Session 1 Managing Water and Energy Use in Buildings: Parallels, Complements, and Trade-offs Gary Wolff, Pacific Institute Session Moderator David Broustis, City of Seattle Session Moderator Jim Lutz, LBNL Discussant John Koeller, CUWCC Consultant [invited] Discussant   A growing number of specialists in water conservation and energy efficiency recognize the close linkages between water and energy systems, from resource extraction to end-use – and even beyond the initial end-user, in the cases of non-consumptive water use or thermal energy recovery and heat cascading. However, it would be far too demanding for one Roundtable session (and beyond the scope of this Summer Study) to explore all of these links. Instead, this Roundtable will focus on water and energy use in buildings, and especially on the linkages – positive and negative – between measures that save or manage energy and those that save water. At least half of the session will be reserved for participatory audience discussion. To provide an initial framework, the Discussion Leaders will offer comments from their unique analysis and program perspectives: Gary Wolff will discuss the buildings- and energy-related aspects of his recent study of urban water use and conservation in California, and forthcoming analyses of energy and water use. David Broustis will offer his perspectives as a senior program manager for urban water conservation closely linked to energy management, and as a leading advocate for a national campaign to label water-efficient products. In response to the participants' interests, the Roundtable will explore energy-and-water topics including (but not limited to) the following: Hot water distribution - how large are thermal losses and wasted water, and their respective costs, in residential and commercial building DHW distribution systems? What measures could reduce either or both types of distribution system losses? Cooling towers - What are the tradeoffs between energy savings and water consumption for typical cooling towers? What changes in tower design and operation can improve the terms of these tradeoffs (i.e., jointly optimize for energy and water)? Water pumping systems in buildings - what systems and component efficiency improvements can reduce water pumping loads in buildings (or shift them off-peak), including pumping for heating and cooling, DHW, fire safety, landscape watering, decorative water features, etc.? What are the energy savings associated with onsite recovery and reuse of graywater and rainwater? How do landscape choices affect water use and energy (including embodied and off-site energy for fertilizers, pesticides, etc.)? Data - How well can we characterize (quantify) the relationships between water and energy end-uses in residential and commercial buildings? What key data are missing? Are there opportunities to collect energy data through water studies or vice-versa? Analysis methods - What parallels are there between measuring and analyzing energy and water, in terms of end-use, time of use, savings potential, demand-shifting, economics, markets, and regulatory policy? Are any of the tools, methods, or perspectives transferable from one sphere to the other? Economics - How much do energy costs (on-site for heating, and indirect for supply and treatment) contribute to the value of saved water in buildings? Conversely, how much do water costs (for producing power or fuel) contribute to the value of saved energy? Policies and programs - What are some concrete suggestions for more closely linking energy efficiency and water efficiency? (For example: improvements in Energy Star ratings for hot-water-using appliances, or changes to the LEED rating system for energy and water efficiency in sustainable buildings.) Discussion of these issues will be continued at the Informal Session at 2:00 pm Monday.     Session 2 Debate K-12 Education—Is it a Good Use of Scarce Energy Efficiency Funds? Marilyn Brown, Director, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Program, Oak Ridge National Laboratory Moderator Merrilee Harrigan, Director of Education, Alliance to Save Energy Debater David Cohan, Evaluation Coordinator, Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance Debater Energy efficiency funds are limited and leaders in the field hold strong opinions about whether school-based educational programs are worth the cost. There is significant disagreement about whether educating K-12 students about energy efficiency promotes significant market transformation or really helps to establish energy efficiency as an important social value. Do young people shape how energy is used today? Will their education about energy efficiency influence how they use energy in the future when they are adults in their own homes and face purchasing decisions? Do the kinds of behavioral and operational changes students make in the Alliance to Save Energy's Schools Program lead to sustained energy savings or retrofits? What happens after support for the program ends—do teachers continue to teach energy efficiency principles at the same high standards that the program established? These kinds of issues will be debated in this session.     