|
| Back to Contents Page |
Home Energy Index |
About Home Energy |
| Home Energy Home Page | Back Issues of Home Energy |
Home Energy Magazine Online November/December 1992
TRENDS IN ENERGY
Trends in Energy is a bulletin of residential energy
conservation issues. It covers items ranging from the latest policy issues to
the newest energy technologies. If you have items that would be of interest,
please send them to: Trends Department, Home Energy, 2124 Kittredge St.,
No. 95, Berkeley, CA 94704.
Temperature Data Concerns in Short-Term Metering
Short-term evaluations of weatherization programs are becoming
increasingly popular because they produce timely results and are
less prone to the sample attrition problems often associated with
methods which require two years of utility data. Yet experience with
low-income weatherization evaluations in Virginia (See
" A Warm Wind Blows South"
HE Jan/Feb '92) and Indiana have raised questions about both
the quality of the temperature data typically used in short-term
monitoring approaches, and how they are used.
One common short-term approach uses elapsed timers to record
furnace "run time." A typical protocol involves installing the run-
time meter five or six weeks before the scheduled retrofit, at which
time the furnace firing rate and heated area of the house are also
determined. The weatherization agency then calls once a week,
asking the occupant to read the run-time meter over the phone. The
run time for the week is then multiplied by the furnace firing rate
and the product is divided by the heated area and the heating
degree-days (HDD) for the week, to get the energy intensity of the
house in Btu/ft2-DD. This is typically done for a six-week pre-retrofit
period and again for a six-week post-retrofit period. The savings, or
more precisely, the change in energy intensity, is then calculated
from the difference between pre- and post-retrofit
measurements.
More Than Checking a Thermometer
Program managers typically obtain the temperature data used in this
approach from local newspapers or directly from local weather
stations. In fact, proponents of run-time metering sometimes tout the
ease of using local temperature data as an advantage of this short-
term approach over methods such as the PRInceton Scorekeeping
Method (PRISM) which require large temperature files that must be
carefully prepared and continually updated. The assumption is that a
local data source, by virtue of its closer proximity to the house under
consideration, produces more accurate results. But data from Virginia
and Indiana do not support this assumption. The apparent advantage
of local temperature data is outweighed by its poorer quality.
In Indiana, when heating degree days are plotted against time for
the major weather stations, the plot curves follow very similar
patterns, with the more northern stations plotting a consistent
number of degree-days above stations to the south. However, data
from local stations do not plot nearly as neatly, and the difference is
often significant. Figure 1
shows heating degree-day data for a local weather station compared
to data from two major weather stations located approximately 60
miles north (Ft Wayne) and south (Indianapolis) of the local station
(Muncie). Accuracy would be sacrificed rather than gained by using
the local weather station in this case (see
Figure 1).
This is not an isolated occurrence: Data from six other local Indiana
weather stations in the same vicinity show similar variations from
the close-order tracking of the two major stations. Better data quality
can be expected from the larger stations because they use
continuously recording thermometers, whereas local stations
typically only have thermometers which record minimum and
maximum temperatures and are read only once a day. Further, the
recording equipment at a major station is in a carefully designed and
maintained housing to minimize extraneous influences, and receives
routine maintenance and calibration. Additionally, technicians
routinely check and verify the data from the major stations.
The difference between data from a continuous recording
thermometer and a minimum/maximum thermometer read once a
day, can be significant. For example, data from a local station using a
minimum/maximum thermometer read each morning at 7:00 a.m.
will in most cases record yesterday's maximum temperature for
today's date. This slight mismatch would probably not be noticeable
with monthly data, but can introduce errors when using weekly
data.
What do you do when you run out of Winter?
The quality of the temperature data is not the only concern. Weeks
without enough heating degree-days can cause problems, as the
relationship between heating consumption and degree-days has been
found not to hold in these warmer weeks. Factors such as mass
effects, solar and internal gains, and occupant behavior all become
relatively more important in weeks with few heating degree-days.
Unfortunately, such weeks occur all too often in short-term metering
studies. The typical research design calls for the pre-retrofit period
to fall in the late fall or early winter, followed by the post-retrofit
period in the spring. There is usually no problem with the pre-
retrofit data; if the weather is too warm, the agency postpones the
retrofit until it collects sufficient data. However, this slippage in the
schedule can easily push the post-retrofit into March, which, in many
climates, contains weeks without enough heating degree-days.
What constitutes a week with an insufficient number of heating
degree-days? Our work suggests that agencies should use caution
when using weeks averaging less than 20 heating degree-days per
day. If weeks such as these must be used, the program manager
should consider computation methods which weight degree-days
equally, rather than the above approach which weights weeks
equally.
Another factor is reference temperature. The usual approach for
calculating savings using run-time data is to use heating degrees
calculated using a base of 65 degrees F. Our research suggests that a
small error in reference temperature can result in large errors in
pre- and post-retrofit energy intensities. Moreover, this potential
error is larger in weeks with few heating degree-days, i.e., in weeks
in which the average daily temperature is close to the reference
temperature. An approach which finds the "best" reference
temperature for each house should improve the accuracy of run-time
metering results.
One technique, suggested by Michael Blasnik of Grass Roots Alliance
for a Solar Pennsylvania (GRASP), is to compute the average energy
intensity for a wide range of possible reference temperatures. The
"best" reference temperature is the one that yields the smallest
relative standard deviation of the weekly energy intensities. This
technique is relatively easy to apply using a spreadsheet, assuming
that temperature data for only a few major stations are used. In the
Indiana study, this method of selecting the reference temperature
resulted in significantly tighter confidence intervals (more precise
results). It appears to be an especially useful approach if the data
include weeks with few heating degree-days.
-William W. Hill
Bill Hill is a senior researcher with the Ball State University Center
for Energy Research, Education, and Service in Muncie, Ind.
Figure 1:

| Back to Contents Page |
Home Energy Index |
About Home Energy |
| Home Energy Home Page | Back Issues of Home Energy |
Home Energy can be reached at: contact@homeenergy.org
Home Energy magazine -- Please read our Copyright Notice
|