The Energy Collective

The world's best thinkers on energy and climate

  • Home
  • Post Here
  • Columns
    • Electricity Markets & Policy Group
    • Full Spectrum
    • Energy and Policy Developments
    • Game Changers
    • Energy for Human Development
    • Seeking Consensus
    • Green Growth
    • New Energy Voices
  • Fuels
    • Oil
    • Wind
    • Nuclear Power
    • Coal
    • Natural Gas
    • Solar Power
    • Renewables
    • Biofuels
    • Geothermal Energy
    • Wave & Tidal
    • Hydro Power
  • Environment
    • Carbon and De-carbonization
    • International Climate Conferences
    • Sustainability
    • Climate
    • Public Health
    • Water
    • Recycling
  • Grid
    • Smart Grid
    • Electricity
  • Tech
    • Cleantech
    • Green Building
    • Storage
    • Rare Earth Minerals
  • Business and Economy
    • Cap-and-Trade
    • Agriculture
    • Efficiency
    • Green Business
    • Utilities
    • Finance
    • Green Jobs
    • Subsidies
    • Risk Management
  • Politics
    • Environmental Policy
    • Energy Security
    • Communications and Messaging
    • China
  • Transport
  • Help
    • FAQ
  • Account
    • Login
    • Register

Debunking Common Energy Efficiency Myths

November 25, 2011 by Sara Hayes

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Energy efficiency can be difficult to conceptualize. There’s not a representative device like a solar panel or wind turbine. Rather, it’s a collection of technologies, strategies, and policies involving our houses, businesses, transportation, and behavior that improve the way we live. There are often misunderstandings or “myths” about how we verify that energy efficiency is working and measure what benefits it’s providing. Four measurement and verification (M&V) myths are debunked below.

MYTH 1: Energy efficiency is an idea, a call to action, not a tangible thing. There is no reliable standard for measuring or verifying energy savings resulting from efficiency measures.

The lack of a national standard for M&V of efficiency-driven energy savings has left states to develop their own protocols. These efforts have resulted in a well-developed and rich source of experience and information that can inform the development of a national standard. Currently more than half of all U.S. states have efficiency targets and are measuring their progress towards achieving those goals. In addition to states, utilities have been demonstrating energy savings resulting from efficiency measures for decades. In many cases, a utility’s authority to collect revenues is based on its ability to verify, with substantial certainty, the amount of savings that occurred. This has caused utilities to invest significant resources into solid M&V methods that stand up to the scrutiny of regulators and ratepayer advocates. 

MYTH 2: Lots of factors affect energy use making it impossible to tell when a change in energy consumption is due to efficiency improvements or other factors.

There is an entire profession of highly experienced energy program evaluators that has developed over the last 30 years, and they utilize evaluation methodologies that have repeatedly been accepted in utility regulatory proceedings across the nation. When an old, inefficient piece of equipment (e.g., a furnace, motor, refrigerator, etc.) is replaced with a new, high-efficiency model, the energy savings that result can be measured quite reliably. While other factors (e.g., the weather, economic activity) may affect total energy use, statistical methods have been developed to separate out these effects. The evaluation methodologies that have been developed can measure and verify the energy savings from energy efficiency measures and programs with a great deal of confidence. 

MYTH 3: I can’t rely on efficiency to meet energy demands because I can’t call on it when I need it and I don’t know how much I’m going to get when I do.

Efficiency is not a “demand response” approach or a peaking resource that is “called upon” when demand is high. Rather, it is a “baseload” resource that once put into practice continues to produce energy savings at all times the device is in operation. The lifetime of an efficiency resource will depend on the type of measure that is installed (e.g., CFL bulbs, a new air conditioner, adding insulation to a building, etc.), and energy savings can reliably last anywhere from 3 to 20 years or more. Furthermore, while many clean energy sources rely on external conditions that cannot be controlled, efficiency measures produce energy savings year-round regardless of the weather. 

MYTH 4: Potential benefits from energy efficiency are small and aren’t worth measuring.

Energy efficiency is our nation’s greatest energy resource. Energy savings from efficiency are real and save Americans money. Since 1970, efficiency improvements have reduced U.S. energy costs by about $700 billion from what they would have otherwise been in 2005 alone. Those dollars are reinvested in the economy to support businesses and create jobs. Available cost-effective energy savings from all sectors is predicted to range from 16 to 30% of current consumption by 2025 (see here for more information). 

