Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “FINANCING”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 163 records · Page 9
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2020

Optimizing an Integrated Renewable-Electrolysis System

Hydrogen is a versatile energy carrier that is used in a wide variety of chemical and industrial processes. Producing hydrogen using electrolysis can enable integration of multiple sectors including electricity, heating, and industrial sectors; however, the cost of producing hydrogen from electrolysis remains a challenge for encouraging greater adoption. With growing amounts of renewable generation on the California grid, there is downward pressure on wholesale electricity prices, particularly during the afternoon from photovoltaics (PV). These lower, or even potentially negative prices, challenge the business cases for new and existing PV plants. In addition, as the grid transitions to less flexible generation, there is greater need for system flexibility. To help improve the economics for both solar PV and hydrogen production using electrolyzers, we explore the benefit of combining PV and electrolysis systems. The optimal breakeven hydrogen production cost for six unique market participation configurations is calculated at six candidate locations where PV is already installed. The six market configurations include islanded, separated, retail, net energy metering (NEM), hybrid retail/wholesale and wholesale. Using the Revenue Operation and Device Optimization Model (RODeO) model, the optimal breakeven hydrogen price over the lifetime of the equipment is calculated. The cost includes production, storage, and compression in preparation for gaseous delivery trucks. Revenue streams include the sale of hydrogen, low carbon fuel standard (LCFS) credits, renewable electricity sold to the grid, and Renewable Energy Credits (REC). The costs included are the electricity costs, capital and fixed operation and maintenance cost (FOM) for the electrolyzer, PV, and storage and compression systems as well as taxes and financing costs. In addition, cost reductions are achieved through retail and wholesale rate optimization, by which electricity is purchased at the lowest price and sold, if possible, at the highest price. For all locations, the breakeven hydrogen production cost results show that, in the order of decreasing cost, the system configurations are islanded (highest), separated, NEM, retail, hybrid retail/wholesale, and wholesale (lowest). The resulting system design balances between the capital and maintenance cost components, the operation costs (i.e., electricity costs) and the additional market revenues. The integration of solar PV and electrolysis is shown to provide a mutually beneficial relationship. For PV, integration with electrolysis offers the potential to hedge against wholesale market price volatility, and integration with electrolysis may offer the potential to defer or avoid transmission investment to deliver power to the point-of-use and instead use it on-site. When compared with SMR without considering any renewable hydrogen premiums, this study finds that PV + Electrolysis systems with current costs are likely not competitive; however, with cost reductions for electrolysis equipment consistent with DOE projections, it was found that systems with wholesale market access would be competitive, largely on account of both low capital costs and low-cost electricity. The electrolysis units can provide greater flexibility than is required based on retail rate optimization, so there is an opportunity for a utility or CAISO to increase system flexibility with PV + Electrolysis systems in return for commensurate compensation. In this way, there are potentially several solutions that fall between the hybrid configuration and the wholesale configuration that could provide sufficient compensation for a PV + Electrolysis unit to compete with SMR while also providing greater flexibility to the grid.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
DOE OSTI2020

ION Engineering Commercial Carbon Capture Design & Costing (C3DC) (Final Report)

ION Engineering LLC (ION) has coupled its proven, solvent-based CO 2 capture technology with an exceptionally qualified design and engineering team to complete a pre FEED for a 300-megawatt equivalent commercial-scale CO 2 capture plant for Gerald Gentleman Station’s (GGS) Generation Unit 2 (GGS2). The remarkable team was comprised of ION, Nebraska Public Power District (NPPD), Sargent & Lundy (S&L) with continued support from Koch Modular Process Systems (KMPS), and Siemens. The overall objective of the project was to provide the engineering design and cost estimate at an American Association of Cost Engineers (AACE) Class 3 estimate, resulting in accuracy ranges of -20 to +30% for the capital cost estimate. The project team was successful in completing this objective and was able to overcome the challenges that were presented during the process. A conservative interest rate of 7.0% with a financing term of 20 years was used based on interest rates utilized by S&L for this level of study. The resulting annualization factor is multiplied by the total EPC cost to calculate an annualized capital expenditure. It is estimated that the carbon capture facility treating a 300 MWe slipstream will capture 1.9 million tonnes per year of CO 2 at a capacity factor of 85%. The resulting cost of capture for the CO 2 island was determined to be $\$$36.55/tonne. Utilizing an interest rate of 4.5%, supported by historical rates for previous large capital projects in the power industry, reduces the cost of capture to $32.52/tonne. These cost of capture numbers continue to further ION’s case for commercial deployment of ION’s solvent technology.

