How the “Dirty Dozen” ECMs Created a Need for a Risk Assessment Tool

Keith Willis, Trane USA

Keywords

Abstract

New technologies have emerged in the field of energy services that promise greater building performances by reducing energy consumption to lessen the carbon footprint, reducing water usage, and decreasing the amount of contributed green house gases. Major challenges when developing upgrades to increase a building's performance, are to effectively weigh the risks, benefits, and costs of implementing Energy Conservation Measure (ECM) investments.

In recommending an ECM, it is essential to minimize the risk that a technology will fail. This was not the case for the "Dirty Dozen," the name coined for new/emerging technology ECMs that did not perform as intended and actually caused equipment damage, higher energy costs, etc. The selections of these technologies were based on a point-in-time opinion, which applied judgment that was not typically consistent.

The lesson learned from the failed "Dirty Dozen" ECMs is that there is a significant need for a risk evaluation tool that minimizes arbitrary decisions or at least consistently standardizes the basis by which every evaluation of a new technology may be made. Such a tool is the Six Sigma^TM Evaluation Tool (SSET), developed in an Excel format that extrapolates a final weighted score through ten calculations from five initial entries.

The SSET allows a systematic evaluation of potential ECMs to minimize arbitrary decision-making and to consistently rate, the risks and benefits related to potential savings, practicality, ROI, and risk management. Using the SSET on the "Dirty Dozen" would have produced low cautionary scores and therefore could have prevented their implementation.