Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Policies and Programs for Sustainable Energy Innovations pp 277–356Cite as

Evaluating Energy Efficiency

  • Chapter

  • 1136 Accesses

Part of the book series: Innovation, Technology, and Knowledge Management ((ITKM))

Abstract

Nature of resource planning has changed dramatically since 1970s due to increased diversity in resource options such as renewable alternatives, demand-side management, space conditioning, cogeneration of heat and electricity in industrial applications, and deregulation of the energy market. Along with that new objectives have been added to the utilities’ decision-making processes beyond cost minimization (Hobbs, Eur. J. Oper. Res., 83:1–20, 1995). Moreover; technological development, instability in fuel markets, and government regulations are taking place faster than ever before and as a result complexity and uncertainty involved in decision-making practices have become increasingly significant. This chapter provides an approach based on hierarchical decision modeling to consider new factors in evaluating energy efficiency technologies.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  1. N.H. Afgan, P.A. Pilavachi, M.G. Carvalho, Multi-criteria evaluation of natural gas resources. Energy Policy 35(1), 704–713 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. N.H. Afgan, M.G. Carvalho, P.A. Pilavachi, N. Matins, Evaluation of natural gas supply options for Southeast and Central Europe: part 2. Multi-criteria assessment. Energy Convers. Manag. 49(8), 2345–2353 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. A.I. Chatzimouratidis, P.A. Pilavachi, Objective and subjective evaluation of power plants and their non-radioactive emissions using the analytic hierarchy process. Energy Policy 35(8), 4027–4038 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. A. Chatzimouratidis, P.A. Pilavachi, Technological, economic and sustainability evaluation of power plants using the analytic hierarchy process. Energy Policy 37(3), 778–787 (2008). doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2008.10.009

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. A.I. Chatzimouratidis, P.A. Pilavachi, Sensitivity analysis of the evaluation of power plants impact on the living standard using the analytic hierarchy process. Energy Convers. Manag. 49(12), 3599–3611 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. A.I. Chatzimouratidis, P.A. Pilavachi, Multicriteria evaluation of power plants impact on the living standard using the analytic hierarchy process. Energy Policy 36(3), 1074–1089 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. H. Chen, Sensitivity analysis for hierarchical decision models. Doctoral dissertation, Portland State University, 2007

    Google Scholar 

  8. C.W. Gellings, W.M. Smith, Integrating demand-side management into utility planning. Proc. IEEE 77(6), 908–918 (1989)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. B.F. Hobbs, G.T. Horn, Building public confidence in energy planning: a multimethod MCDM approach to demand-side planning at BC gas. Energy Policy 25(3), 357–375 (1997)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. B.F. Hobbs, P.M. Meier, Multicriteria methods for resource planning: an experimental comparison. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 9(4), 1811–1817 (1994)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. I. Iskin, Literature review on adoption of energy efficient technologies from a demand side management perspective: taxonomy of adoption drivers, barriers and policy tools. Technology Management in Energy Smart World (PICMET 2011) (2011), pp. 1–16

    Google Scholar 

  12. I. Iskin, J. Callahan, M. Vowles, R Fedie, Variable capacity heat pump program development roadmap. Technology Management in Energy Smart World (PICMET 2011) (2011), pp. 1–12