20 FOSSIL-FUELED POWER PLANTS↗
DOE OSTI2020

First Look West (FLoW 2.0) (Final Technical Report for Closeout)

DOE’s Cleantech UP was an annual business plan competition, operating nationally between 2015 and 2018 through eight regional nodes that included Caltech’s FLOW. Cleantech UP focused on supporting university students at all levels creating cleantech startups. FLOW operated nationally with a focus on California. In support of the DOE’s objectives FLOW developed an immersive five point program that targeted major gaps in the educational support and practical resources available to scientists and engineers starting their first cleantech companies that prevented such young innovators from becoming entrepreneurs. Specifically, the FLOW program augmented the number of participants entering the energy entrepreneurship pipeline via the Cleantech UP competition; helped the US remain competitive by increasing the viability and financing potential of these cleantech companies started by young academics; and helped build the regional, state and national infrastructure that spurs and supports entrepreneurship. Each year the FLOW featured two major judging rounds for candidates drawn from as many as 80 applicants annually, providing essential experience and feedback that helped define the direction of these young entrepreneurs. The FLOW winners competed at the DOE’s national event, and FLOW companies took the top prize twice in the total history of the DOE program which was started in 2011.

96 KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT AND PRESERVATION↗
DOE OSTI2020

Montana Community-Scale Solar Strategy Project (Final Technical Report)

Grid-tied solar photovoltaic (PV) development began gradually in Montana, initially taking root in the early 2000s, largely in the form of small residential systems, rarely larger than two kilowatts. Utility support for solar technology through public benefit funding triggered the installation of the state’s first solar PV installations on community-owned facilities including schools, libraries, fire stations and local government buildings in the mid-2000s. By 2016, solar PV installations totaled approximately 28 megawatts of installed capacity, generating less than 0.05% of electricity sold in Montana. Montana’s solar fleet in 2016 included 17 megawatts of utility-scale solar farms, and three shared solar projects developed by rural electric cooperatives that ranged from 25 to 50 kilowatts in size. However, with only 3,000 households utilizing solar PV, either through an on-site installation or participation in a shared solar project, the potential benefits and reach of solar technology was limited. The Montana Solar Community Project (MSCP) was developed by the Montana Energy Office (MEO) at the Department of Environmental Quality in order to implement a “community-scale” solar energy strategy for the state that would cost-effectively expand Montanans’ access to solar PV. This project defines three types of community-scale solar projects: shared solar, community-sited solar, and group purchasing programs. The MSCP project conducted research and stakeholder engagement that helped to inform and develop model community-scale initiatives and an overarching community-scale solar strategy for Montana. Specifically, the project included a solar market assessment, stakeholder meetings across Montana, development of a menu of community-scale solar options, a study of solar potential on schools, community solar market research, and community-scale project implementation support. MSCP activities were successful in implementing solar projects and supporting solar development in communities across Montana. Project activities realized 280 kW of newly installed solar from two solarize programs, a shared solar array at a rural electric cooperative, and a solar array atop a Bozeman high school. The community-scale project implementation support and Solar on Schools components of the project resulted directly in the analysis and design of nearly 2 MW of distributed solar systems across the state. The Solar on Schools analysis alone produced solar designs for 25 schools, representing 920.8 kW of solar potential. Many of the deliverables from this project provide guidance on future development of community-scale solar in Montana, and resulted in a number of important conclusions about community-scale solar in Montana. There is strong interest in community-scale solar in Montana, as noted during stakeholder meetings, in response to solar market research surveys, and as seen by applications for implementation support grants provided by MEO. Project activities also suggest that Montanans demonstrated a desire and need for more information about solar energy technology, solar financing options, and the state’s policy and regulatory framework. Additionally, the project found that schools will be key partners for future community-scale solar programs. In addition to being excellent hosts for solar arrays, schools have the opportunity to use the installation of a solar array to develop educational materials and curricula to educate Montana’s future leaders about these technologies, which can be shared and replicated across the state. Project activities laid a clear path forward for solar energy in Montana. Certain activities have concrete next steps. For example, numerous solar arrays were designed for schools and other public buildings around the state. Many of those designs will be used as soon as funding becomes available. Other activities have less developed next steps, though lay the foundation for future work. The solar market assessment, solar market research, and community stakeholder meetings are good examples. These documents can be used as stepping stones to increase renewable energy education, increase stakeholder outreach, and support communities as they seek to develop community-scale solar projects.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2020

