A Systematic Review of Energy Efficiency Home Retrofit Evaluation Studies

IF 4.2 2区 经济学 Q1 AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS & POLICY Annual Review of Resource Economics Pub Date : 2022-05-24 DOI:10.1146/annurev-resource-111920-124353
Lauren Giandomenico, Maya Papineau, N. Rivers
{"title":"A Systematic Review of Energy Efficiency Home Retrofit Evaluation Studies","authors":"Lauren Giandomenico, Maya Papineau, N. Rivers","doi":"10.1146/annurev-resource-111920-124353","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We systematically review studies evaluating the energy savings and cost-effectiveness of residential energy efficiency retrofit programs. We review 39 evaluations of 23 residential retrofit programs that were evaluated between 1984 and 2021. Our sample is restricted to program evaluations that used postretrofit household energy billing or consumption data from 140,977 retrofitted households. We report four primary findings. First, none of the studies in our sample reported deep energy savings (e.g., 50% or greater) from retrofit programs. The mean reduction in measured electricity and/or fuel consumption due to energy efficiency retrofits for all programs included in our sample was roughly 7.2%. However, because many households use both fuel and electricity, total household energy savings from the retrofit programs evaluated in our sample are probably smaller. Second, reported program savings decreased as the internal validity of study design increased. Third, as measured by realized savings and cost-effectiveness, the most promising retrofits were insulation and programmable thermostats, whereas the least promising retrofits were storm windows and doors. Fourth, programs with high reported savings and low costs of conserved energy served low-income, fuel-heated households exclusively. Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Resource Economics, Volume 14 is October 2022. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.","PeriodicalId":48856,"journal":{"name":"Annual Review of Resource Economics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annual Review of Resource Economics","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-resource-111920-124353","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS & POLICY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

We systematically review studies evaluating the energy savings and cost-effectiveness of residential energy efficiency retrofit programs. We review 39 evaluations of 23 residential retrofit programs that were evaluated between 1984 and 2021. Our sample is restricted to program evaluations that used postretrofit household energy billing or consumption data from 140,977 retrofitted households. We report four primary findings. First, none of the studies in our sample reported deep energy savings (e.g., 50% or greater) from retrofit programs. The mean reduction in measured electricity and/or fuel consumption due to energy efficiency retrofits for all programs included in our sample was roughly 7.2%. However, because many households use both fuel and electricity, total household energy savings from the retrofit programs evaluated in our sample are probably smaller. Second, reported program savings decreased as the internal validity of study design increased. Third, as measured by realized savings and cost-effectiveness, the most promising retrofits were insulation and programmable thermostats, whereas the least promising retrofits were storm windows and doors. Fourth, programs with high reported savings and low costs of conserved energy served low-income, fuel-heated households exclusively. Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Resource Economics, Volume 14 is October 2022. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
能效家庭改造评价研究的系统回顾
我们系统地回顾了评估住宅节能改造项目的能源节约和成本效益的研究。我们回顾了1984年至2021年间对23个住宅改造项目的39项评估。我们的样本仅限于使用改造后家庭能源账单或来自140,977个改造家庭的消费数据的项目评估。我们报告了四个主要发现。首先,在我们的样本中,没有一项研究报告说改造项目能节省大量能源(例如50%或更多)。在我们的样本中包括的所有项目中,由于能效改造,测量的电力和/或燃料消耗的平均减少约为7.2%。然而,由于许多家庭既使用燃料又使用电力,因此我们样本中评估的改造项目所节省的家庭能源总量可能较小。第二,随着研究设计的内部效度增加,报告的项目节省减少。第三,根据实现的节约和成本效益来衡量,最有希望的改造是隔热和可编程恒温器,而最没有希望的改造是防风窗和防风门。第四,节电高、节约能源成本低的项目专门为低收入、燃料取暖的家庭服务。《资源经济学年度评论》第14卷的最终在线出版日期预计为2022年10月。修订后的估计数请参阅http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Annual Review of Resource Economics
Annual Review of Resource Economics AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS & POLICY-
CiteScore
9.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
34
期刊介绍: The Annual Review of Resource Economics provides authoritative critical reviews evaluating the most significant research developments in resource economics, focusing on agricultural economics, environmental economics, renewable resources, and exhaustible resources.
期刊最新文献
Looking Backward, Looking Forward The Shadow Economy, an Enigma, in the Agriculture of 15 EU Member States over the Period 1996–2019 Agricultural Productivity and Climate Mitigation The Economics of Electricity and Development: Planning for Growth and a Changing Climate Navigating the Complexity: The Sustainability Challenges in Global Value Chains
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1