To download the fact sheet, click here.

Related posts:

Microsoft: ‘Computational Demand Response’ Could Lower Data Center Emissions 99 Percent To Advance Efficiency, State Governments Go Local How Does Energy Efficiency Create Jobs? DOE Launches $100 Electric Submeter Challenge

Sara Hayes

Filed Under: Efficiency Tagged With: demand response, energy efficiency, myths

  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of

The Energy Collective Columns

Full Spectrum: Energy Analysis and Commentary with Jesse JenkinsEnergy and Policy Developments with John Miller
Game Changers column badgeEnergy for Human Development Column
Seeking Consensus with Schalk CloeteGreen Growth with Silvio Marcacci
New Energy VoicesMore coming soon...

Latest comments

  • Bas Gresnigt on Closing Nuclear Reactors in Ohio and Pennsylvania Will Thwart Climate Goals What has been shown is that nuclear power plants that do more load following run into a variety of p (April 20, 2018 at 3:15 PM)
  • Mark Heslep on Closing Nuclear Reactors in Ohio and Pennsylvania Will Thwart Climate Goals "History shows that nuclear can deliver only base load. Hence it needs fossil plants to deliver the (April 20, 2018 at 2:09 PM)
  • Bas Gresnigt on Closing Nuclear Reactors in Ohio and Pennsylvania Will Thwart Climate Goals Fraunhofer institute gathered real data on the subject. In their graph (showed below) you can see th (April 20, 2018 at 1:59 PM)
  • Bas Gresnigt on New Solar Capacity Exceeded All Other Fuel Sources Combined in 2017, Study Finds Bob, Why so negative? Once the costs of nuclear were less than fossil. Partly thanks to in hindsig (April 20, 2018 at 11:05 AM)

Advisory Panel

About the panel

Scott Edward Anderson is a consultant, blogger, and media commentator who blogs at The Green Skeptic. More »


Christine Hertzog is a consultant, author, and a professional explainer focused on Smart Grid. More »


Elias Hinckley is a strategic advisor on energy finance and energy policy to investors, energy companies and governments More »


Gary Hunt Gary is an Executive-in-Residence at Deloitte Investments with extensive experience in the energy & utility industries. More »


Jesse Jenkins is a graduate student and researcher at MIT with expertise in energy technology, policy, and innovation. More »


Jim Pierobon helps trade associations/NGOs, government agencies and companies communicate about cleaner energy solutions. More »


Geoffrey Styles is Managing Director of GSW Strategy Group, LLC and an award-winning blogger. More »


Featured Contributors

Rod Adams

Scott Edward Anderson

Charles Barton

Barry Brook

Steven Cohen

Dick DeBlasio

Senator Pete Domenici

Simon Donner

Big Gav

Michael Giberson

Kirsty Gogan

James Greenberger

Lou Grinzo

Jesse Grossman

Tyler Hamilton

Christine Hertzog

David Hone

Gary Hunt

Jesse Jenkins

Sonita Lontoh

Rebecca Lutzy

Jesse Parent

Jim Pierobon

Vicky Portwain

Willem Post

Tom Raftery

Joseph Romm

Robert Stavins

Robert Stowe

Geoffrey Styles

Alex Trembath

Gernot Wagner

Dan Yurman

 

 

 

Follow Us

32-linkedin 32-facebook 32-twitter 32-rss

Content for personal use only. Distribution prohibited. Republication in part or in whole is strictly prohibited. © All rights reserved Energy Central © 2018

Recent Comments

  • Bas Gresnigt on Closing Nuclear Reactors in Ohio and Pennsylvania Will Thwart Climate Goals
  • Mark Heslep on Closing Nuclear Reactors in Ohio and Pennsylvania Will Thwart Climate Goals
  • Bas Gresnigt on Closing Nuclear Reactors in Ohio and Pennsylvania Will Thwart Climate Goals

Recent Posts

  • UK Will Legislate Net-Zero Carbon Emissions Target, Says Minister
  • Why EPA’s U-Turn on Auto Efficiency Rules Gives China the Upper Hand
  • U.S. Natural Gas Production and Consumption Increase in Nearly All AEO2018 Cases

Useful Pages

  • Terms of Use
  • Comments Policy
  • Privacy & Cookies
  • Help
  • About and Contact Us
Copyright © 2018 Energy Central. All Rights Reserved
This site uses cookies, for a number of reasons. By continuing to use this website you accept the use of cookies. Find out more.