Benchmarking Utility-Scale PV Operational Expenses and Project Lifetimes: Results from a Survey of U.S. Solar Industry Professionals

This paper draws on a survey of solar industry professionals and other sources to clarify trends in the expected useful life and operational expenditure (OpEx) of utility-scale photovoltaic (PV) plants in the United States. Solar project developers, sponsors, long-term owners, and consultants have increased project-life assumptions over time, from an average of ~21.5 years in 2007 to ~32.5 years in 2019. Current assumptions range from 25 years to more than 35 years depending on the organization; 17 out of 19 organizations surveyed or reviewed use 30 years or more. Levelized, lifetime OpEx estimates have declined from an average of ~$\$$35/kW DC -yr for projects built in 2007 to an average of ~$\$$17/kW DC -yr in 2019. Across 13 sources, the range in average lifetime OpEx for projects built in 2019 is broad, from $\$$13 to $\$$25/kW DC -yr. Operations and maintenance (O&M) costs—one component of OpEx—have declined precipitously in recent years, to $\$$5-8/kW DC -yr in many cases. Property taxes and land lease costs are highly variable across sites, but on average are—together—of similar magnitude. Other OpEx line items include security, insurance, and asset management. Given 2007-2009 values for not only project life and OpEx but also other drivers of the levelized cost of energy (LCOE, excluding the investment tax credit), the LCOE for utility-scale PV projects built from 2007 through 2009 averaged $\$$305 /MWh. Using 2019 values for all parameters yields an average LCOE of $\$$51 /MWh. The decline in LCOE from $\$$305 /MWh to $\$$51 /MWh was predominantly caused by reductions in up-front expenditures (and, to a much lesser extent, by changes in capacity factors, financing costs, and tax rates), but 9% ($\$$22 /MWh) of the overall decline is due to improvements in project life and OpEx. Project life extensions and OpEx reductions have had similarly sized impacts on LCOE over this period, at $\$$11 /MWh each. Had project life and OpEx not improved over the last decade, LCOE in 2019 would have instead been $\$$73 /MWh—43% higher. Given the limited quantity and comparability of previously available data on these cost drivers, the data and trends presented here may inform assumptions used by electric system planners, modelers, and analysts. The results may also provide useful benchmarks to the solar industry, helping developers and assets owners compare their expectations for project life and OpEx with those of their peers.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2020

