Search eceee proceedings

Industrial Process and Equipment Efficiency in Oregon: An Evaluation of the Energy Trust’s Production Efficiency Program

Panel: Panel 5. Role of Government and Programs in Industrial Energy Efficiency

Authors:
Marjorie McRae, Research Into Action, Inc.
Jane S. Peters, Research Into Action, Inc.
Steven Scott, MetaResource Group
Ben Bronfman, Energy Trust of Oregon, Inc.

Abstract

In mid-2003, the newly created Energy Trust of Oregon, Inc. launched the Production Efficiency Program to acquire large volumes of energy savings from industrial facilities. Consistent with best practices, the program design builds on existing market relationships and offers both technical and financial support for efficiency. The paper presents the findings from a process evaluation addressing the program’s first two years and assessment of the program’s impact evaluability.

The Production Efficiency (PE) Program appears to be effective in engaging a wide variety of facilities in generating efficiency savings. Projects committed to or completed in 2003- 2004 are estimated to have first-year energy savings of over 150 million kWh. Efficiency projects include those substantially changing the participants’ production processes, as evidenced by the 28 projects underway or completed that each had estimated savings in excess of one million first-year kilowatt hours (kWh). Process improvement projects save more energy and cost less than equipment projects, from both the program’s and the participants’ perspectives. By all accounts, the program’s success owes to its simplicity, its effective use of technical analysis, and to the relationships formed between program implementers and facility staff. The evaluation team also found areas of program weakness that it posited as resulting from the contractual relationships among the Energy Trust, the program management contractor, and the program delivery contractors. The team concluded that the terms and/or structure of the implementation contract complicates the attainment of program objectives. It also concluded the project documentation is sufficient to support an impact evaluation and yet warrants improvement.

Paper

Download this paper as pdf: Paper