Energy efficiency implementation

The results of energy efficiency implementation are all beneficial for the energy consumer. It reduces operational costs, reduces carbon footprint, and it can even improve quality of life. Energy efficiency implementation can also play a role in increased revenue when consumers choose a “greener” product over another that is not.[1] Energy efficiency implementation can be extremely beneficial to large market segments like small businesses, schools, cement processing plants; basically any area that uses large amounts of energy. Small changes here add up to large savings.

Implementing energy efficiency measures in a home or business can also lead to behavioral changes. When an energy efficiency change has been made and the energy consumer sees the benefits, more changes are often wanted to further their savings. These small changes create awareness and can be as simple as turning of lights when a room is not in use, or as complex as adding window glazing or installing demand-control ventilation.

Energy sector regulators might have wide discretion in the implementation and/or monitoring energy efficiency (EE) initiatives. The most likely roles involve giving technical advice to the agency developing EE initiatives, since changes in demand patterns will have implications for the operations and investment plans of utilities (and for costs, security of supply and quality of service) . Particularly when the EE outlays are by the utility, the energy sector regulator needs to monitor outcomes to ensure that the resources are being utilized in ways that are consistent with overarching public policies. Furthermore, interactions of utility initiatives with other EE policies need to be taken into account when evaluating whether the scale and scope of existing utility-based demand-side management programs. Utilities are in a position to analyze bills and conduct on-premises energy audits to identify areas of saving. Regulators could require utilities to undertake costly audit programs. A high tech approach to improving operations and the customer interface involves smart meters and information systems that enable the utility to track system performance in real time.[2]

The costs of implementing such systems need to be balanced against the benefits, including the possibility that outlays on other projects might be more cost effective. Thus, the role of regulators primarily involves providing technical input into the development of EE policies initiated by other agencies or via legislated tax programs.[3] In addition, the Regulator must determine (unless specified in law) which benefit-cost test is appropriate for evaluating utility-based EE programs. The regulatory tests include the participant cost test (will participants benefit over the measure's life?), the program administrator cost test (will utility bills increase?), the ratepayer impact measure (will utility prices increase?), the total resource cost test (will the total costs of energy decrease?) and the societal cost test (is the utility, state or nation better off, including environmental impacts?).[4] The IEA Energy Efficiency Governance Handbook goes into much more detail on the importance of having a coherent system for developing, incentivizing, and evaluating energy efficiency programs.[5]

By making appliances, lighting or the HVAC system more efficient, energy consumption levels drop, which leads to a lower utility bill for utility customers.

By reducing energy consumption we are able to conserve natural resources and thus have a less dramatic impact on our environment.

Working in natural or well-lit areas contributes to performance and productivity. Comfortable temperature levels also factor into how well a person functions. This fact can be applied to any operation that requires the use of lighting or an HVAC system.