Pumped Storage Hydropower (PSH) FAST Commissioning Prize Technical Analysis

The US energy landscape has undergone major changes over the past 10 years and will continue to see significant changes in future decades as the power grid increases its reliance on variable renewable energy resources. Because of the inherent variability of these resources, renewable energy growth may require additional energy storage capacity to provide flexible load-following capabilities and other grid services that can quickly adjust to changes in energy demand and generation. Pumped storage hydropower (PSH)—one such energy storage technology—uses pumps to convey water from a lower reservoir to an upper reservoir for energy storage and releases water back to the lower reservoir via a powerhouse for hydropower generation. PSH facility pump and generation cycling often follows economic and energy demand conditions. Across the United States, 43 PSH facilities are in operation and 55 projects are in various permitting or licensing stages. Altogether, the 43 operational projects provide the wide majority (95%) of utility-scale electricity storage in the United States. These facilities also provide significant power and nonpower grid benefits, including large-scale electrical system reserve capacity, grid reliability support, and electricity supply-demand balancing through quick-response capabilities and operational flexibility. PSH systems can accomplish these at a scale (e.g., size) and cost that makes these systems highly attractive from a technical standpoint. Although these research concepts are still in their infancy, they demonstrate promising potential as future PSH energy storage technologies. Although PSH has many advantages, development in the United States has effectively stalled since the 1990s, partially because of the magnitude of project costs and financing interest during development and construction, the length of time from project investment until project revenue begins, permitting challenges, construction risks, competition from other storage technologies (e.g., batteries, hydrogen storage), and electricity market evolution and uncertainty. In short, the time, cost, and risk associated with modern PSH development have resulted in limited growth in the United States recently, despite the growing energy storage demand stemming from increased wind and solar power deployment. Technology innovation is needed to help reduce PSH commissioning time, cost, and risk, particularly during the post-licensing phase of project development. To address challenges facing the PSH industry and to improve PSH commissioning timelines, the US Department of Energy (DOE) Water Power Technologies Office (WPTO) initiated the PSH Furthering Advancements to Shorten Time to (FAST) Commissioning Prize project.

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2020

Addressing Soiling: From Interface Chemistry to Practicality

Natural soiling has reduced the energy output of photovoltaic (PV) systems since the technology was first used. Projecting even a small average annual soiling loss translates to billions of dollars in annual lost revenue worldwide. Production losses due to soiling can be very high in some locations, substantially increasing the levelized cost of electricity (LCOE) due to lost power production, increased operating and maintenance costs, and/or increased finance cost due to the uncertainty. Furthermore, although soiling has been discussed in the literature for more than 70 years, solutions to many problems are still needed. The National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) is working with the PV industry to develop the tools/knowledge so that the effects of soiling can be predicted for different environmental conditions and cost-effective mitigation can be implemented. For this project, NREL performed a number of research and development tasks/subtasks in the following general areas to 1) predict PV module soiling losses based on environmental factors at a PV installation and from its energy production data, 2) quantitatively measure the adhesion forces to understand the physics enabling soiling, and 3) develop related standards on PV module coatings and artificial soiling. At the inception of the project, the PV industry considered these efforts to be the most important and immediate soiling issues that we could address to have the highest impact on LCOE. These focused efforts have led to outstanding accomplishments that have been communicated and very well received by the community.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2020

User's Manual for the FE/NETL Onshore CO 2 EOR Cost Model, Version 1

This user's manual describes the conceptual and mathematical basis for the FE/NETL Onshore CO 2 EOR Cost Model (a Fortran program). The model performs a cash flow analysis to estimate the cost of implementing CO 2 EOR using supercritical CO 2 by incorporating oil field performance outputs for a pattern from the FE/NETL CO 2 Prophet Model (available on NETL's website along with its associated user's manuals under the Collection Name: FE/NETL CO 2 Prophet Model) and implementing patterns to develop an oil field for CO 2 EOR. The model calculates capital costs, operation and maintenance costs, and financing costs. The user’s manual also describes how to run the FE/NETL Onshore CO 2 EOR Cost Model, along with the model’s file structure, inputs and outputs. The FE/NETL Onshore CO 2 EOR Cost Model is available on NETL's website under the Collection Name: FE/NETL Onshore CO 2 EOR Cost Model.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2020

Industrial Energy Management During a Pandemic: Lessons Learned from DOE Better Plants Program Partners

The COVID-19 pandemic is causing many challenges for manufacturers, especially those that depend on workers whose jobs cannot be performed remotely. This has detrimentally impacted the energy management workforce, energy support system performance, as well as operations and supply chains.This article discusses four primary challenges for industrial energy management caused by the pandemic, strained budget for energy projects, increased energy intensity caused by low production rates and other safety practices, limited access to energy systems, and the lost knowledge and experience of senior staff. This article also proposes some potential solutions for these challenges that include implementing no- and low-cost energy conservation measures, adopting alternative financing options, improving shutdown procedures, reducing baseloads, creating an effective online energy-monitoring system, performing virtual energy assessments, building a robust EnMS, and attending online and in-person training events.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2020

