Best Practices in Determining the Impacts of 

Municipal Programs on Energy Use, Air Quality, 

and Other Ancillary Costs and Benefits

GOAL

Develop indicators, and measure the energy and environmental benefits of 

municipal programs that may or may not have energy and environmental goals. 

Background

Many local and small-scale community programs have the direct intention or 

the ancillary benefit of increasing energy efficiency, decreasing dependence on 

foreign oil, promoting clean energy, or improving air quality. Although these 

SAMPLE TYPES OF MUNICIPAL 

PROGRAMS

• Weatherization programs. The stated goal is to save 

the consumer money by increasing the efficiency of 

the home, but the overall impact not only includes 

increased consumer comfort, but also the reduction 

of energy use and pollutant emissions. 

• Traffic reduction programs. The primary goal is 

reducing congestion or alleviating traffic, but 

IMPACTS OF MEASURING 

ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENTAL 

ANCILLARY BENEFITS

Measuring the ancillary energy and environmental 

benefits of programs is important because of the 

Contacts

Elizabeth Brown and Gail Mosey 

elizabeth_brown@nrel.gov 

gail_mosey@nrel.gov

National Renewable Energy Laboratory 

(NREL) 

1617 Cole Blvd. 

Golden, CO 80401-3393

following local benefits:

• Offers a fuller look at the benefits/financial savings 

related to small programs, 

• Argues for continued program support, and 

• Addresses the energy and environmental needs of 

the community

On the national scale, municipal and local programs 

may have a large impact on national energy use 

patterns, energy security, and air quality.

programs are locally focused with local goals, the range of benefits includes 

positive energy and environmental benefits, and the impacts of those can be 

far reaching. Moreover, the cumulative impacts of these programs have the 

potential for large impacts on the U.S. dependence on foreign oil and air quality. 

Understanding the energy and environmental impacts of these programs allows 

for a full benefits assessment of the program and, in the aggregate, an expression 

of the full benefit of local programs on energy use and the environment in the 

United States. 

Figure 1: Sample Starting Point Data. This program was able to 

provide average daily trips reduced attributable to the program. 

From this data, NREL developed methodologies for quantifying 

economic and air quality benefits

SAMPLE LOCALIZED BENEFITS 

ANALYSIS

This set of sample graphs illustrates the development 

and measurement of indicators for a municipal 

congestion-reduction program. The traffic-congestion 

program collects data on the number of trips the 

program reduces annually (Figure 1).

Using this limited data, NREL developed 

methodologies to determine energy and 

environmental program benefits, including: 

Gasoline savings (gallons avoided). Reductions in 

gasoline use are the result of reduced trip frequency 

and length. Assuming that the primary fuel for vehicles 

is gasoline, there is a decreased demand for gasoline.

Pollution-reduction impacts (CO, VOC, NOx, and 

CO2 equivalents avoided). Pollution reductions are 

the direct result of vehicles not running on the roads. 

Reductions contribute to the improvement of local air 

quality and decreased greenhouse gas emissions in the 

immediate and surrounding areas (Figures 2 and 3).

Figure 2: Cumulative CO2 equivalent savings resulting from 

program.

the ancillary benefits of reducing mobile source 

pollution, increasing worker productivity, avoiding 

emissions and gasoline use, and saving money spent 

on gasoline can be significant. 

Figure 3: Estimated NOx avoided resulting from combined 

average vehicle technology change and the sample program. 

Pollution reductions can also be represented in tabular 

form, as in Table 2.

Productivity benefits (commute time savings) and 

Limited Economic Benefits. Time spent sitting in 

traffic is time one cannot spend elsewhere. The time 

gained by not sitting in traffic is a benefit. This benefit, 

depending on the use of the time saved by choosing 

an alternative to driving alone, is considered a qualityof-life benefit to either the commuter or the employer 

company. Reduced gasoline purchases and increased 

productivity have measurable economic benefits 

illustrating the impact of the program (Table 3). 

Sample Emissions Results Table 2 . Annual average and cumulative program 

attributable pollutant reductions (1992-2005)

Pollutant Annual Average Reduction (tons) Cumulative reduction (tons)

CO 664 9,300

VOC 79 1,100

Nox 60 843

Table 3: Productivity benefits and Limited Economic Benefits

Indicator 2005 Cumulative Total (1992-2005)

Gasoline Savings (gal.) 3,000,000 44,000,000

Employee Productivity (hours) 3,000,000 42,000,000

Economic Benefits* ($) 47,000,000 658,000,000

*Includes both gasoline savings and productivity savings (estimated time saved). 

THIS TYPE OF ANALYSIS CAN ANSWER 

THE FOLLOWING TYPES OF QUESTIONS

• What is the overall energy and environmental 

benefit of municipal energy related programs? 

• Where is the largest potential impact for these municipal 

programs? 

• Can a best practices guide for developing municipal 

program metrics be created and implemented for better 

understanding of program development and impacts? 

Average Daily 

Trips Reduced

C

O

2 eq. avoided (tons)

Tons NOX 

Avoided

The information contained in this poster is 

subject to a government license.

CU Energy Initiative/NREL Symposium 

University of Colorado, Boulder 

October 3, 2006 

NREL/PO-640-40672