It's easy to contribute articles, article proposals, commentary and analysis and be published online through Energy Central!
Sound interesting? Contact the editor for more information.
As utilities, regulators and other market actors face increasing pressure to dramatically ratchet up energy efficiency and demand response programs, a new buzzword, behavior, is fundamentally changing the approach to energy efficiency. Behavior strategies, often grouped with close cousins marketing, education, outreach, conservation and market transformation, offer the promise of dramatically increasing the reach, cost-effectiveness and verifiability of energy efficiency investments. By combining the insights of behavioral science and consumer marketing with advanced technologies, changes in household energy use patterns and purchases of energy efficiency products and services can be strongly affected.
The interest in behavior comes at an opportune time. Government-mandated energy efficiency goals are placing utilities and regulators in a tough spot. Not only must they reach higher energy reduction targets, but they must also do so in a cost-effective and verifiable manner. Currently, 18 states have some sort of Energy Efficiency Resource Standard (EERS) in statute, and many more are in the process of passing an EERS or have structural equivalents. In addition, federal energy and carbon legislation may pass this year that will extend an EERS to remaining states, potentially saving $170 billion in energy costs.
In many states, utilities receive direct incentives, both carrots and sticks, to meet their EERS goals. And in states where utility decoupling is being applied (e.g., California), utilities will only make excess profit by exceeding energy efficiency goals. In such an environment, the normal approach to energy efficiency just won't do. Behavior offers a path to scaling energy efficiency, especially in the residential sector, with some experts estimating that we can reduce 20 percent or more of our nation's energy use through behavior strategies.
So what is behavior exactly? First, let's start with what it is not. The opposite of behavior is generally referred to as Physical-Technical-Economic Models (PTEM for short). PTEM takes an engineering-centric approach to energy efficiency, assuming that energy use can only be affected by new technology, which in turn can only be affected by marginal price subsidies. This mentality is the reason why the vast majority of residential energy efficiency programs rely on product rebates to incentivize purchases of energy efficient products and services.
But with the exception of programs that offer free CFLs (hard to beat that price!), it is challenging to find rebate programs that offer extremely attractive benefit-cost ratios. It simply takes too much money to effectively change purchasing decisions, as energy use is relatively inelastic. Consumers will respond to price signals, but they have to be fairly strong, especially since other market failures such as the landlord-tenant disconnect and uncertainties in length of occupancy can further disincentive investments in energy efficiency.
In addition, PTEM programs often have trouble meeting increasingly strict measurement and verification (M&V) standards. There are essentially three ways to approach M&V, none of which are mutually exclusive. The first, billing analysis, is generally preferred wherever possible, because actual savings, assuming an appropriate control group is used, can be accurately measured. The second, engineering studies, use advanced building modeling algorithms to estimate energy savings from improvements to a specific home or building. The third M&V method, which the majority of rebate programs rely upon, is generally referred to as 'deemed savings'.
The deemed savings approach makes a variety of assumptions related to the benefits of installing a particular technology. So if customers are offered a $100 rebate on an energy-efficient air conditioner, a set of deemed savings assumptions will be employed to estimate the marginal energy savings, both total and peak, that accrue from that rebate. These assumptions generally include the engineering specifications of the air conditioner, the efficiency of the unit that is being replaced, the manner in which the air conditioner will be used, the expected performance of the new air conditioner across its useful life, the estimated useful life itself, and the likelihood that the customer would have bought the air conditioner without the rebate.
Different assumptions are made for each product and for each region, with sometimes wildly different deemed savings estimates. And so despite the great deal of time, expertise and money that goes towards creating deemed savings estimates, regulators are often reluctant to rely on them, creating constant acrimony on the public benefits generated by ratepayer-funded energy efficiency investments.
In contrast to the PTEM approach, behavior-based strategies focus on non-financial leverage points that affect consumer decision-making. In addition, there is no distinction made between operating behavior (e.g., turning off the lights more often) and purchasing behavior (e.g., purchasing CFLs). This is important since most experts agree at least half of actual energy use is dependent upon operating behavior, rather than the specific technologies being employed in a home. In fact, some researchers have found a 3x energy variability in identical houses and 4x variability in apartments across cultures.
There are a variety of approaches that leverage behavior, but best practice combines the following elements, all of which focus on what motivates real people:
Of course, program administrators and energy efficiency experts have long known that behavior is an important aspect of any energy efficiency program. But only recently has behavior begun to be accepted as the primary lens with which to view energy efficiency. A recent Behavior, Energy and Climate Change conference attracted a record turnout, with utilities, academics, technology providers and other market actors coming together to discuss ways that behavior can play a role in solving the intertwined energy and climate crises. This interest is part of a larger behavioral renaissance in academia that focuses on actual decision-making processes rather than assumptions about "rational" human behavior.
Perhaps more importantly, technology has advanced to the point that the benefits of behavior strategies can be accurately measured and tracked. In-home feedback technologies, online energy analysis software, and web 2.0 social media tools can all track the type and impact of behavior changes at the household level. When combined with grassroots marketing, education, and outreach strategies, these technologies can deliver verifiable, reliable energy savings at much more attractive benefit-cost ratios than traditional rebate programs. Instead of focusing on the means, with separate marketing and program implementation costs for each energy-efficient product and service, behavior strategies focus on the ends, remaining neutral as to the means (product purchases, lifestyle changes, etc.) that lead to the reductions. Incentives can still be an integral part of a program, but they are approached from a marketing, not marginal price, perspective. A sale at a furniture store would not be very effective without loud marketing announcing slashed prices, and energy efficiency is the same. Rebates and other incentives are just one part of a larger strategy to get people's attention.
