Skip to main content

Table 5 Summary Data for Trials Analyzed

From: Energy consumption feedback in perspective: integrating Australian data to meta-analyses on in-home displays

Completed trials Trial year Peer-reviewed/journal publication Country Conservation effect from IHD (%) Sample size (N) Sampling classification IHD used
Seligman, Darley and Becker 1978 1979 YES USA 16.00 30 Class C Unspecified display
McClelland and Cook 1979 1979 YES USA 12.00 25 No Data Fitch Energy Monitor
Hutton, Mauser, Filiatrault and Ahtola 1986 1986 YES USA and Canada 7.00 75 Class A Energy Cost Indicator—ECI
Van Houwelingen and van Raaij 1989 1989 YES Netherlands 12.00 50 Class A Unspecified display
Dobson and Griffin 1992 1992 NO Canada 13.00 25 Class A Residential Electricity Cost Speedometer
Wood and Newborough 2003 2003 YES UK 14.00 20 Class C Energy Cost Indicator—ECI
Hydro One (in Faruqui et al. 2009) 2004 YES Canada 6.50 505 Class B PowerCost Monitor
Country Energy (in EMCA 2009) 2004 NO Australia 8.00 200 No Data Ecometer
Uneo, 2006 2006 YES Japan 9.00 9 Class A Energy Consumption Information System—ECOIS
Allen and Janda 2006 2006 YES USA 1.00 10 Class C The Energy Detective
Parker et al. 2006 2006 YES USA 7.00 17 No Data The Energy Detective
San Diego Gas and Electric (in Faruqui et al. 2009) 2007 YES USA 13.00 300 Class B Unspecified display
Hydro One TOU trial (in Faruqui et al. 2009) 2007 YES Canada 4.30 486 Class B PowerCost Monitor
Energy Australia (Amos 2009) 2007 NO Australia 2.00 561 Class A Ecometer
Integral Energy (Lette 2009) 2008 NO Australia 4.00 300 Class B Ecometer
Maclennan 2008 2008 NO USA 3.00 2210 Class B PowerCost Monitor
Mountain 2008 2008 NO Canada 2.70 43 No Data Power Cost Monitor
Scott 2008 2008 NO USA 1.00 370 No Data PowerCost Monitor
Sulyma, 2008 2008 YES Canada 8.60 307 No data PowerCost Monitor
Baltimore Gas and Electric (in Faruqui et al. 2009) 2008 YES USA 4.00 1021 No data Energy Orb
Caroll et al. 2009 2009 NO USA 7.40 22 No data The Energy Detective
Connecticut light and power 2009 2009 NO USA 1.00 307 No data Energy Orb and Power Cost Monitor
Nevada Energy (in Faruqui et al. 2009) 2009 YES USA 5.20 93 Class B The Energy Detective, PowerCost Monitor, Energy Joule, Whole House Energy Monitor
EDF (AECOM 2011) 2010 NOa UK 4.00 720 Class A Unspecified display—mix of clip-on and smart meter compatible devices
E.ON (AECOM 2011) 2010 NOa UK 2.90 1530 Class A Unspecified display—mix of clip-on and smart meter compatible devices
Scottish Power (AECOM 2011) 2010 NOa UK 1.00 2433 Class A Unspecified display—mix of clip-on and smart meter compatible devices
SSE (AECOM 2011) 2010 NOa UK 3.60 1701 Class A Unspecified display—mix of clip-on and smart meter compatible devices
Upcoming Trials
Western Power/Synergy 2011 N/A Australia   2200 Class A Energy Aware PowerTab
Memphis Light, Gas and Water (Peacock 2011) 2011 N/A USA   500 No data Unspecified display
SP Ausnet (EMCA 2009) 2011 N/A Australia   1000 Class B Unspecified display
Minnesota Power (US Department of Energy 2011) 2012 N/A USA   4000 No Data Unspecified display
Origin Energy (De Bortoli 2009) 2012 N/A Australia   5000 No Data Tendril IHD
Nevada Energy (Greentech Media, 2011) 2015 N/A USA   20000 No Data Control4 IHD
  1. aWhile the UK trials included in the AECOM report were not peer-reviewed, the analysis of the data was handled independently from the suppliers participating in the EDRP project. The authors recognize that this is not a substitute for the peer review process but feel it offers some level of improvement over self-reported results