    Google Scholar 

  13. R.L. Keeney, T.L. McDaniels, Value-focused thinking about strategic decisions at BC Hydro. Interfaces 22, 94–109 (1992)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. R.L. Keeney, T.L. McDaniels, Identifying and structuring values to guide integrated resource planning at BC Gas. Oper. Res. 47(5), 651–662 (1999)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. C.H. Lawshe, A quantitative approach to content validity. Pers. Psychol. 28(4), 563–575 (1975)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. D.K. Lee, S.Y. Park, S.U. Park, Development of assessment model for demand-side management investment programs in Korea. Energy Policy 35, 5585–5590 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. S.K. Lee, Y.J. Yoon, J.W. Kim, A study on making a long-term improvement in the national energy efficiency and GHG control plans by the AHP approach. Energy Policy 35(5), 2862–2868 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. D. Mills, I. Lowe, L.A. Vlacic, Hierarchical decision support system for integrated resource planning. J. Decis. Syst. 7(1), 21–38 (1998)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. N. Nagesha, P. Balachandra, Barriers to energy efficiency in small industry clusters: multi-criteria-based prioritization using the analytic hierarchy process. Energy 31(12), 1633–1647 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. M.A. Papalexandrou, P.A. Pilavachi, A.I. Chatzimouratidis, Evaluation of liquid bio-fuels using the analytic hierarchy process. Process Saf. Environ. Prot. 86(5), 360–374 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. P.A. Pilavachi, C.P. Roumpeas, S. Minett, N.H. Afgan, Multi-criteria evaluation for CHP system options. Energy Convers. Manag. 47(20), 3519–3529 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. P.A. Pilavachi, S.D. Stephanidis, V.A. Pappas, N.H. Afgan, Multi-criteria evaluation of hydrogen and natural gas fuelled power plant technologies. Appl. Therm. Eng. 29(11–12), 2228–2234 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. P.A. Pilavachi, A.I. Chatzipanagi, A.I. Spyropoulou, Evaluation of hydrogen production methods using the analytic hierarchy process. Int. J. Hydrog. Energy 34(13), 5294–5303 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. R. Ramanathan, L.S. Ganesh, Energy alternatives for lighting in households: an evaluation using integrated goal programming-AHP model. Energy 20(1), 63–72 (1995)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. V. Ravi, R. Shankar, Analysis of interactions among the barriers of reverse logistics. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 72(8), 1011–1029 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. A.K.N. Reddy, Barriers t o improvement in energy efficiency. Energy Policy 19(10), 953–961 (1991)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. A.H. Sanstad, R.B. Howarth, “Normal” markets, market imperfections and energy efficiency. Energy Policy 22(10), 811–818 (1994)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. J. Sathaye, A.J. Gadgil, Aggressive cost-effective electricity conservation: novel approaches. Energy Policy 20(2), 163–172 (1992)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. S. Vashishtha, M. Ramachandran, Multicriteria evaluation of demand side management (DSM) implementation strategies in the Indian power sector. Energy 31, 2210–2225 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. G. Wang, Y. Wang, T. Zhao, Analysis of interactions among the barriers to energy saving in China. Energy Policy 36(6), 1879–1889 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Portland State University, Portland, OR, USA

    Ibrahim Iskin

  2. Department of Engineering and Technology Management, Portland State University, 1900 SW 4th Avenue 50-02, Portland, OR, 97201, USA

    Tugrul U. Daim

Authors
  1. Ibrahim Iskin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Tugrul U. Daim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ibrahim Iskin .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Engineering and Technology Management, Portland State University, Portland, Oregon, USA

    Tugrul U. Daim

  2. Portland State University, Portland, Oregon, USA

    Jisun Kim

  3. Portland State University, Portland, Oregon, USA

    Ibrahim Iskin

  4. Portland State University, Beaverton, Oregon, USA

    Rimal Abu Taha

  5. Portland State University, Portland, Oregon, USA

    Kevin C. van Blommestein

Appendices

11.7 Appendix 1: Content Validation Survey

11.1.1 11.7.1 Survey Instructions

  1. 1.

    Please note that each page contains one question and short definitions of the relevant terms in case you are not familiar with the wording.

  2. 2.

    Please use Likert scale of 1–3 to reflect your judgment, if you have any comments/suggestions please use the specified field under the scoring table.

  3. 3.

    After you are done with all the questions, please save the word document and send the file back to the researcher using the same mail you have received the survey (ibrahimiskin@gmail.com).

Please proceed to the next page for the survey

  1. 1.

    Please rate the importance of the following attributes in defining overall utility mission. If you believe the list below misses any important attributes, please use the comment box below.