Working in Partnership for a Resilient and Innovative Energy Future (Progress Report 2020)

This annual report from the Better Buildings Initiative contains information about partner projects, energy and cost savings, and new program initiatives. The 2020 Progress Report also recognizes the latest group of Better Buildings Goal Achievers - organizations who have met their energy, water, and/or financing commitments under the Better Buildings or Better Plants Challenge.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2020

Assessment of the Dominican Republic’s Commercial and Industrial Scale Energy Efficiency Sector

In this paper the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) explores the commercial and industrial (C&I) energy efficiency market in the Dominican Republic, including the market’s current status. During NREL’s engagement with its Dominican counterparts, NREL noted market gaps, identified by both public and private sector market actors, that became the focus of this report. The intent is two-fold. First, to assist potential customers, project financing institutions, and various government agencies understand where the energy efficiency sector stands, in August 2020. Second to help them recognize the scope, scale, and opportunity for energy savings from untapped potential large reductions in energy expenditures. This research identified how savings could be captured through improvements to the enabling environment, technical capacity, and level of activity in the sector. Moreover, it determined that through taking action to catalyze energy efficiency investment, the government could make significant progress towards its self-declared NDC goals, and result in tens of millions of dollars in savings across the Dominican economy for both the private and public sectors.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2020

Pumped Storage Hydropower FAST Commissioning Technical Analysis

This report is designed to address barriers and solutions to modern pumped storage hydropower (PSH) development by establishing baseline project development knowledge, defining key aspects of project development, and identifying opportunities to reduce project timelines, costs, and risks. This report’s scope includes post-licensing activities and excludes factors related to permitting or licensing. The U.S. PSH fleet is composed of 43 projects providing the majority (95%) of utility-scale electricity storage in the US. However, only one new PSH facility has become operational in the past 20 years. Several factors contribute to diminishing PSH growth in the US, including the magnitude of project costs and financing interest during development and construction; the length of time from project investment until project revenue; permitting challenges and construction risks; competition from other storage technologies; and unrecognized energy storage valuation. Although innovative PSH concepts (including underground, small, and modular systems) have been investigated, widespread application has yet to occur. In short, the time, cost, and risk associated with modern PSH development has resulted in limited recent growth in the United States, despite the rising energy storage demand from increased deployment of variable renewable technologies. To address these challenges, the US Department of Energy’s (DOE) Water Power Technologies Office initiated the PSH Furthering Advancements to Shorten Time to (FAST) Commissioning project, aimed at catalyzing new solutions, designs, and strategies to accelerate PSH development. This report uses available data from previous license applications, ongoing project cost data, and other global PSH project information based on a typical closed-loop PSH project.

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2020

Guidance and Recommendations for Streamlining Reporting for Federal Energy and Water Efficiency Projects

Federal agencies are required to report on their progress in meeting various energy and water management requirements. These reporting requirements encompass energy and water projects at federal facilities, including projects that are alternatively financed, e.g., conducted through energy savings performance contracts (ESPCs) or utility energy service contracts (UESCs). The purpose of this guidance is to provide recommendations to streamline federal agency reporting. The guidance recommends the use of eProject Builder (ePB), a project development and archiving tool for energy projects. ePB carries additional value in its simplification of federal agency reporting by dovetailing with the Federal Energy Management Program’s (FEMP’s) EISA 432 Compliance Tracking System (CTS).

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2021

The Outdoor Lighting Accelerator: Lighting the Way Forward (Final Report)

This final report outlines the work performed by DOE’s Better Buildings Outdoor Lighting Accelerator, through which cities, states, and regional groups explored best practice approaches to improve the way communities apply advanced outdoor lighting technologies in parking lots and highways. It describes the related work of participants, including designing regional bonding authorities or joint purchasing programs, financing streetlight upgrades, and more.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2020

