>[…]Those seeking capital for energy project investments need to do a better job presenting risk information to decision makers. Simple payback, return on investment, or even life-cycle-cost models do not provide sufficient information on risks and rewards. Investors cannot properly assess cash flow forecasts without a discussion of risks and risk mitigation.

For example, imagine two five-year streams of cash flow, one that generates a 15 percent return and one that generates a seven percent return. Which is better? The answer depends on the level of risk in achieving the forecasted benefits. If the seven percent return is based on seasoned existing cash flows it might be highly preferable to a 15 percent return predicated on executing construction, lease-up, and other risks.

The initial estimated energy cost savings is a critical value for investors considering energy projects. The risk side of this economic opportunity is that a building will fail to live up to performance expectations and the anticipated cost savings are not achieved.

[…] This causes the financial analyst to increase the required rate of return or to de-rate the savings before applying the financial model. This practice undermines the viability of energy projects.

Yet recent efforts have highlighted attempts to address these confidence deficiencies. The Environmental Defense Fund—through its Investor Confidence Project—is working with engineers, financial firms, insurers, regulators and utilities to unlock the flow of private capital into building efficiency investments. They are developing protocols so that energy and cost savings from retrofit projects can be predicted more accurately and realized more consistently. […]

The modeler utilizes building simulation software to project energy use and costs. By evaluating and comparing performance, the modeler determines the benefits of building siting, space layout, passive design elements, and energy-efficient components. The modeler also identifies occupant comfort issues. Building energy modeling (BEM) is often applied in the design and retrofit of buildings to evaluate proposed and alternate integrated-design solutions that satisfy project performance targets. To support investors, information must be provided that describes the risk associated with cost savings estimates and indirect benefits of improvements so their value beyond costs can be considered.

The level of risk associated with the energy savings for retrofit projects can be addressed in two general ways: 1) the approach for quantifying energy savings, and 2) methods for managing risk introduced by the modeling process. […]<

>"It can reduce electric costs by $400,000 a year. It is much cleaner. It is going to reduce carbon emissions. So it will help the environment," said Ed Kear, NYSERDA Senior Project Manager.<

>Water heating accounts for 15 to 20 percent of electric energy use in homes with electric water heating. Compared to traditional electric water heaters, heat pump water heaters can save homeowners up to 50 percent on energy costs while still delivering the same amount of hot water. Heat pump water heater technology works like a refrigerator, but in reverse – using fans and an evaporator to pull warmth from the surrounding air and transfer it to water in the storage tank.

"The work we accomplished in collaboration with our utility, manufacturer and retail partners in 2012 and 2013 sets the stage for new innovations, new features and improved product designs that will help transform the market," said Jill Reynolds, heat pump water heater initiative manager, NEEA. "Part of developing new technologies is testing product quality. Together with our partners we tested heat pump water heaters in the field and launched a regional marketing promotion across the Northwest. We see huge potential regional energy savings from this technology."

Fifty-five percent of Northwest homes have electric water heaters. If all of those homes used heat pump water heaters specifically designed for the Northern climate, the region could save nearly 500 average megawatts (aMW) by 2025, the equivalent to powering all the homes in Seattle and Boise combined each year.<

see here for rebates:  http://www.oregon.gov/energy/RESIDENTIAL/docs/2013RETCRates.pdf

>In the United States, buildings account for about 40% of the energy consumed and 38% of all CO2emissions, according to the U.S. Green Building Council. Cost-effective measures that cut the energy used by buildings represent a critical strategy to help building owners save money and curb the impacts of climate change.

“The updates related to existing and historic buildings clarify and further extend the code’s impact on the current building stock and will mean large energy savings growing over time,” said Jim Edelson, NBI Senior Manager of Codes and Policy. “Taken together, the approved code changes represent the most significant code revisions for energy consumption of existing buildings since the 1970s,” he said.

[…]

Code officials and local government representatives approved a new chapter in the IECC that has dedicated sections for additions, alterations, and repairs based on work by an International Code Council (ICC) Code Action Committee and the Northwest Energy Codes Group, both of which included NBI participation. The sections of the new chapter clearly define the activity types and describe how the provisions of the code apply. The Northwest proposal that was also approved adds further application guidance and enhanced requirements for many of the activities that are performed on existing buildings.<