    1: Essential, 2: Useful but not essential, 3: Not necessary

    Promote regional development

    		 

    Minimize environmental impacts

    		 

    Increase operating flexibility and reliability

    		 

    Reduce system cost

    		 

    Minimize adverse effects on public

    		 

    Command:

    • Promote regional development: Electric utilities need to support regional development by providing accessible service.

    • Minimize environmental impacts: Electric utilities need to operate in an environmentally sustainable manner.

    • Increase operating flexibility and reliability: Electric utilities need to maintain their operations without compromising reliability.

    • Reduce system cost: Electric utilities need to keep rates as low as possible within sound business principles.

    • Minimize adverse effects on public: Electric utilities need to operate collaboratively with public entities and minimize adverse effects caused by their operations.

  2. 2.

    Please rate the importance of the following attributes in defining “Promote regional development.” If you believe the list below misses any important attributes, please use the comment box below.

    1: Essential, 2: Useful but not essential, 3: Not necessary

    Create or retain job opportunities

    		 

    Keep local industry competitive

    		 

    Improve life standards (nonenergy benefits)

    		 

    Command:

    • Promote regional development: Electric utilities need to support regional development by providing accessible service.

    • Create or retain job opportunities: Electric utilities can support regional development by creating new job opportunities.

    • Keep local industry competitive: Electric utilities can support regional development by providing local industry with low rate energy and enabling diffusion of new technologies.

    • Improve life standards (nonenergy benefits): Electric utilities can promote regional development by improving life standards of public through introduction of new technologies.

  3. 3.

    Please rate the importance of the following attributes in defining “Minimize environmental impacts.” If you believe the list below misses any important attributes, please use the comment box below.

    1: Essential, 2: Useful but not essential, 3: Not necessary

    Reduce GHG emissions

    		 

    Reduce emission of soil, air, and water contaminants

    		 

    Avoid flora and fauna habitat loss

    		 

    Command:

    • Minimize environmental impacts: Electric utilities need to operate in an environmentally sustainable manner.

    • Reduce GHG emissions: Electric utilities can reduce environmental impacts by reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

    • Reduce emission of soil, air, and water contaminants: Electric utilities can reduce environmental impacts by reducing emission of soil, air, and water contaminants.

    • Avoid flora and fauna loss: Electric utilities can reduce environmental impacts by protecting flora and fauna species.

  4. 4.

    Please rate the importance of the following attributes in defining “Increase operating flexibility and reliability.” If you believe the list below misses any important attributes, please use the comment box below.

    1: Essential, 2: Useful but not essential, 3: Not necessary

    Reduce need for critical resources

    		 

    Increase power system reliability

    		 

    Increase transmission and distribution system reliability

    		 

    Command:

    • Increase operating flexibility and reliability: Electric utilities need to maintain their operations without compromising reliability.

    • Reduce need for critical resources: Electric utilities can increase their operating flexibility and reliability by reducing need for critical resources.

    • Increase power system reliability: Electric utilities can increase their operating flexibility and reliability by increasing power system reliability.

    • Increase transmission and distribution system reliability: Electric utilities can increase their operating flexibility and reliability by increasing transmission and distribution system reliability.

  5. 5.

    Please rate the importance of the following attributes in defining “Reduce system cost.” If you believe the list below misses any important attributes, please use the comment box below.

    1: Essential, 2: Useful but not essential, 3: Not necessary

    Reduce/postpone capital investments

    		 

    Reduce operating costs

    		 

    Command:

    • Reduce system cost: Electric utilities need to keep rates as low as possible within sound business principles.

    • Reduce/postpone capital investments: Electric utilities can reduce system cost by reducing or postponing capital investments.

    • Reduce operating costs: Electric utilities can reduce system cost by reducing operating costs.

  6. 6.

    Please rate the importance of the following attributes in defining “Minimize adverse effects on public.” If you believe the list below misses any important attributes, please use the comment box below.

    1: Essential, 2: Useful but not essential, 3: Not necessary

    Avoid noise and odor

    		 

    Avoid visual impacts

    		 

    Avoid property damage and impact on lifestyles

    		 

    Command:

    • Minimize adverse effects on public: Electric utilities need to operate collaboratively with public entities and minimize adverse effects caused by their operations.

