving the business case to your Finance Director, or proving how much carbon you have actually saved for Corporate Social Responsibility reporting.

As more and more organisations begin to recognise the importance of M&V, the more apparent independent M&V is becoming. Depending on the project or payment mechanism, there may be a bias on behalf of either the ESCO, technology provider, or client to want to see more or less savings. If in-house M&V is undertaken, how can you be assured of the credibility of the results?

An independent third party, working to within the processes and procedures of international standards is one way to eliminate bias and address this. After all, if energy savings verification needs to be undertaken anyway – why not go to an independent provider with specialist knowledge?

Solution Description Let’s go back to basics for a moment. An energy saving project is different to a renewable energy scheme in that it’s all about saving in the first place and not energy generation. With energy generation, it’s a case of simply metering your output. However, an energy saving is an absence of energy use and as such does not exist.

2|P a g e

The way to determine an energy saving is to consider the scenario of the ‘what would have been’ meter. That is, what would have been my energy consumption if I had not installed my energy conservation measure? By comparing the ‘what would have been’ scenario to metered energy post installation of the measure, and making any necessary adjustments, one can determine energy savings through the difference of the two.

This is illustrated in the diagram below (source www.evo-world.org).

The most widely used International methodology for determining energy savings is the International Performance Measurement and Verification Protocol – IPMVP®.

IPMVP was developed in the early 1990’s by the US Department of Energy as a growing response to the true and accurate measurement and verification of savings from energy efficiency measures.

Since then, it has been evolving to what it now the latest edition – ‘’Concepts and Options for Determining Energy and Water Savings, Vol 1, 2012’’. The Protocol highlights the approach and methodology to take in order to provide repetitive, consistent and credible results.

The IPMVP basic savings equation: The basic IPMVP savings equation 1 states: Savings reported for any period = Baseline Period Energy – Reporting Period Energy +/Adjustments (Ref: IPMVP Volume I, 2012, Chapter 4.1).

3|P a g e

That is, M&V is not simply a straight A minus B consumption figure, but adjustments should be made to the energy consumption pattern post implementation to ensure like for like comparisons are being made.

These adjustments maybe for weather, production, occupancy, IT utilisation etc. An M&V Plan, developed prior to the installation, would highlight the energy-governing factors that are likely to have a significant impact on energy consumption.

How do you approach M&V? There are two main approaches for undertaking M&V:

a) Retrofit Isolation (IPMVP Options A & B) This approach looks at savings from a measure within a specified boundary. This could be a plant upgrade on only three floors of a seven-storey building. This approach uses temporary or submetering to monitor consumption over an appropriate period of time (a day, a week, a month, a year) depending upon the measure, building operation and the energy governing factors.

b) Whole Building Approach (IPMVP Options C & D) With a whole building approach, the boundary is the building itself. All interactive effects within this boundary also become part of the determined savings. This approach typically uses a utility or whole site meter, and the period of assessment pre and post installation is generally longer to take into account full energy cycles. For example, a full years’ energy consumption may be taken into consideration, correlated to an energy governing factor such as degree days.

An M&V plan, developed prior to the installation of measure, will determine the most suitable approach to take. Savings reports are then appended to the Plan, once the installation has been verified and a suitable time period for assessment has passed.

Benefits One of the key benefits to undertaking M&V to IPMVP standards is that it is the most widely used International Protocol and therefore savings report are consistent in format. Using an International Standard provides credibility in terms of the savings figures reported and ensures that any anomalies are considered and that like for like comparisons are being made. For organisations reporting savings, be it internally or externally, reported savings can be stated as being ‘IPMVP-compliant’.

4|P a g e

IPMVP is administered by the Efficiency Valuation Organisation – EVO (www.evo-world.org). EVO is the only organisation in the world that administers a professional certification scheme related to M&V Practitioners, and applicants must have reached a minimum level of experience, qualifications as well as pass an examination. Currently, there are just over 2000 Certified Measurement and Verification Professionals (CMVPs) worldwide, with only a handful in the UK.

