North Carolina Field Test: Field performance of the preliminary version of an advanced weatherization audit for the Department of Energy's Weatherization Assistance Program

摘要

The field performance of weatherizations based on a newly-developed advanced technique for selecting residential energy conservation measures was tested alongside current Retro-Tech-based weatherizations in North Carolina. The new technique is computer-based and determines measures based on the needs of an individual house. In addition, it recommends only those measures that it determines will have a benefit-to-cost ratio greater than 1 for the house being evaluated. The new technique also considers the interaction of measures in computing the benefit-to-cost ratio of each measure. The two weatherization approaches were compared based on implementation ease, measures installed, labor and cost requirements, and both heating and cooling energy savings achieved. One-hundred and twenty houses with the following characteristics participated: the occupants were low-income, eligible for North Carolina's current weatherization program, and responsible for their own fuel and electric bills. Houses were detached single-family dwellings, not mobile homes; were heated by kerosene, fuel oil, natural gas, or propane; and had one or two operating window air conditioners. Houses were divided equally into one control group and two weatherization groups. Weekly space heating and cooling energy use, and hourly indoor and outdoor temperatures were monitored between November 1989 and September 1990 (pre-period) and between December 1990 and August 1991 (post-period). House consumption models were used to normalize for annual weather differences and a 68(degrees)F indoor temperature. Control group savings were used to adjust the savings determined for the weatherization groups. The two weatherization approaches involved installing attic and floor insulations in near equivalent quantities, and installing storm windows and wall insulation in drastically different quantities. Substantial differences also were found in average air leakage reductions for the two weatherization groups.