Session 3 Major Trends Affecting Efficient Energy Use in Buildings Rick Diamond, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Moderator Katherine Johnson, KJ Consulting and John Reed, Innovologie Presenters Paper #470: "The Future of Commercial Buildings: The Major Trends, Influences, and Factors Driving Change in the Commercial Buildings Market"   Rick Diamond/Mithra Moezzi, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Presenters Paper # 460: "Changing Trends: A Brief History of the US Household Consumption of Energy, Water, Food, Beverages and Tobacco"   Rich Brown and Bruce Nordman, LBNL and Leo Rainer, Davis Energy Group Commentators – re: Information Technologies in Buildings     Energy use in buildings – and opportunities to save energy through efficient technologies and practices – are influenced by many trends both within and outside the realm of either the buildings sector or the energy sector. Some of these include: continuing advances in technology, especially information technology, and the rapid market penetration of those new technologies especially favored by consumers (e.g, mobile phones, digital photography) age, income, and household demographics evolving cultural and social norms, and the still increasing tempo of daily life consumer preferences for increasing levels of convenience, amenity, health and safety – and the ability to pay for them changes in market structure, including ownership concentration, financing, and services outsourcing increasing uncertainty, for many consumers, about energy prices and price structure, availability, and reliability a shift in the locus of energy efficiency policy initiatives, from the federal level to states, local governments, and non-governmental organizations (like the US Green Building Council) In this Roundtable session, we will consider these and other trends, beginning with two background papers and then inviting attendees to contribute to the list of trends. As a group, we will consider, for each trend: the potential consequences for energy use and energy efficiency in buildings, and implications for energy efficiency policies, programs, and R&D priorities While this session focuses on discernable or suspected trends, we also recognize that other influences, more sudden and less predictable, have also had significant impacts on energy use and efficiency in the past. "Out of the box" thinkers who come to this Roundtable will be encouraged to remind the rest of us of past surprises and to expect future ones.     Session 4 Debate Neither Just People Nor Just Technology-Moving Past the Impasse in the Conservation vs. Efficiency Debate Rick Diamond, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Moderator Mithra Moezzi, Ecole des Mines, Paris Debater Mark Levine, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Debater While efforts to increase energy efficiency have contributed to lowering projected U.S. energy consumption, absolute levels and per capita energy consumption continue to increase. In energy policy, energy efficiency is routinely called upon to deliver absolute reductions in energy consumption and carbon emissions. In the United States, improved levels of technical energy efficiency over the past 25 years have not led to such absolute reductions. Some argue that technical efficiency has inherent limitations, and nothing short of dramatic changes in behavior and social values are needed to achieve stabilization of energy demand or atmospheric carbon concentrations. Others say that social values and behavioral changes cannot be forced, or that the problem lies in insufficient penetration of energy-efficient technologies, so that the solution lies in ensuring that more efficient technology is developed and commercialized. The issue is further complicated by overlapping definitions of conservation and efficiency. Do policymakers need to focus more on individual behaviors, social structures, organizational innovation, and cultural meanings and values? Or should the principle focus be on identifying inefficient use of energy, and developing and commercializing the technology needed to improve it? Can policymakers and the research community even frame the debate in non-market terms, or do political considerations both limit the terms of discussion and constrain potential outcomes? This debate will explore these important and complex questions toward achieving a balanced view and a better framework for continued productive discussions.     Session 5 Beyond the Price Signal Skip Laitner Moderator Adrienne Vayssières Kandel, California Energy Commission Presenter Paper #369: "Beyond the Price Signal: Rethinking the Economic Evaluation of Energy Efficiency Programs and Policies" (submitted only for review and discussion at the Roundtable)   Alan Sanstad, LBNL, and Marvin Horowitz, Demand Research Commentators   A growing literature suggests that standard economic models, relying largely on the price signal to coordinate markets and consumer behavior, may actually constrain the development of innovative technologies and policies. Hence, they inadequately inform policy-makers about new market potential. This may be especially true with respect to the nation's energy policies. This Roundtable discussion will open with a background paper that both reviews the evidence of this limitation and then explores the extent to which economic models might reflect a more dynamic characterization of policy opportunities. The presentation will then be followed by 10 minutes of thoughts and reactions from each of the commentators. We will then invite attendees to contribute their own insights about the role and value of price signals and non-price policies as they might encourage new energy efficiency opportunities.     