    • Avoid noise and odor: Electric utilities can reduce adverse effects on public by reducing noise and odor-related disturbances caused by their operations.

    • Avoid visual impacts: Electric utilities can reduce adverse effects on public by reducing visual disturbances caused by their operations.

    • Avoid property damage and impacts on lifestyles: Electric utilities can reduce adverse effects on public by reducing property damage and lifestyle-related disturbances caused by their operations.

11.8 Appendix 2: Content Validation Analyses

11.2.1 11.8.1 Chi-Square Test Results

figure a

11.2.1.1 11.8.1.1 One Sample T test for Mean of 1

figure b

11.2.1.2 11.1.8.2 One Sample T test for Mean of 2

figure c

11.2.1.3 11.1.8.3 One Sample T test for Mean of 3

figure d

11.9 Appendix 3: Pairwise Comparison Survey for Objectives Level

11.3.1 11.9.1 Survey Instructions

11.3.1.1 11.9.1.1 Sample Question

Please distribute 100 points between the following pairs of utility objectives to reflect your judgment on their relative importance to overall electric utility mission.

Promote regional development

  

Increase operating flexibility and reliability

Promote regional development

  

Reduce system costs

Increase operating flexibility and reliability

  

Reduce system costs

11.3.1.2 11.9.2 Rating Sample

Promote regional development

50

50

Increase operating flexibility and reliability

Promote regional development

75

25

Reduce system costs

Increase operating flexibility and reliability

 1

99

Reduce system costs

If you believe objectives “Promote regional development” and “Increase operating flexibility and reliability” have equal importance to overall utility mission, then allocate 50 points on both sides of the rating table.

If you believe “Promote regional development” has three times as much importance as “Reduce system costs,” then allocate left-hand side of the table three times as much points as the right-hand side of the table.

If you believe importance of “Increase operating flexibility and reliability” is negligible compared to “Reduce system costs” then use the scores demonstrated earlier.

Please proceed to the next page for the survey

  1. 1.

    Please distribute 100 points between the following pairs of utility objectives to reflect your judgment on their relative importance to overall utility mission.

    Promote regional development

    		  

    Increase operating flexibility and reliability

    Promote regional development

    		  

    Reduce system costs

    Increase operating flexibility and reliability

    		  

    Reduce system costs

    Command:

    • Promote regional development: Electric utilities need to support regional development by providing accessible service.

    • Increase operating flexibility and reliability: Electric utilities need to maintain their operations without compromising reliability.

    • Reduce system cost: Electric utilities need to keep rates as low as possible within sound business principles.

11.10 Appendix 4: Pairwise Comparison Survey for Goals Level

11.4.1 11.10.1 Survey Instructions

11.4.1.1 11.10.1.1 Sample Question

Please distribute 100 points between the following pairs of utility goals to reflect your judgment on their relative contributions to “Promote regional development”

Create or retain job opportunities

  

Keep local industry competitive

Create or retain job opportunities

  

Improve life standards (nonenergy benefits)

Keep local industry competitive

  

Improve life standards (nonenergy benefits)

11.4.2 11.10.2 Rating Sample

Create or retain job opportunities

50

50

Keep local industry competitive

Create or retain job opportunities

75

25

Improve life standards (nonenergy benefits)

Keep local industry competitive

 1

99

Improve life standards (nonenergy benefits)

If you believe “Create or retain job opportunities” and “Keep local industry competitive” have equal contributions in fulfilling objective “Promote regional development,” then allocate 50 points on both sides of the rating table.

If you believe “Create or retain job opportunities” has three times as much contribution as “Improve life standards (nonenergy benefits)” in fulfilling objective, then allocate left-hand side of the table three times as much points as the right-hand side of the table.

If you believe contribution of “Keep local industry competitive” is negligible compared to “Improve life standards (nonenergy benefits)” in fulfilling the objective, then use the scores demonstrated earlier.

Please proceed to the next page for the survey

  1. 1.