Target Market It is considered that up to 30% of a building’s energy consumption originates from Air Handling Plant – of which filters and pre-filters form one element. Regarding energy efficiency and filters, the greater the pressure differential there is across a filter, the greater the energy consumed.

Camfil Farr are providers of Low Energy Air Filters. As such, both particulate efficiency and energy efficiency are considered as key performance criteria. Camfil Farr are keen to work with clients to develop savings reports that specify the level of savings actually made from their filter installations – over a period of time not just the initial installation.

Technology providers, facilities managers and end clients are keen to know what the energy savings have actually been at their sites. Vitally also, when the optimal time to change a filter might be in order to keep maintaining low energy costs and particulate efficiency and therefore a healthy building environment.

Third party verification can help FMs and clients understand the answers to these questions and help to improve their planned maintenance regimes. M&V can also help to determine whether investing in better quality but more expensive filters prove to be more cost-effective over the lifetime of the filters, whilst still maintaining indoor air quality.

Summary

Using an independent verifier of energy efficiency savings will further enhance the IPMVP methodologies for determining energy savings from an energy conservation scheme such as the installation of Low Energy Air Filters.

Typically some of the questions an Engineering Manager or Chief Financial Officer within an organisation might ask of some of the invested projects are: 5|P a g e



‘Did my project achieve the promised outturn savings?’



‘How confident am I of the results?’

By providing assurance to the client that an externally qualified individual or organisation has undertaken savings verifications in an objective view and to international standards, will enable organisations to make further informed business decisions regarding investment in such technology in the future.

__________________________________________________________________________________ About the Author Rajvant Nijjhar is an Energy and Sustainability professional with over 15 years experience in building services, and the construction and water industry. After completing a Bachelors degree in Mechanical Engineering she started her career as tendering engineer, working for WABAG Water Engineering and Gleeson Construction Services focussing mainly on anaerobic digestion schemes and other water industry projects. After taking a sabbatical to do an MBA, she then worked in business development, winning a £100m water framework for Gleeson. Her move into energy and sustainability came when she produced Costain’s inaugural Corporate Responsibility report in 2006 - ‘Being Responsible’. Thereafter, she worked for a building services consultancy, hurleypalmerflatt on a wide variety of energy and sustainability projects including energy audits, CSR consulting, EPCs and DECs, and renewable energy schemes. She recently set up IVEES | Independent Verifiers of Energy Efficiency Savings, a consultancy dedicated to providing independent third party measurement and verification (M&V) services. Rajvant is a CMVP and also a member of the ISO Technical Committee responsible for producing new standards on M&V and energy baselines.

Email rajvant@ivees.co.uk Web www.ivees.co.uk Tel 07989 407 426 LinkedIn – Rajvant Nijjhar Twitter IVEES_ About Camfil Farr Camfil Ltd is the UK subsidiary of Camfil AB which trades as Camfil Farr or the Camfil Farr Group. Camfil Farr is a world leader in the development and production of air filters and clean air solutions. Camfil Farr is also one of the most global air filtration specialists in the world with 23 production units and research and development centres in four countries in the Americas, Europe and the Asia-Pacific region.

Camfil Farr, headquartered in Stockholm, Sweden, has approximately 3,350 employees and sales in the region of SEK 4.6 billion (c. £440 million). International markets account for almost 90% of sales. The company’s business is to provide customers with sustainable best-in class air filtration products and services within four main segments: Comfort Air; Clean Processes; Power Systems; and Safety and Protection.

With 47 years of experience in air filtration products and solutions, Camfil Farr delivers value to customers all over the world while contributing to something essential to everyone – clean air for health, wellbeing and performance.

See: www.lowenergyairfilter.co.uk and www.camfilfarr.co.uk

6|P a g e