Insurance in the Operation of Photovoltaic Plants

This paper provides an overview of property and casualty insurance industry functions, insurance terminology descriptions, and special insurance coverage considerations for photovoltaic (PV) system owners, asset managers, operators, PV operation-and-maintenance service providers, utilities, and other parties. The paper includes the results of an analysis of 6 years of property and casualty insurance claims for PV equipment and discusses considerations for purchasing property and casualty insurance for owners and operators of PV systems. PV is a relatively new asset type, and insurance companies are revisiting rates and offerings as actuarial data become available. This paper seeks to inform decisions that optimize the balance of the cost of insurance with enabling benefits to finance, permitting, utility connections, and the operation of PV plants.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2020

Data-Driven Understanding of Low-to-Moderate Income Customers’ Adoption and Financial Qualification in Community Solar (Final Technical Report)

When Solstice began working in the community solar industry, it quickly became clear that there was a wide disparity along race and class lines in terms of what kind of household traditional solar offerings benefited. Solstice is an organization that aligns itself to the principles of a Just Transition, or the concept that a transition to a green economy should benefit and prioritize historically marginalized groups of people. Given that low-income communities are disproportionately burdened by our current polluting fossil fuel economy, Solstice set out to investigate the root causes of the exclusion of low to moderate income (LMI) households in the community solar market. As we worked more and more with financiers, developers, and LMI households, we recognized that significant barriers to entry in a developer-owned project were credit threshold requirements. A FICO score of 750 and higher discriminates against LMI households that are not financially stable enough to take on multiple lines of credit (or who may not have been deemed credit worthy enough to access a line of credit) yet who may have been reliable utility customers. As Solstice began looking further into preliminary data and speaking to community-based organizations (CBOs) that serve LMI households, we found our hypothesis to be worth investigating; there was indeed a subset of LMI households with poor FICO scores (or no FICO score at all) that had perfect bill payment history. Though initially Solstice was intent on gathering a body of data to prove or disprove this hypothesis, we were also concerned that all this proof of a financially stable and reliable customer was not being incorporated into FICO, and wondered if such a score would be possible. After preliminary research into the existence of alternative scores, Solstice realized that many mission-driven lending institutions rely on alternative metrics that are formulated for their specific industry. However, we also realized that community solar did not have an alternative credit underwriting mechanism, though there was great need from solar financiers for one. We anticipated that the creation of an EnergyScore would contribute to financiers’ need to qualify more people, as these entities are desperately looking for ways to lower the cost of customer acquisition. FICO turns away nearly 50% of potential customers (according to our own acquisition experience), and much of the community solar industry is realizing that FICO is not the perfect qualifying mechanism. Additionally, with a grounding in energy justice, just transitions, and climate justice, Solstice recognizes the need for a solution that addresses a more urgent need for LMI households to access renewable energy savings and relieve energy burdens. With funding from the Department of Energy, we gathered the data necessary to build the EnergyScore, reached out to mission-driven developers willing to test the metric, and secured several demonstration projects to pilot the EnergyScore. After acquiring customers for these demo projects using the EnergyScore, we will be continuously collecting customer payment behavior data. Though it goes beyond the scope of this project, we plan to disseminate this de-identified data with the wider community solar industry, which includes not only financiers and developers, but other mission-driven nonprofits, solar cooperatives, community-based organizations, environmental justice activists, and academics. While we intend to disprove the notion that LMI households cannot be included in projects without acutely increasing the risk to project finances, we also hope the data can be used to negotiate better pricing of systems and terms of ownership for community groups seeking to build inclusive projects.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2021