    Please distribute 100 points between the following pairs attributes to reflect your judgment on their relative contributions to “Promote regional development”

    Create or retain job opportunities

    		  

    Keep local industry competitive

    Create or retain job opportunities

    		  

    Improve life standards (nonenergy benefits)

    Keep local industry competitive

    		  

    Improve life standards (nonenergy benefits)

    Command:

    • Promote regional development: Electric utilities need to support regional development by providing accessible service.

    • Create or retain job opportunities: Electric utilities can support regional development by creating new job opportunities.

    • Keep local industry competitive: Electric utilities can support regional development by providing local industry with low rate energy and enabling diffusion of new technologies.

    • Improve life standards (nonenergy benefits): Electric utilities can promote regional development by improving life standards of public through introduction of new technologies.

  2. 2.

    Please distribute 100 points between the following pairs of attributes to reflect your judgment on their relative contributions to “Increase operating flexibility and reliability”

    Reduce need for critical resources

    		  

    Increase power system reliability

    Reduce need for critical resources

    		  

    Increase transmission and distribution system reliability

    Increase power system reliability

    		  

    Increase transmission and distribution system reliability

    Command:

    Operations without compromising reliability.

    • Reduce need for critical resources: Electric utilities can increase their operating flexibility and reliability by reducing need for critical resources.

    • Increase power system reliability: Electric utilities can increase their operating flexibility and reliability by increasing power system reliability.

    • Increase transmission and distribution system reliability: Electric utilities can increase their operating flexibility and reliability by increasing transmission and distribution system reliability.

  3. 3.

    Please distribute 100 points between the following attributes to reflect your judgment on their relative contributions to “Reduce system cost”

    Reduce/postpone capital investments

    		  

    Reduce operating costs

    Command:

    Sound business principles.

    • Reduce/postpone capital investments: Electric utilities can reduce system cost by reducing or postponing capital investments.

    • Reduce operating costs: Electric utilities can reduce system cost by reducing operating costs.

11.11 Appendix 5: Pairwise Comparison Survey for Alternatives Level

11.5.1 11.11.1 Survey Instructions

11.5.1.1 11.11.1.1 Sample Question

Please distribute 100 points between the following pairs of program alternatives to reflect your judgment on their relative potentials to “Increase power system reliability”

  • Alternative 1: An energy efficiency program for promoting ductless heat pump technology for replacing electric baseboard heating technology in single family residential end use.

  • Alternative 2: An energy efficiency program for promoting light emitting diodes technology for replacing compact fluorescent technology in grocery commercial end use.

  • Alternative 3: An energy efficiency program for promoting variable frequency drive ventilation fan systems for replacing nonvariable frequency drive ventilation fan systems in agricultural potato onion shedding end use.

Alternative 1

  

Alternative 2

Alternative 1

  

Alternative 3

Alternative 2

  

Alternative 3

11.5.2 11.11.2 Rating Sample

Please note that, magnitude of each alternative’s contribution is a function of utility load profile, corresponding technologies’ end use load profile, and potential market size for diffusion. Please respond the following questions for BPA’s case.

Alternative 1

50

50

Alternative 2

Alternative 1

75

25

Alternative 3

Alternative 2

 1

99

Alternative 3

If you believe “Alternative 1” and “Alternative 2” have equal contributions to “Increase power system reliability” then allocate 50 points on both sides of the rating table.

If you believe alternative “Alternative 1” has three times as much contribution as “Alternative 3” then allocate left-hand side of the table three times as much points as the right-hand side of the table.

If you believe the contribution of alternative “Alternative 2” is negligible compared to “Alternative 3” then use the scores demonstrated earlier.

11.5.3 11.11.3 Survey

  • Alternative 1: An energy efficiency program for promoting ductless heat pump technology for replacing electric baseboard heating technology in single family residential end use.

  • Alternative 2: An energy efficiency program for promoting light emitting diodes technology for replacing compact fluorescent technology in grocery commercial end use.

  • Alternative 3: An energy efficiency program for promoting variable frequency drive ventilation fan systems technology for replacing nonvariable frequency drive ventilation fan systems technology in agricultural potato onion shedding end use.