Measurement and verification (M&V) can also be much more accurate in behavior programs. Rather than attempt to estimate the effect of specific rebate programs, large-scale data analysis is employed to measure aggregate reduction effects. Taking into account weather-adjusted billing information and a robust control group (usually neighbors that have not had a behavioral intervention), reliable savings estimates are generated that can be easily updated on a monthly or quarterly basis. Measures taken can be determined by real-time or post-facto survey data, with various statistical tools determining the relative importance of each measure.
So behavior strategies can be more effective, cheaper and verifiable than current approaches. All it takes is a little bit of creativity in melding new technology with existing program infrastructure. You might even say that behavior is the iPhone of energy efficiency. Both leverage advanced technology, but the real insight lies in the relentless focus on consumer behavior. Understanding how people think and act is imperative to any consumer venture, whether it is the design of a cell phone or the development of an energy efficiency program. And so these days, no utility or program administrator can afford to ignore behavior, especially as more aggressive energy efficiency goals are instituted at the state and national level.
Part II of this article will discuss examples of how behavior can be deployed to maximize your energy efficiency investments.
| Date | Comment |
|
Jeff Burkel 5.13.09 |
Agree wholeheartedly! We have been in the business of changing human behavior in the pharma industry for 20 years and have proved over and over again teh effectiveness of applying behavioral science to improve patient outcomes. Understanding the motivations, fears, hopes and aspirations of different segments of the population also allows you to predict who will be most likely to respond favorably to different programs and communications - so that these investments can be selective rather than mass - virtually guarenteeing a return on investment. When the energy industry wants to catch up with the pharma industry, let us know! Jeff Burkel Chief Operating Officer MicroMass Communications, Inc.
|
|
bill payne 5.19.09 |
PNM electric load forecaster Steve Martin identified new construction as the primary reason for projected load increases. http://home.comcast.net/~bpayne37/pnmelectric/altreport/altreport.htm#altreport Everyone must conserve so that new construction continues?
|
|
Len Gould 5.20.09 |
A huge waste of effort. Everything in the article becomes obsolete once a genuine real-time-pricing-on-short-intervals metering scheme comes into use, and the required behavioural pattern changes necessary to make it through future fossil fuel depletion cannot be induced without it. So just skip this feelgood nonsense and get on it.
|
|
Victor Bush 5.27.09 |
Behavioral change can be very effective and generally begins at the work place. It is even more important in these financial times where capital funding for new equipment and controls is constrained. Business is looking for low cost – no cost opportunities to cut costs and change management is a vehicle for those opportunities. What is needed to make the changes sustainable is accountability. Someone must be accountable for the energy use in their areas. Once the goal is established and accountability is set in place it is surprising what can be accomplished. This behavioral change, in most cases, will be carried over to the home and eventually feedback from a “smart meter” will serve as the accountability. But when money is tight people will look for ways to cut costs. We can’t afford to wait for the deployment of “real-time-pricing-on-short-intervals metering.”
|
|
Bob Amorosi 5.27.09 |
Victor, Feedback in the home from a "smart meter" will serve as the accountability only if residential consumers can actually get it. My personal experience in recent years developing a real-time in-home energy display product that communicated with a state-of-the-art smart meter was very sobering. Our utility companies now widely investing in smart meter technology are (still) not planning to bear the huge costs to equip all their residential customers with any in-home equipment beyond their meters, even if their meters get deployed ready equipped with the necessary communications hooks built into the meters to do so. Without governments forcing utility companies (as is happening now in Texas I read on this website), they are not generally interested in becoming the Home Depot for commercializing consumer in-home devices like energy displays or home automation gadgets for demand response systems. Consumers will have to pay for the in-home equipment from other third parties unless governments give handouts to the utility companies to commercialize them. In the former case, it is still very difficult for third parties to commercialize them such that they will interoperate with a utility company’s AMI smart meter system without the commercial involvement of the utility companies.
|
|
Victor Bush 5.29.09 |
Bob, I am sorry to say that you are probably right in your analysis. The only driver will probably be the case where it becomes too expensive not to do it.
|
|
Bill Melendez 6.6.09 |
Andy: Unless one is the DR and HAN business, it would be difficult to understand what you are implying. I agree with your point of view but add that most consumers, while wanting to do their part in energy conservation and carbon reduction, are also less likely to change behavior without outside assistance such as technology offers. The easiest and least expensive energy conservation thing to do is to turn a light switch off -- yet most don't. A DR HAN system would know to turn the light switch off and when to leave it on as per the needs or lifestyles of the occupant -- whether residential home or commercial office. In countries, such as South Africa, exceeding monthly building energy consumption quotas results in fines. How to measure consumption then becomes the main issue. Here in the US we resort to blackouts and outages. Studies have shown a desire on the part of consumers to participate in reducing energy waste -- they just need help doing it.
|
|
Andy Frank 6.9.09 |
Bill, You are correct that DR and HAN technologies can be effective tools in enabling energy behavior change. As some other folks have pointed out, though, these technologies are expensive and so investments must be taken carefully. The point I was trying to make in this article is not that technology is bad (quite the opposite in fact), but that technologies of all sorts (communications, hardware, software, etc.) must be designed for actual people, not some sort of imaginary being that always makes rational choices. This is a fairly simple concept, of course, but one that the energy efficiency industry has been slow to adopt. I encourage you to read Part II which gets into specific strategies and the tradeoffs inherent in any strategy to change consumer energy behavior. http://www.energypulse.net/centers/article/article_display.cfm?a_id=2064 Andy
|
It's easy to contribute articles, article proposals, commentary and analysis and be published online through Energy Central!
Sound interesting? Contact the editor for more information.