Session 6 Debate Stronger Codes or Vigorous Enforcement: What's More Important? Floyd Barwig, Director, Iowa Energy Center Moderator Jeffrey A. Johnson, Executive Director, New Buildings Institute Debater Z. Todd Taylor, Manager, Residential Codes R&D, Pacific Northwest National Lab Debater With respect to codes, what is the most effective way to improve the energy performance of the nation's homes and to save significant energy at the national level? Which path will lead to the biggest gains, now and in the long run? Should the primary focus be on increasing the stringency of national model energy codes, and demanding higher levels of home energy performance? Or should we invest most of our effort on implementing existing codes by working with local communities and states to enforce codes that are already on the books? Alternatively, if a hybrid approach is the answer, what should the relative weight of our efforts be? These are critical issues facing decision makers facing tight budgets at all levels of government and the need to prioritize scarce resources. This important debate will argue these questions in the context of today's needs as well as long-term energy challenges.     Session 7 Limits to Efficiency Skip Laitner Moderator/Presenter Paper #749: "How Far Energy Efficiency?"   Dan Kammen, Energy Resources Group, UC-Berkeley, and James McMahon, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Commentators   Analysts agree about the need for developing new and cleaner energy resource technologies. At the same time, some argue that energy efficiency will provide only a minimal role in meeting future energy needs. Hence, energy supply is encouraged while energy efficiency is supported only minimally. Analysts Douglas Lightfoot and Christopher Green suggest in a series of papers, for example, that there are practical limits that will constrain the rate of efficiency improvement to no more than about one percent per annum over the next 100 years. This paper explores the assumptions that underpin such "practical limits" and concludes that efficiency gains could more than double the rate suggested by Lightfoot and Green. The question is not one of practical limits; rather, the issue is one of choosing to develop energy paths that allow greater system efficiencies to emerge. In this Roundtable session we will discuss the extent of practical limits for energy efficiency compared to policy options that might encourage greater efficiency innovations. The session will open with a 15-minute presentation of the background paper, and will then be followed by 10 minutes of thoughts and reactions from each of the commentators. We will then invite attendees to contribute their own insights into the emerging energy efficiency trends and opportunities.     Session 8 Time for a National Energy Efficiency Data Center? Alan Meier, International Energy Agency Moderator Marvin Horowitz, Demand Research Presenter Paper #374: It's Time for a National Energy Efficiency Data Center" (distributed only for review and discussion at the Roundtable)   Steve Nadel, American Council for an Energy-Efficiency Economy, and Jon Koomey, Stanford University Commentators   Energy-related national policy issues, from reducing greenhouse gas emissions to enhancing national security, are demanding increasing attention. Unfortunately, energy and environmental organizations labor under a significant handicap; while policy discussions are increasing in intensity and importance, the data needed for informing energy efficiency-related policies are inadequate. National time series data that measure the costs and quantities of energy efficiency resources are either lacking or of questionable coverage and dependability. The purpose of this roundtable will be to discuss some of the basic issues related to the creation of a national energy efficiency data center and to gather innovative ideas that might support its creation. Topics to be opened for discussion by the roundtable will include: What are the most critical data needs for policy development? What are the most critical data needs for quantitative modeling? What indicators or indexes of realized and potential energy efficiency would be most useful for policy development, planning and evaluation? Should the energy efficiency data, and various indicators and indexes, be coordinated with international efforts? How should the data be collected, at what frequency and level of granularity? How should the data be standardized and quality-controlled? What should the formal reports consist of? How should the data be made available to the public? What other activities should the data center undertake? How should the data center be funded? The session will open with a 20-minute presentation of the background paper, and will then be followed by 10 minutes of thoughts and reactions from each of the commentators. We will then invite roundtable participants to contribute their own insights into the need and potential for a national energy efficiency data center.

Top of Page