  1. 1.

    Please distribute 100 points between the following pairs of program alternatives to reflect your judgment on their relative potentials to “Create or retain job opportunities”

    Alternative 1

    		  

    Alternative 2

    Alternative 1

    		  

    Alternative 3

    Alternative 2

    		  

    Alternative 3

    Create or retain job opportunities: Development and delivery of energy efficiency programs create new job opportunities throughout the industry supply chain such as manufacturers, retailers, designers, contractors, etc.

  2. 2.

    Please distribute 100 points between the following pairs of program alternatives to reflect your judgment on their relative potentials to “Keep local industry competitive”

    Alternative 1

    		  

    Alternative 2

    Alternative 1

    		  

    Alternative 3

    Alternative 2

    		  

    Alternative 3

    Keep local industry competitive: Energy efficiency programs can enable rapid diffusion of some of the new manufacturing technologies by eliminating implementation and operation-related concerns through demonstration projects.

  3. 3.

    Please distribute 100 points between the following pairs of program alternatives to reflect your judgment on their relative potentials to “Improve life standards (non energy benefits)”

    Alternative 1

    		  

    Alternative 2

    Alternative 1

    		  

    Alternative 3

    Alternative 2

    		  

    Alternative 3

    Improve life standards (nonenergy benefits): New technology alternatives provide not only energy savings, but also improve life standards of public through newly added functions embedded in new products.

  4. 4.

    Please distribute 100 points between the following pairs of program alternatives to reflect your judgment on their relative potentials to “Reduce need for critical resources”

    Alternative 1

    		  

    Alternative 2

    Alternative 1

    		  

    Alternative 3

    Alternative 2

    		  

    Alternative 3

    Reduce need for critical resources: Energy efficiency programs can reduce/alter loads to help with allocation of critical resources between competing bodies. A relevant example might be a utility case where regulations of environment, fish, and wildlife require a steady water flow for wildlife habitat and this situation causes power generation difficulty in managing available water reservoir.

  5. 5.

    Please distribute 100 points between the following pairs of program alternatives to reflect your judgment on their relative potentials to “Increase power system reliability”

    Alternative 1

    		  

    Alternative 2

    Alternative 1

    		  

    Alternative 3

    Alternative 2

    		  

    Alternative 3

    Increase power system reliability: Energy efficiency programs can reduce/alter loads on critical parts of power generation systems in order to cope with some of the challenges such as increasing population, seasonality in magnitude peak loads, generation variability in renewable energy alternatives, and aging infrastructure.

  6. 6.

    Please distribute 100 points between the following pairs of program alternatives to reflect your judgment on their relative potentials to “Increase transmission and distribution system reliability”

    Alternative 1

    		  

    Alternative 2

    Alternative 1

    		  

    Alternative 3

    Alternative 2

    		  

    Alternative 3

    Increase transmission and distribution system reliability: Energy efficiency programs can reduce/alter loads on critical parts of power transmission systems in order to cope with some of the challenges such as increasing population, seasonality in load and peak demands, and aging transmission and distribution systems.

  7. 7.

    Please distribute 100 points between the following pairs of program alternatives to reflect your judgment on their relative potentials to “Reduce/postpone capital investments”

    Alternative 1

    		  

    Alternative 2

    Alternative 1

    		  

    Alternative 3

    Alternative 2

    		  

    Alternative 3

    Reduce/postpone capital investments: Energy efficiency programs can be utilized to reduce magnitude of peak loads and help reduce or postpone capital investments which require high upfront capital requirements.

  8. 8.

    Please distribute 100 points between the following pairs of program alternatives to reflect your judgment on their relative potentials to “Reduce operating costs”

    Alternative 1

    		  

    Alternative 2

    Alternative 1

    		  

    Alternative 3

    Alternative 2

    		  

    Alternative 3

    Reduce operating costs: Energy efficiency programs can be utilized to reduce need for peak load generation units whose marginal cost of energy generation is higher than base load generation units.