DOE Deep Energy Retrofit Cost Survey

A survey was conducted by the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory on deep energy retrofit (DER) market drivers, opportunities, and challenges. The survey was part a research study sponsored by the U.S. Department of Energy to gather information on the costs of DER from home performance contractors and stakeholders. Cost data was gathered from DER projects that use a comprehensive, whole-home approach to drastically reduce energy use and improve performance. DER projects often aim at reducing energy use by 50% or more. In addition, these projects can improve home comfort and potentially benefiting occupant health. Yet, market adoption of DER has been limited. Major limiting factors include complex projects, high costs, perceived risks, extensive disruption, and unfamiliar work scopes to some contractors. In order to better understand what motivates and deters DER projects in today’s market, a survey was conducted to gather this information, and to learn about promising approaches and technologies from the industry perspective. Past surveys on homeowners and home energy performance professionals have studied the motivations and barriers of energy efficiency retrofits. Two surveys of home energy performance professionals were conducted in recent years. The Resources for the Future (RFF) Home Energy Audit and Retrofit Survey was conducted in 2011 by recruiting energy auditors and retrofit installers through members of Efficiency First and Building Performance Institute (BPI) accredited contractors. The survey asked about the business and services that respondents provide, how often homeowners follow their recommendations to retrofit their homes, and the respondents’ opinion on barriers faced by the industry. The survey found that not enough homeowners know about energy audits, but more importantly, it is the high cost of retrofits compared to low energy prices that is responsible for few energy audits and retrofits being completed. The RESNET Deep Retrofit Industry Stakeholder Survey was conducted shortly after launching of the EnergySmart Home Performance Team program. The EnergySmart Team program involves a formal agreement among allied contractors who are engaged in high performance retrofits. Using this allied team approach, teams can pool their expertise and provide each other with customer referrals. The survey asked EnergySmart Team members and outside stakeholders on questions about market and technical barriers in performing home energy retrofits. Survey respondents identified lack of consumer awareness and lack of affordable financing for consumers as the leading market barriers to home energy retrofits. In their written comments, many survey respondents also echoed that the high costs of retrofit compared to low energy prices is a market barrier. Respondents found “certain housing characteristics that prevent effective retrofit” and “energy analysis software inaccuracy or limitations” are the two leading technical barriers. Their choices for technical barriers were reflective of the energy rater/auditor role played by the majority (78%) of the survey respondents. In comparison to past surveys, this work aimed to gather inputs from a broader segment of the home performance industry to identify the opportunities and barriers faced by DERs from all perspectives. The survey asks for project costs to help breakdown the high costs of DERs. This survey is also motivated by a need to better understand the role of DERs in reducing energy use by the residential sectors and meeting climate goals. The survey is designed towards obtaining more substantive inputs from survey respondents by encouraging written comments, rather than setting the goal to reach a large number of respondents. We took this approach because DER is currently still a niche market, so it is more valuable to gather in-depth inputs from individuals who are performing this work rather than getting to the masses.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2021

Emerging Pathways to Upgrade the US Housing Stock: A Review of the Home Energy Upgrade Literature

The residential buildings sector is responsible for about 20% of total US energy use. In order to achieve climate goals, we need ways to reduce carbon emissions and energy use in this sector. In addition, resiliency, electric grid stability, emergency survivability and other energy and building-related issues are becoming increasingly important challenges. New homes in most of the US meet various energy codes and are reasonably energy efficient. However, the vast majority of energy use is from existing homes that were not required to conform to energy performance requirements. It is becoming imperative to reach as many of these existing homes as possible and find ways to improve their energy-related performance. This must be done in such a way that it meets the needs and desires of homeowners and building occupants, as well as those of the contractors and design professionals engaged in doing the upgrades themselves. Energy retrofits of homes started in the 1970’s in response to the energy crisis, however, these retrofits were very limited in scope and relatively few homes were upgraded. Those homes that have been upgraded generally still have much scope for improvement. A huge effort is needed to get to scale to address the energy use in housing. The target population is effectively every home in the country, whether a large suburban single-family home, or a small downtown apartment. In order to provide a framework for analysis and the basis for plans to get to large-scale retrofits of homes, this literature review summarizes the state-of-the art in the US buildings industry. It identifies where more research, engineering, or technology is needed, as well as relevant industry trends, such as electrification, one-stop shop program design and others. It also examines other key topics, such as availability of financing, minimizing household disruption, and engaging home owners and occupants. This literature review builds on a similar review from several years ago (Less and Walker, 2014). The current review focuses on efforts in the intervening years. This literature review is part of a larger DOE study of deep energy upgrades that includes industry surveys and development of cost-stack analyses. For this review, we gathered data not just from the published literature, but also from practitioners in conjunction with other aspects of the larger DOE study. In some cases, we refer to comments from specific individuals or companies, or refer to specific products by name. This is not intended as an endorsement, but rather to provide clarity on sources of information and examples of relevant technologies.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