11.12 Appendix 6: Analysis and Data Validation of Expert Judgment

11.6.1 11.12.1 Analysis and Data Validation of Utility Objectives with Respect to Mission

Inconsistencies and relative contributions of objectives to mission

figure e

Group disagreements on utility objectives under mission

figure f

Hierarchical clustering analysis of utility objectives under mission

figure g

11.13 Analysis and Data Validation of Utility Goals with Respect to “Promote Regional Development”

11.7.1 11.13.1 First Round

Inconsistencies and relative contributions of utility goals under “Promote regional development”

figure h

Group disagreements on utility goals under “Promote regional development”

figure i

Hierarchical clustering analysis of utility goals under “Promote regional development”

figure j

11.7.2 11.13.2 Second Round

Inconsistencies and relative contributions of utility goals under “Promote regional development”

figure k

Group disagreements on utility goals under “Promote regional development”

figure l

Hierarchical clustering analysis of utility goals under “Promote regional development”

figure m

11.7.3 11.13.3 Analysis and Data Validation of Utility Goals with Respect to “Increase Operating Flexibility and Reliability”

11.7.3.1 11.13.3.1 First Round

Inconsistencies and relative contributions of utility goals under “Increase operating flexibility and reliability”

figure n

Group disagreements on utility goals under “Increase operating flexibility and reliability”

figure o

Hierarchical clustering analysis of utility goals under “Increase operating flexibility and reliability”

figure p

11.7.3.2 11.13.3.2 Second Round

Inconsistencies and relative contributions of utility goals under “Increase operating flexibility and reliability”

figure q

Group disagreements on utility goals under “Increase operating flexibility and reliability”

figure r

Hierarchical clustering analysis of utility goals under “Increase operating flexibility and reliability”

figure s

11.7.4 11.13.4 Analysis and Data Validation of Utility Goals with Respect to “Reduce System Cost”

11.7.4.1 11.13.4.1 First Round

Relative contributions of utility goals under “Reduce system cost”

 

Reduce operating costs

Reduce postpone capital investments

Expert 1

0.5

0.5

Expert 2

0.6

0.4

Expert 3

0.7

0.3

Expert 4

0.5

0.5

Expert 5

0.7

0.3

Expert 6

0.5

0.5

Expert 7

0.3

0.7

Aggregated

0.54

0.46

Group disagreements on utility goals under “Reduce system cost”

figure t

Hierarchical clustering analysis of utility goals under “Reduce system cost”

figure u

11.7.4.2 11.13.4.2 Second Round

Relative contributions of utility goals under “Reduce system cost”

 

Reduce operating costs

Reduce postpone capital investments

Expert 1

0.5

0.5

Expert 2

0.6

0.4

Expert 3

0.7

0.3

Expert 4

0.5

0.5

Expert 5

0.7

0.3

Expert 6

0.5

0.5

Expert 7

0.7

0.3

Aggregated

0.60

0.40

Group disagreements on utility goals under “Reduce system cost”

figure v

Hierarchical clustering analysis of utility goals under “Reduce system cost”

11.7.5 11.13.5 Analysis and data Validation of Alternatives with Respect to “Keep Local Industry Competitive”

Inconsistencies and relative contributions of energy efficiency program alternatives under “Keep local industry competitive”

figure w

Group disagreements on energy efficiency program alternatives under “Keep local industry competitive”

figure x
figure y

Hierarchical clustering analysis of energy efficiency program alternatives under “Keep local industry competitive”

figure z

11.7.6 11.13.6 Analysis and Data Validation of Alternatives with Respect to “Improve Life Standards”

Inconsistencies and relative contributions of energy efficiency program alternatives under “Improve life standards”

figure aa

Group disagreements on energy efficiency program alternatives under “Improve life standards”

figure ab

Hierarchical clustering analysis of energy efficiency program alternatives under “Improve life standards”

figure ac

11.7.7 11.13.7 Analysis and Data Validation of Alternatives with Respect to “Create or Retain Job Opportunities”

Inconsistencies and relative contributions of energy efficiency program alternatives under “Create or retain job opportunities”

figure ad

Group disagreements on energy efficiency program alternatives under “Create or retain job opportunities”

figure ae

Hierarchical clustering analysis of energy efficiency program alternatives under “Create or retain job opportunities”

figure af

11.7.8 11.13.8 Analysis and Data Validation of Alternatives with Respect to “Reduce Need for Critical Resources”

11.7.8.1 11.13.8.1 Round 1

Inconsistencies and relative contributions of energy efficiency program alternatives under “Reduce need for critical resources”

figure ag

Group disagreements on energy efficiency program alternatives under “Reduce need for critical resources”

figure ah

Hierarchical clustering analysis of energy efficiency program alternatives under “Reduce need for critical resources”

figure ai

11.7.8.2 11.13.8.2 Round 2

Inconsistencies and relative contributions of energy efficiency program alternatives under “Reduce need for critical resources”

figure aj

Group disagreements on energy efficiency program alternatives under “Reduce need for critical resources”

figure ak

Hierarchical clustering analysis of energy efficiency program alternatives under “Reduce need for critical resources”

figure al

11.7.9 11.13.9 Analysis and Data Validation of Alternatives with Respect to “Increase Power System Reliability”

11.7.9.1 11.13.9.1 Round 1

Inconsistencies and relative contributions of energy efficiency program alternatives under “Increase power system reliability”

figure am

Group disagreements on energy efficiency program alternatives under “Increase power system reliability”

figure an

Hierarchical clustering analysis of energy efficiency program alternatives under “Increase power system reliability”

figure ao

11.7.9.2 11.13.9.2 Round 2

Inconsistencies and relative contributions of energy efficiency program alternatives under “Increase power system reliability”

figure ap

Group disagreements on energy efficiency program alternatives under “Increase power system reliability”

figure aq

Hierarchical clustering analysis of energy efficiency program alternatives under “Increase power system reliability”

figure ar

11.7.10 11.13.10 Analysis and Data Validation of Alternatives with Respect to “Increase Transmission and Distribution System Reliability”

11.7.10.1 11.13.10.1 Round 1

Inconsistencies and relative contributions of energy efficiency program alternatives under “Increase transmission and distribution system reliability”

figure as

Group disagreements on energy efficiency program alternatives under “Increase transmission and distribution system reliability”

figure at

Hierarchical clustering analysis of energy efficiency program alternatives under “Increase transmission and distribution system reliability”

figure au

11.7.10.2 11.13.10.2 Round 2

Inconsistencies and relative contributions of energy efficiency program alternatives under “Increase transmission and distribution system reliability”

figure av

Group disagreements on energy efficiency program alternatives under “Increase transmission and distribution system reliability”

figure aw

Hierarchical clustering analysis of energy efficiency program alternatives under “Increase transmission and distribution system reliability”

figure ax

11.7.11 11.13.11 Analysis and Data Validation of Alternatives with Respect to “Reduce Operating Costs”

Inconsistencies and relative contributions of energy efficiency program alternatives under “Reduce operating costs”

figure ay

Group disagreements on energy efficiency program alternatives under “Reduce operating costs”

figure az

Hierarchical clustering analysis of energy efficiency program alternatives under “Reduce operating costs”

11.7.12 11.13.12 Analysis and Data Validation of Alternatives with Respect to “Reduce Postpone Capital Investments”

Inconsistencies and relative contributions of energy efficiency program alternatives under “Reduce or postpone capital investments”

figure ba

Group disagreements on energy efficiency program alternatives under “Reduce postpone capital investments”

figure bb

Hierarchical clustering analysis of energy efficiency program alternatives under “Reduce postpone capital investments”

figure bc

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Iskin, I., Daim, T.U. (2015). Evaluating Energy Efficiency. In: Daim, T., Kim, J., Iskin, I., Abu Taha, R., van Blommestein, K. (eds) Policies and Programs for Sustainable Energy Innovations. Innovation, Technology, and Knowledge Management. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-16033-7_11

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation