Challenges and 

Opportunities To Achieve 

50% Energy Savings in 

Homes: National Laboratory 

White Papers 

M.V.A. Bianchi, Editor

July 2011
NOTICE

This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States 

government. Neither the United States government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, 

makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, 

completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents 

that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial 

product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily 

constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States government or any 

agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect 

those of the United States government or any agency thereof.

Available electronically at http://www.osti.gov/bridge

Available for a processing fee to U.S. Department of Energy

and its contractors, in paper, from:

U.S. Department of Energy

Office of Scientific and Technical Information

P.O. Box 62

Oak Ridge, TN 37831-0062

phone: 865.576.8401

fax: 865.576.5728

email: mailto:reports@adonis.osti.gov

Available for sale to the public, in paper, from:

U.S. Department of Commerce

National Technical Information Service

5285 Port Royal Road

Springfield, VA 22161

phone: 800.553.6847

fax: 703.605.6900

email: orders@ntis.fedworld.gov

online ordering: http://www.ntis.gov/help/ordermethods.aspx

Printed on paper containing at least 50% wastepaper, including 20% postconsumer waste
iii

Challenges and Opportunities to Achieve 50% Energy Savings in 

Homes: National Laboratory White Papers

Prepared for: 

Building America

Building Technologies Program

Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy 

U.S. Department of Energy 

Prepared by: 

National Renewable Energy Laboratory 

1617 Cole Boulevard 

Golden, CO 80401 

July 2011 
iv

[This page left blank]
v 

Contents

Figures ...................................................................................................................................................... viii

Tables ........................................................................................................................................................ viii

Definitions ................................................................................................................................................... ix

Executive Summary.................................................................................................................................... x

Barriers, Gaps, and Opportunities Identified by the National Laboratories ............................ xi

Summary of Longer Term Barriers and Gaps .................................................................... xi

Opportunities..................................................................................................................... xii

1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Overview of Building America Program .............................................................................1

1.1.1 Technology Pathways Analysis (BEopt) .................................................................2

1.1.2 System Evaluations ..................................................................................................3

1.1.3 Test House and Pilot Community Evaluations ........................................................3

1.2 Reference .............................................................................................................................3

2 Assessing and Improving the Accuracy of Energy Analysis for Residential Buildings............... 4

2.1 Introduction ..........................................................................................................................4

2.1.1 Mechanisms To Improve Energy Analysis Methods ...............................................4

2.2 Motivation ............................................................................................................................5

2.3 Method To Improve the Accuracy of Residential Energy Analysis Methods .....................6

2.3.1 Identify Potential Issues ...........................................................................................7

2.3.2 Improve Inputs .........................................................................................................8

2.3.3 Improve Software .....................................................................................................8

2.3.4 Update Test Suites ...................................................................................................8

2.3.5 Add Field Data to Repository ..................................................................................8

2.3.6 Simulate in Reference Software...............................................................................9

2.3.7 Compare Predicted Versus Metered ........................................................................9

2.4 Ongoing Efforts ...................................................................................................................9

2.4.1 Addressing Potential Issues .....................................................................................9

2.4.2 National Residential Efficiency Measures Database ...............................................9

2.4.3 Building America House Simulation Protocol ......................................................10

2.4.4 BEopt Diagnostic Test Suite ..................................................................................10

2.4.5 Building Energy Simulation Test ...........................................................................10

2.4.6 Estimating Uncertainty in Energy Analysis Predictions ........................................11

2.4.7 Field Testing ..........................................................................................................11

2.4.8 Thermal Test Facility Experiments ........................................................................11

2.4.9 Field Data Measurement Technology Research and Development .......................12

2.5 Final Remarks ....................................................................................................................12

2.6 References ..........................................................................................................................12

3 Deep Retrofits ..................................................................................................................................... 14

3.1 Goal 14

3.2 Background ........................................................................................................................14

3.3 Summary of Research Needs Identified ............................................................................15

3.3.1 Utility-Led Deep Energy Retrofits .........................................................................15

3.3.2 Research To Address Factors Affecting Availability of Commercially Viable 

Equipment With Variable-Capacity Compressors That Achieves Installed 

Performance That Meets DOE Goals for High Part-Load Efficiency and 

Dehumidification ...................................................................................................16
vi 

3.3.3 Significant Envelope and Thermal Distribution Energy Savings Beyond IECC 

2012 and IECC 2015 ..............................................................................................16

3.3.4 Foundations ............................................................................................................17

3.4 Major Research Issues Associated With Deep Energy Retrofits .......................................17

3.4.1 Utility-Led Deep Energy Retrofits .........................................................................17

3.4.2 Factors Affecting Availability of Commercially Viable Residential Heat Pumps 

and Air Conditioner Units for New and Retrofit Application With Installed 

Performance That Meets DOE Goals for High Part-Load Efficiency and 

Dehumidification Performance ..............................................................................23

3.4.3 Envelope and Thermal Distribution Energy Savings Beyond IECC 2012 and 

IECC 2015 Code Goals for New Housing and Deep Energy Retrofits .................24

3.5 References ..........................................................................................................................27

4 Draft Residential Roadmap: With Focus on Deep Energy Upgrades and Improvements .......... 28

4.1 Problem Summary .............................................................................................................28

4.1.1 Problem Statement .................................................................................................28

4.1.2 Solution—Upgrade and Improve Existing Homes ................................................28

4.2 Identifying Challenges for Home Builders and Renovators ..............................................31

4.3 Identifying Challenges for Contractors ..............................................................................31

4.4 Identifying Challenges for Homeowners ...........................................................................31

4.5 Identifying Challenges for the Market ...............................................................................31

4.6 Identifying Challenges for Weatherization and Utility Programs .....................................32

4.7 Changing the Metrics .........................................................................................................32

4.8 R&D Questions ..................................................................................................................33

4.9 Current Status—LBNL Efforts in FY 2011 .......................................................................36

4.9.1 Deep Retrofits ........................................................................................................36

4.9.2 Hazard and Risk Mitigation ...................................................................................36

4.9.3 Ventilation Strategies .............................................................................................36

4.9.4 Improve Software Used in Analyses ......................................................................37

4.10 FY 2012 Issues—Continuation of FY 2011 Work ................................................37

4.10.1 Deep Retrofits ........................................................................................................37

4.10.2 Hazard and Risk Mitigation ...................................................................................37

4.10.3 Ventilation Strategies .............................................................................................37

4.11 New for FY 2012 ...................................................................................................38

4.11.1 Create DOE BLUE/ORANGE Sheets ...................................................................38

4.11.2 Connect to Google and Others for Information, Feedback, and Social Changes ..38

4.11.3 Develop a New Lexicon and Energize for the Future ............................................38

4.11.4 Listen to Experts ....................................................................................................38

4.11.5 Get Away From Cost-Effectiveness Issues ............................................................38

4.11.6 Develop Diagnostic Tools ......................................................................................38

4.12 Multi-Year Milestones ...........................................................................................39

4.12.1 FY 2012 .................................................................................................................39

4.12.2 FY 2012/2013 ........................................................................................................39

4.12.3 FY 2012/2013/2014 ...............................................................................................39

4.13 Reference ...............................................................................................................39

5 Residential Roadmap for Healthy, Efficient Homes Research ...................................................... 40

5.1 Problem Summary .............................................................................................................40

5.2 R&D Questions ..................................................................................................................41
vii 

5.3 Current Status.....................................................................................................................43

5.4 Opportunities, Gaps, and Barriers ......................................................................................44

5.5 Multi-Year Milestones .......................................................................................................46

5.6 References ..........................................................................................................................47

6 Residential Miscellaneous Electric Loads R&D Agenda................................................................ 49

6.1 Problem Summary .............................................................................................................49

6.2 R&D Questions ..................................................................................................................49

6.3 Current Status.....................................................................................................................50

6.3.1 U.S. Department of Energy Activities ...................................................................51

6.3.2 ENERGY STAR ....................................................................................................52

6.3.3 Other Activities ......................................................................................................53

6.3.4 Industry Activities ..................................................................................................53

6.4 Opportunities, Gaps, and Barriers ......................................................................................53

6.5 Multi-Year Milestones .......................................................................................................54

6.5.1 FY 2011 Milestones ...............................................................................................54

6.5.2 FY 2012 Milestones ...............................................................................................54

6.6 References ..........................................................................................................................55

7 Research Needs for Achieving Cost-Effective Deep Energy Retrofits (Site Built and 

Manufactured Housing) and High-Performance New Manufactured Housing............................. 57

7.1 Context ...............................................................................................................................57

7.2 Introduction ........................................................................................................................57

7.3 Research Needs ..................................................................................................................58

7.4 Site-Built and Manufactured Housing Retrofits ................................................................58

7.4.1 Pilot Deep Energy Retrofits ...................................................................................58

7.5 Manufactured Housing Retrofits ........................................................................................60

7.6 Manufactured Housing New Construction ........................................................................60

7.7 Software Needs ..................................................................................................................60

7.8 Conclusions ........................................................................................................................61

7.9 References ..........................................................................................................................61

8 Building America Market Transformation Opportunities ............................................................... 62

8.1 Problem Summary and Introduction ..................................................................................62

8.2 Building America Market Transformation Strategies ........................................................63

8.2.1 Strategy 1: Use Building America Documentation Products To Strengthen the 

Building America Brand and Market Allies ..........................................................64

8.2.2 Strategy 2: Form an Ongoing Market Transformation Working Group Within 

Building America ...................................................................................................65

8.2.3 Strategy 3: Continue To Support Standard-Setting Organizations ........................65

8.2.4 Strategy 4: Leverage Relationships With Builders To Establish a More Formal 

Organization of Builder Partners ...........................................................................66

8.2.5 Strategy 5: Reach Out to Manufacturers and Vendors ..........................................67

8.2.6 Strategy 6: Reach Out to Other Programs ..............................................................67

8.3 Summary of Residential Construction Market Transformation Opportunities and 

Barriers ...............................................................................................................................67

8.4 References ..........................................................................................................................73

Appendix – Barriers, Gaps, and Opportunities Identified by the National Laboratories................... 74
viii

Figures

Figure 1. Building America program system integration research elements....................................... 2

Figure 2: Mechanisms for improving energy analysis methods in the field......................................... 5

Figure 3: Continuous process for improving the accuracy of energy analysis for residential 

buildings................................................................................................................................................ 7

Figure 4. Example of interactions required for retrofit ......................................................................... 30

Figure 5. Energy per square foot versus energy per household ......................................................... 33

Figure 6. Example of BLUE SHEET......................................................................................................... 34

Tables 

Table 1. Matrix of Three Levels of Energy Performing Houses and Three Levels of EnergyConsuming Occupants ...................................................................................................................... 21

Table 2. National Averages of Remodel Costs in 2010 ......................................................................... 29

Table 3. Residential MELs Product Categories With ENERGY STAR Specifications........................ 52

Table 4. Summary Table of Building America Strategies for Market Barriers and Opportunities.... 68
ix

Definitions

ACEEE American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy

ACI Affordable Comfort Inc.

BPI Building Performance Institute

CEE Consortium for Energy Efficiency

DALY disability adjusted life year

DIY do-it-yourself

DOE U.S. Department of Energy

HERS Home Energy Rating System

HPWH heat pump water heater

HUD U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development

HVAC heating, ventilation, and air-conditioning

IAQ indoor air quality

IECC International Energy Conservation Code

in. inch

kW kilowatt

kWh kilowatt-hour

LBNL Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory

MEL miscellaneous electric load

NO2 nitrogen dioxide

NREL National Renewable Energy Laboratory

ORNL Oak Ridge National Laboratory

PNNL Pacific Northwest National Laboratory

PV photovoltaic

QALY quality adjusted life year

RESNET Residential Energy Services Network

SIP structurally insulated panel

TVA Tennessee Valley Authority

VOC volatile organic compound
x 

Executive Summary 

In 2010, researchers from four of the national laboratories involved in residential research 

(Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory [LBNL], National Renewable Energy Laboratory 

[NREL], Oak Ridge National Laboratory [ORNL], and Pacific Northwest National Laboratory 

[PNNL]) were asked to prepare papers on the key longer term research challenges, market 

barriers, and technology gaps that must be addressed to achieve the longer term 50% saving goal 

for Building America to ensure coordination with the Building America industry teams who are 

focusing their research on systems to achieve the near-term 30% savings goal. Although new 

construction was included, the focus of the effort was on deep energy retrofits of existing homes. 

Building America holds three annual planning meetings to develop and evaluate strategies to 

reach its goals for cost effective savings of 30%–50% in new and existing homes. These 

meetings generate public documents similar to this report that are used as resources to support 

the DOE planning process. The three annual meetings are: 

• A fall research planning meeting to identify and evaluate technical gaps and barriers to 

long-term goals.

• A summer technology update meeting to review current year research progress.

• A spring stakeholder update meeting to review stakeholder needs and ensure that 

Building America research reports provide actionable results. Key stakeholders include 

other Building Technology program areas (Codes, Better Buildings, and Emerging 

Technologies), other government agencies, manufacturers, contractors, utilities, 

developers, builders, financial institutions, appraisers, and real estate agents.

The topics in this report were a result of lab discussions held at the fall 2010 research planning 

meeting. Presentations from past meetings and information on current meetings can be found at 

www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/building_america/meetings.html. 

Technology roadmapping, a form of technology planning, can identify and develop the 

technologies required to meet the mission of Building America. Its main benefit is that it 

provides information to make better technology investment decisions by identifying critical 

technologies and technology gaps and identifying ways to leverage R&D investments (Garcia 

and Bray 1997). 

Two parts of this activity were initiated in the fall of 2010: 

• National laboratory planning, long-term 50% or greater energy savings 

• Overall industry team planning, near-term 30% energy savings. 

To complete this task, the national laboratories focused on a strategic planning activity that 

included a meeting on November 2, 2010, and a group of white papers written by the laboratory 

researchers about specific areas to identify research opportunities. This report summarizes the 

key opportunities, gaps, and barriers identified in the national laboratory white papers. 

 
xi 

The industry team portion of this planning exercise is documented.1

Building America currently has three major system integration research elements: 

 

• System Evaluations

• Technology Pathways Analysis (BEopt)

• Test House and Pilot Community Evaluations

Barriers, Gaps, and Opportunities Identified by the National Laboratories

A few of the barriers, gaps, and opportunities identified by the national laboratories in their white

papers are listed below. For a complete list, see the Appendix at the end of this report.

Summary of Longer Term Barriers and Gaps

• There is a general perception (but limited evidence) that software-based energy analysis 

of inefficient existing homes tends to overpredict pre-retrofit energy use and retrofit 

energy savings.

• Building characteristics and utility billing data from actual houses have not been 

available in large scale for comparing software predictions with metered data.

• Advanced heating, ventilation, and air-conditioning (HVAC) equipment has fewer 

oversizing performance penalties than do traditional ones. However, their long fan run 

times mean that their field performance may not live up to their rated performance in 

typical installations with ducts in unconditioned spaces.

• Homeowners choose not to spend their capital in energy efficiency retrofits.

• The International Energy Conservation Code (IECC) 2012 will increase performance 

requirements in enclosures and the building industry is not fully equipped to meet the 

requirements cost effectively.

• The heavy focus on air sealing without designed ventilation provisions will negatively 

affect health, safety, and durability unless precautions are taken.

• Multifamily and rental units need special attention vis-a-vis energy efficiency.

• A major barrier to retrofits is the relatively low cost of energy.

• Limited data from past energy retrofit efforts suggest long payback periods (25 to 50 

years).

• Although energy retrofits can enhance comfort, indoor air quality (IAQ), and other 

desirable characteristics, very little research has been done to document and market these 

added benefits 

• There is low value on unseen retrofits. Renovation focus is on appearance, adding 

amenities, convenience, comfort, and health, not on energy efficiency.

• The energy and IAQ performance of a high-performance home will be limited without 

advances in ventilation equipment and control systems.

 

1 http://apps1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/publications/pdfs/building_america/meeting_summary_50675.pdf
xii 

• There is a lack of standards to realize a vision where miscellaneous electric load (MEL) 

devices cooperatively manage their energy use in a distributed manner.

• Building America research is not accessible in a format that is most useful to 

stakeholders.

• Building code information is not consolidated in a single location.

Opportunities

• Focus retrofit efforts on conserving resources for the next generations rather than saving 

money.

• Concentrate on energy efficiency measures that are associated with other benefits that the 

homeowner desires (enhanced comfort, improved IAQ, dust control, durability, etc.).

• Use empirical data from the field to assess and track the accuracy of reference software.

• Use a rigorous process to identify potential issues in building energy simulation tools 

using comparisons of predicted versus metered energy use and savings.

• Perform careful field data collection, HVAC model development, and computer 

simulation validation from multiple test sites and climates surrounded by whole-house 

performance measurements to generate well-characterized datasets.

• Establish successful deep energy retrofit projects spawned by homeowner needs.

• Conduct research to determine the health, safety, and durability of high-R enclosures, 

focusing on their moisture performance.

• Develop, evaluate, and deploy smart and robust ventilation and ventilation control 

technologies. Develop on-demand ventilation solutions that can sense the presence of 

occupants and the operation of unvented gas appliances, electric and gas dryers, and bath 

and kitchen exhaust fans.

• Conduct research on how to manage shared hot water equipment that is unique to multifamily homes.

• Investigate ways to address the distinction between those who can legally make changes 

to a rental property and those who accrue the energy savings.

• Participate in committees defining standards for interoperability of MELs communication 

and control.

• Use Building America documentation products to strengthen market allies and potential 

partners, such as trade organizations representing strategic elements of the building and 

remodeling industries; program implementers such as government agencies, utilities, and 

regional alliances; and educators.

• Form an ongoing market transformation working group within Building America.
1 

1 Introduction

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Building America Residential Integration Program holds 

three annual strategic planning meetings to evaluate stakeholder needs, review research progress, 

and identify system performance gaps. The Stakeholder Meeting is held in the spring, the 

Research Update Meeting is held in the summer, and the Research Planning Meeting is held in 

the fall. 

The fall 2010 Research Planning Meeting focused on identifying technology gaps and research 

opportunities to achieve 30%–50% savings in existing and new homes. Before then, researchers 

from the national laboratories were asked to prepare papers on the key research challenges that 

must be addressed to achieve the longer term 50% saving goal and to leverage coordination with 

the Building America industry teams who are concentrating their research efforts on systems to 

achieve the shorter term 30% savings goal. This report summarizes the key opportunities, gaps, 

and barriers identified in the national laboratory white papers. 

Technology roadmapping, a form of technology planning, can identify and develop the 

technologies required to meet the mission of Building America. Its main benefit is that it 

provides information to make better technology investment decisions by identifying critical 

technologies and technology gaps and identifying ways to leverage R&D investments (Garcia 

and Bray, 1997). 

1.1 Overview of Building America Program

Building America is part of the DOE Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy 

(EERE), Building Technologies Program (BTP). Building America focuses on conducting the 

systems research required to improve the efficiency of the approximately 116 million existing 

homes, as well as of the 500,000–2,000,000 new homes built each year. 

Research from this program accelerates the development of reliable and effective whole-house 

packages of measures for highly energy-efficient new and existing homes that are tailored for 

each major U.S. climate region. This research can be broadly implemented to reduce risks, 

increase durability, and provide a reasonable return on investment. These improvements are 

accomplished through multi-scale research, systems development, systems integration, largescale field implementation and evaluation, and effective communication of key research results 

and system-based strategies. Recently, the near- and long-term Building America performance 

targets were updated to help guide the energy efficiency of homes past updated code 

requirements and current standard practices. 

Since July 2010, the 15 Building America research partnerships have begun projects that help 

dramatically improve the energy efficiency of American homes. These highly qualified, 

multidisciplinary teams work to deliver innovative energy efficiency strategies to the residential 

market and address barriers to bringing high-efficiency homes within reach for all Americans. 

Visit the Building America website for more information about Building America teams, 

projects, partners, and tools: www.buildingamerica.gov. 

Building America currently has three major system integration research elements (Figure 1): 

• Technology Pathways Analysis (BEopt)

• System Evaluations 

• Test House and Pilot Community Evaluations. 
2 

Figure 1. Building America program system integration research elements

1.1.1 Technology Pathways Analysis (BEopt)

1.1.1.1 Pathways Overview

Because numerous alternative designs can be considered and distinguishing between designs that 

improve cost/performance and designs that reduce cost/performance is difficult, Building 

America has developed a cost/performance optimization tool, BEopt. Pathway analysis provides 

the most cost effective packages for representative percentages of energy savings (e.g., 30% 

solution package). 

1.1.1.2 Objective

The objective is to identify current best value/least cost efficiency packages for various energy 

savings levels and climates. These packages are then used as references for the participants to 

ensure their efforts focus on broad market rather than niche market solutions.

1.1.1.3 Technical Approach

A search optimization technique is used to identify a package of efficiency measures that 

provides the target level of whole-house energy savings with the least increase in cost relative to 

the base building. The user can select climate, building type (existing or new), building 

geometry, and efficiency measures to meet specific stakeholder needs. 

This analysis effort is supported by research to improve residential software accuracy, including 

a national efficiency measures database, an empirical database for validation of audit software 

energy savings, the development of standard software methods of test, and the development of 

standard techniques for comparison of software predictions. 

1.1.1.4 Key Results

Measures packages, improved software and audit tool accuracy, measures database, case studies, 

partnerships with software providers.
3 

1.1.2 System Evaluations

1.1.2.1 System Performance Overview

This element uses laboratory and field testing to develop detailed performance maps of emerging 

residential building systems (e.g., the performance of air conditioners across a range of 

temperatures and relative humidities). 

1.1.2.2 Objective

The objective is to differentiate between emerging systems that have the potential for broad 

market impacts or only niche market solutions, based on how well the system performs in 

various scenarios. 

1.1.2.3 Technical Approach

In collaboration with manufacturers and utilities, laboratory tests are conducted using realistic 

operating conditions to develop highly accurate performance datasets that cover the range of 

expected operating conditions for all seasons and building types within major U.S. climate 

regions. 

1.1.2.4 Key Results

Measures guidelines, system performance maps, case studies, and partnerships with 

manufacturers.

1.1.3 Test House and Pilot Community Evaluations

1.1.3.1 Test House Overview 

Promising efficiency packages identified by Building America are evaluated in individual test 

homes and in multiple home pilot communities to ensure they meet contractor and builder 

requirements and can be successfully deployed. 

1.1.3.2 Objective

The objective of evaluations in test homes and pilot communities is to verify that advanced 

efficiency packages developed by Building America can be successfully integrated with 

production, retrofit, and construction practices and meet overall comfort, usability, durability, 

safety, maintenance, quality installation, and commissioning requirements for use in homes. 

1.1.3.3 Technical Approach

Research partnerships are developed with key stakeholders, including utilities, builders, 

contractors, program operators, and auditors to conduct field studies in test homes and pilot 

communities. All construction labor and material costs are provided as cost share by research 

partners with technical support from Building America teams.

1.1.3.4 Key Results

Case studies confirming cost-effective savings and benefits, residential data repository, case 

studies, and partnerships with utilities, appraisers, real estate groups, financial institutions, 

developers, contractors, and builders.

1.2 Reference

Garcia, M.L.; Bray, O.H. 1997. Fundamentals of Technology Roadmapping, Sandia National 

Laboratories Report, SAND97-0665, UC-900. 
4 

2 Assessing and Improving the Accuracy of Energy Analysis for 

Residential Buildings

Ben Polly, Neal Kruis, and Dave Roberts 

National Renewable Energy Laboratory 

2.1 Introduction

Whole-building energy analysis is used in the residential sector for many purposes: 

• Design energy-efficient homes.

• Produce labels, scores, and ratings.

• Predict energy and cost savings from energy efficiency upgrades (retrofit measures).

• Determine cost and performance criteria for new energy-efficiency technologies.

• Provide quantitative analysis and data to support programmatic and policy-related 

decisions.

The success of energy-efficient design, labeling, scoring, rating, and retrofit efforts depends 

largely on the accuracy of the analysis performed for each task; stakeholders must be confident 

that the analysis approach can accurately predict relevant metrics such as energy use and energy 

savings. This chapter describes NREL’s methodology to assess and improve the accuracy of 

whole-building energy analysis for residential buildings. 

2.1.1 Mechanisms To Improve Energy Analysis Methods

A variety of approaches, including annual building energy simulation, statistical analysis based 

on empirical data, and spreadsheet calculations, can be used to perform whole-building energy 

analysis. This chapter focuses on improving whole-building energy analysis methods that 

employ annual building energy simulations. These methods involve inputting information about 

a building into a building energy simulation program and running the program to predict energy 

use. Key participants are energy assessors, building energy analysts, and software developers. 

NREL improvements to the accuracy of energy analysis methods are translated to industry 

through three primary mechanisms: 

• Field data collection procedures. Published recommendations for collecting data from a 

house through measurement and observation.

• Simulation protocols. Published defaults and assumptions for simulation inputs that are 

not directly measured or observed in the field.

• Software test suites. Published suites of tests through which commercial vendors can 

compare their software results to those of reference software,2

Figure 2 shows how each mechanism relates to energy analysis in the field. NREL’s overall 

approach for improving the accuracy of energy analysis methods for residential buildings leads 

to improvements in field data collection procedures, simulation protocols, and software test 

suites. The approach builds on previous work at NREL to develop a methodological foundation 

analytical solutions, and 

empirical data. Tests can be at the whole-building or isolated-component level. 

 

2 Detailed, hourly whole-building energy simulation engines such as EnergyPlus, DOE-2, and SUNREL®. 
5 

for evaluating the accuracy of whole-building energy simulation programs (ASHRAE 2007; 

Judkoff and Neymark 1995a, 1995b; Judkoff et al. 2010; Neymark and Judkoff 2004, 2008, 

2009a), but also focuses on assessing and improving the accuracy of input data for residential 

energy analysis methods. 

Figure 2: Mechanisms for improving energy analysis methods in the field

2.2 Motivation

Historically, DOE/NREL residential buildings research efforts have focused on high-efficiency 

designs for new homes. Software has been validated primarily in the context of such buildings. 

During the past few years, more emphasis has been placed on research related to improving the 

efficiency of existing homes. Anecdotal evidence and controlled studies have raised concerns 

about the accuracy of software-based energy analysis for existing homes, especially for energyinefficient ones. 

A general perception is that software-based energy analysis of inefficient existing homes tends to 

overpredict pre-retrofit energy use and retrofit energy savings. This perception hinders the efforts 

of companies, utilities, programs, and research institutions that depend on the accuracy of energy 

analysis predictions. One goal of NREL’s overall research is to use empirical data from the field 
6 

to assess and track the accuracy of reference software. A literature review of previous accuracy 

studies is presented by Polly et al. (2011) (Appendix A of their report), who showed that: 

• Multiple studies confirm that analysis methods tend to overpredict energy use and 

savings in poorly insulated, leaky homes with older mechanical systems, that is, homes 

most needing energy retrofits.

• Determining the reason for discrepancies is difficult, because all error sources act 

simultaneously.

• Many metrics for accuracy are used in various studies and many possible causes of 

overprediction are described. A single reference containing definitions for error, potential 

sources of error, and accuracy, developed in the context of comparing simulated building 

energy use to measured energy use, would be beneficial.

• A method to improve the accuracy of energy use and savings predictions is needed.

• Definitions for error, sources of error, and accuracy are presented by Polly et al. (2011) 

(Appendix B of their report). These can be used to improve the consistency of 

calculations for errors and accuracy, which provides for easier comparisons across studies 

and reduces confusion that arises from having differing definitions in different sources. 

Sources of error can be grouped into the following categories: 

• Related to the analysis methods

o Inputs 

o Software.

• External to the analysis methods 

o Processing utility data

o Quality and consistency of retrofit contractor work. 

The process described in this chapter focuses on reducing errors related to the analysis methods 

(inputs and software)—methods for reducing error external to the analysis methods are not 

described. A method for improving the accuracy of energy use and savings predictions is 

described in Section 2.3. 

2.3 Method To Improve the Accuracy of Residential Energy Analysis Methods

A continuous process for improving the accuracy of energy analysis for residential buildings is 

illustrated in Figure 3 and is described in Sections 2.3.1–2.3.7. The first four subprocesses 

(Sections 2.3.1–2.3.4) improve field data collection procedures, simulation protocols, and 

software test suites to reduce software and input errors. The last three (Sections 2.3.5–2.3.7) 

track the impact of improving inputs and reference software by comparing analysis predictions to 

metered energy use in real homes.
7 

Figure 3: Continuous process for improving the accuracy of energy analysis for residential 

buildings 

2.3.1 Identify Potential Issues

The method illustrated in Figure 3 involves incremental improvements to energy analysis 

methods by identifying, investigating, and correcting specific input and software issues. The first 

step is to identify potential issues based on: 

• Comparisons of predicted versus metered energy use and savings. With large samples of 

predicted and metered energy uses, observation and statistical analysis of errors may 

identify certain building characteristics, occupant types, and building sites where energy 

analysis methods perform poorly. 

• External methods. Hypotheses about specific issues may originate from consensus of 

modeling experts, field tests, comparative software tests, etc.

Issues with the greatest potential impact on energy use and savings predictions, as determined 

from the literature and preliminary sensitivity and uncertainty studies, are given priority. A 

selected issue is typically classified as either an input issue or a software issue. In some cases the 

classification may be difficult to determine. For example, if the potential issue is heat transfer 

through uninsulated wall cavities, one could hypothesize that (1) the default input for the air-gap 

thermal resistance is incorrect; or (2) the current wall heat transfer model in the reference 
8 

software is not appropriate for uninsulated cavities. Because models define the necessary input 

values (in this example the 1-D conduction model in the software defines the need to input an air 

gap thermal resistance), the best approach is to first confirm the model is accurate and then 

verify that methods for defaulting, estimating, or measuring the relevant inputs are sufficient. 

2.3.2 Improve Inputs

Potential input issues are investigated and resolved through a series of steps described by Polly et 

al. (2011) (Appendix C of their report). Improvements are documented in technical reports along 

with expected impacts on the accuracy and cost of energy analysis methods. Organizations that 

maintain field data collection procedures and simulation protocols can choose whether to adopt 

improvements depending on their specific accuracy requirements and cost limitations. 

2.3.3 Improve Software

Potential software issues are investigated and resolved through a series of steps described by 

Polly et al. (2011) (Appendix D of their report). Software models and solution processes related 

to the issue are isolated in the code and then validated against empirical data from laboratory 

experiments and field tests. Improvements are documented in published technical reports, and 

when possible, implemented in reference software.3

2.3.4 Update Test Suites

Improvements to reference software tend to 

be additions or alterations to the underlying source code and result in compiling updated 

reference software. 

Figure 3 shows the overall process that results in improvements to reference software. 

Comparative test suites should be updated periodically so commercial software developers can 

verify they have implemented software improvements and simulation protocols correctly.4

Updating reference program results using improved reference software.

Updating comparative test suites involves:

Modifying or adding test cases that are designed to determine whether specific improvements 

have been implemented correctly.

Software improvement efforts may also result in analytical and empirical test cases that can be 

included in software test suites to help developers improve their software. 

2.3.5 Add Field Data to Repository

The subprocesses described in Sections 2.3.1–2.3.4 lead to improvements of energy analysis 

methods. To track their impact on the accuracy of analysis methods, NREL researchers compare 

analysis predictions to the performance of real homes. The first step is to collect empirical 

datasets from field analysis activities.

Field data for many residential buildings are collected and stored in a repository. The 

information collected in the field includes the building characteristics that are relevant to energy 

 

3 NREL researchers are directly involved in the development of EnergyPlus, which is the primary reference software 

tool supported by DOE. Improvements to other tools will be made at the discretion of those developing and 

maintaining the software. Recommendations for improved models and the expected benefits of adopting 

improvements will be documented and published in technical reports to aid software developers. When selecting 

reference tools for comparative test suites, NREL will consider tools that are actively implementing bug fixes and 

model improvements. 

4 Comparative test suites cannot be used to verify that recommended field data collection procedures are being 

followed.
9 

analysis, as well as metered utility data. The range and resolution of the field data are determined 

according to established field data collection procedures from labeling, rating, scoring, and 

retrofit efforts. This information must cover a wide range of residential building types and 

occupants and span each DOE climate region. When energy improvements are made, building 

descriptions and utility bill data also cover pre- and post-retrofit conditions.

2.3.6 Simulate in Reference Software

Reference software is used to simulate the residential buildings in the repository. Inputs come 

from the collected field data, or where appropriate, are calculated or defaulted under the 

guidance of published simulation protocols. The simulations predict long-term energy use and 

energy savings for buildings and retrofit packages represented in the field data.

2.3.7 Compare Predicted Versus Metered

Reference software predictions of long-term energy use and energy savings are compared to the 

metered utility data in the repository. Utility bill analysis methods such as PRISM (Fels 1986) 

can be used to disaggregate the metered energy use into several estimated end-use bins. This 

method provides more meaningful and diagnostic comparisons between predicted and metered 

data.5

2.4 Ongoing Efforts

The aggregate accuracy of the energy analysis method is quantified as described by Polly 

et al. (2011). Because the current versions of the reference software are used in conjunction with 

current simulation protocols and field data collection procedures, the predictions represent the 

current state of residential energy analysis methods. If current energy analysis methods are not 

accurate enough, other potential sources of inaccuracy must be investigated. 

This section describes ongoing research efforts at NREL and how each effort supports the 

method presented in Section 2.3 

2.4.1 Addressing Potential Issues

NREL has begun to identify, investigate, and correct input and software issues (see Figure 3). A 

preliminary list of potential issues was compiled and is presented by Polly et al. (2011)

(Appendix E of their report). NREL is also engaging the Building America Analysis Methods 

and Tools Standing Technical Committee to help: 

• Identify potential issues. 

• Prioritize potential issues.

• Peer review proposed improvements. 

A series of short NREL technical reports will document results and recommendations for 

individual issues. Others will summarize improvements to field data collection procedures, 

simulation protocols, and software test suites.

2.4.2 National Residential Efficiency Measures Database

In 2009, DOE tasked NREL to develop a National Residential Efficiency Measures Database6

 

5 Direct comparison of predicted and measured energy use is not without challenges. Uncertainties associated with 

occupant behavior, weather normalization, and end-use disaggregation make direct comparison inexact. Reddy 

(2006) provides a good overview of these issues in the context of software calibration. Mills (2004) highlights 

limitations related to the availability and manipulation of measured data.

 to 

create standard technical definitions for energy retrofit measures so software developers and 

6 See www.nrel.gov/ap/retrofits/index.cfm. 
10 

analysts would have access to consistent and vetted input information. The database is publicly 

available through a Web interface and XML (extensible markup language) feeds. Improvements 

to measure definitions will be made through scheduled database updates. 

To further improve the database, NREL is collecting and organizing field data from residential 

retrofit programs. These characteristics, consumption, cost, and performance data will help 

evolve the public-facing, aggregate measure data. As described in Sections 2.3.5–2.3.7, NREL 

will use the field data repository to assess the accuracy of reference software under the current 

field data collection procedures and simulation protocols. NREL is striving to make field data 

available to commercial software developers so they can use large empirical datasets to track the 

impact of improvements on software accuracy.

2.4.3 Building America House Simulation Protocol

NREL will continue to maintain and improve the Building America House Simulation Protocols7

2.4.4 BEopt Diagnostic Test Suite

(Hendron and Engebrecht 2010). Improvements will be documented in published updates, and 

can be adopted by other organizations that maintain simulation protocols. 

To facilitate rapid comparison of research-level, whole-building simulation engines, NREL 

developed the BEopt Diagnostic Test Suite. BEopt is a building energy optimization tool that 

currently interfaces with two simulation engines: EnergyPlus and DOE-2.2. Because BEopt is 

designed to evaluate alternative energy efficiency options and retrofit measures in new home 

construction and existing buildings, respectively, a comprehensive range of building 

characteristics, site conditions, and occupant behavior can be simulated automatically and 

systematically. This tool enables NREL researchers to identify and understand differences 

between simulation engines by eliminating discrepancies caused by inputs. Discrepancies 

between simulation engines may indicate potential software issues where analytical verification 

and empirical validation are needed.8

2.4.5 Building Energy Simulation Test

NREL researchers have developed an overall building energy software validation methodology 

that includes analytical solutions, comparative testing, and empirical data (Judkoff and Neymark 

2006). The methodology has been adopted by the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating 

and Air-Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) Standard 140 and is discussed in the ASHRAE 

Handbook of Fundamentals, along with the pros and cons of the analytical, comparative, and 

empirical methods (ASHRAE 2005). NREL researchers have written several building energy 

simulation test (BESTEST) suites (see Judkoff and Neymark 1995a, 1995b; Judkoff et al 2010; 

Neymark and Judkoff 2002, 2004, 2008, 2009a, 2009b; Neymark et al. 2005). Most have used 

comparative methods where software predictions are evaluated versus reference software 

predictions, and versus analytical solutions and verified numerical solutions when possible. 

These test suites have helped software developers diagnose and fix discrepancies caused by 

physical algorithms and coding. However, because there is no truth standard in comparative 

testing, such a suite is only as good as the reference software that is the basis for comparison. 

Also, analytical solutions and verified numerical solutions represent a mathematical truth 

 

7 Previously called the Building America Benchmark. 8

 Agreement between two simulation engines does not ensure agreement with the true performance of buildings; 

some models and solution processes in both programs may be incorrect relative to the true physical behavior of the 

building system. Possible software issues are thus identified by applying other techniques in addition to 

comparative testing. 
11 

standard, but not necessarily a physical truth standard. NREL is therefore interested in 

addressing empirical validation, the third component of the overall validation method. 

NREL will develop test suites that can be used to directly compare software predictions to 

empirical data. Classes of empirical data include:

• Laboratory and field test data for isolated building subsystems. Empirical datasets 

collected to validate software algorithms may be presented in a standardized form as 

empirical test cases. Such data, which are collected from highly controlled experiments 

designed to minimize input error, can be used to validate algorithms corresponding to 

different subsystems and the interactions of subsystems in building energy simulation 

programs. 

• Building characteristics and utility bill data. Empirical datasets collected to support the 

National Residential Efficiency Measures Database may also be presented in a 

standardized form to aid software developers in the evaluation of their tools against 

measured data. This type of data, which are collected from field analysis activities where 

input errors are not tightly controlled, can be used to assess the performance of software 

as it is typically used in the field.

The purpose of developing software test suites is to provide tools for developers to improve the 

accuracy of their software. Therefore, test suites should be diagnostic (allow users to determine 

the sources of inaccuracy) and cover a range of building characteristics, site conditions, and 

occupant behaviors. NREL will periodically update BESTEST comparative suites to reflect 

improvements to simulation protocols and reference software (see Section 2.3.4).

2.4.6 Estimating Uncertainty in Energy Analysis Predictions

Whether an input is defaulted, estimated, or measured, there is some uncertainty as to how 

closely the input value matches the “true” value. These errors in input propagate through a 

building energy simulation program to produce errors in output. Because there will always be 

some uncertainty in input values, there will always be some uncertainty in software predictions. 

In the process of addressing specific input issues, NREL will estimate the uncertainty of many 

input values for software. NREL is also exploring methods to estimate the uncertainty and 

natural variability in energy assessment data through controlled field studies. As more 

information is collected, NREL will use batch Monte Carlo simulation methods to estimate the 

overall uncertainty in predicted energy uses and savings for a variety of conditions. 

Understanding the variability and uncertainty in predictions will help establish expectations for 

software accuracy and identify the relative importance of each input parameter. Results from this 

research will lead to more accurate, streamlined, cost-effective energy assessments.

2.4.7 Field Testing

NREL and Building America field tests will collect data that can be used to validate software 

models (Section 2.3.3) and improve input collection methods (Section 2.3.2). 

2.4.8 Thermal Test Facility Experiments

Measurements taken in the NREL Thermal Test Facility will be used to improve the accuracy of 

models and inputs for various HVAC and domestic hot water systems. For example, laboratory 

tests will yield performance maps for various new and existing air-conditioning systems, which 

will help us validate software models and improve default input parameters. These detailed 
12 

performance characteristics will be added to the National Residential Efficiency Measures 

Database as they become available.

2.4.9 Field Data Measurement Technology Research and Development

In the process improving field data collection procedures (Section 2.3.2), gaps may be identified 

that demonstrate the need for measurement technology research and development. NREL plans 

to develop and test alternative measurement technologies that will lead to more accurate, more 

affordable, faster, and safer energy assessments.

2.5 Final Remarks

A method for improving the accuracy of residential energy analysis methods has been presented. 

Application of the method will result in improvements to:

• Field data collection procedures

• Simulation protocols

• Software test suites.

Energy assessors, analysts, and software developers can incorporate these improvements into 

their activities, resulting in more accurate energy analysis in the field. More accurate energy 

analysis methods will improve the success of energy-efficient design, labeling, scoring, rating, 

and retrofit efforts.

2.6 References

ASHRAE. 2005. ASHRAE Handbook Fundamentals. Atlanta, GA: American Society of Heating,

Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers.

ASHRAE. 2007. ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 140-2007. “Standard Method of Test for the 

Evaluation of Building Energy Analysis Computer Simulation Programs.” Atlanta, GA: 

American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers. 

Fels, M.F. 1986. “PRISM: An Introduction.” Energy and Buildings 9:5–18. 

Hendron, R.; Engebrecht, C. 2010. Building America House Simulation Protocol. Golden, CO: 

National Renewable Energy Laboratory. NREL/TP-550-49246. 

Judkoff, R.; Neymark, J. 1995a. International Energy Agency Building Energy Simulation Test 

(BESTEST) and Diagnostic Method. Golden, CO: National Renewable Energy Laboratory. 

NREL/TP-472-6231. 

Judkoff, R.; Neymark, J. 1995b. Home Energy Rating System Building Energy Simulation Test 

(HERS BESTEST). Vol. 1: Tier 1 and Tier 2 Tests User’s Manual and Vol. 2: Tier 1 and Tier 2 

Tests Reference Results. Golden, CO: National Renewable Energy Laboratory. NREL/TP-472-

7332. 

Judkoff, R.; Neymark, J. 2006. “Model Validation and Testing: The Methodological Foundation 

of ASHRAE Standard 140.” ASHRAE Transactions 112(2):367–376. Atlanta, GA: American 

Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers. 

Judkoff, R.; Polly, B.; Bianchi, M.; Neymark, J. 2010. Building Energy Simulation Test for 

Existing Homes (BESTEST-EX), Phase 1 Test Procedure: Building Thermal Fabric Cases. 

Golden, CO: National Renewable Energy Laboratory. NREL/TP-550-47427. 
13 

Mills, E. 2004. “Inter-comparison of North American Residential Energy Analysis Tools.” 

Energy and Buildings 36:865–880. 

Neymark, J.; Girault, P.; Guyon, G.; Judkoff, R.; LeBerre, R.; Ojalvo, J.; Reimer, P. 2005. “The 

‘ETNA BESTEST’ Empirical Validation Data Set.” Building Simulation 2005, 15–18 August, 

2005; Montreal, Canada. International Building Performance Simulation Association. 

Neymark, J.; Judkoff, R. 2002. International Energy Agency Building Energy Simulation Test 

and Diagnostic Method for Heating, Ventilating, and Air Conditioning Equipment Models 

(HVAC BESTEST), Volume 1: Cases E100-E200. Golden, CO: National Renewable Energy 

Laboratory. NREL/TP-550-30152. 

Neymark, J.; Judkoff, R. 2004. International Energy Agency Building Energy Simulation Test 

and Diagnostic Method for Heating, Ventilating, and Air Conditioning Equipment Models 

(HVAC BESTEST), Volume 2: Cases E300-E545, E200. Golden, CO: National Renewable 

Energy Laboratory. NREL/TP-550-36754. 

Neymark, J.; Judkoff, R. 2008. International Energy Agency Building Energy Simulation Test 

and Diagnostic Method (IEA BESTEST), Multi-Zone Non-Airflow In-Depth Diagnostic Cases: 

MZ320 -- MZ360. Golden, CO: National Renewable Energy Laboratory. NREL/TP-550-43827. 

Neymark, J.; Judkoff, R. 2009a. “IEA BESTEST In-Depth Diagnostic Cases for Ground 

Coupled Heat Transfer Related to Slab-On-Grade Construction.” Building Simulation 2009, 27–

30 July, 2009; Glasgow, Scotland, UK. International Building Performance Simulation 

Association.

Neymark, J.; Judkoff, R. 2009b. International Energy Agency Building Energy Simulation Test 

and Diagnostic Method (IEA BESTEST) In-Depth Diagnostic Cases for Ground Coupled Heat 

Transfer Related to Slab-On-Grade Construction. Golden, CO: National Renewable Energy 

Laboratory. NREL/TP-550-43388. 

Polly, B.; Kruis, N.; Roberts, D. 2011. Assessing and Improving the Accuracy of Energy 

Analysis for Residential Buildings. Golden, CO: National Renewable Energy Laboratory, TP5500-58065. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Energy, DOE/GO-102011-3243. 

Reddy, T.A. 2006. “Literature Review on Calibration of Building Energy Simulation Programs: 

Uses, Problems, Procedures, Uncertainty, and Tools” ASHRAE Transactions 112(1):226–240. 

Atlanta, GA: American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers. 
14 

3 Deep Retrofits 

Jeff Christian, Amy Wolfe, Roderick Jackson, and Tim Hendrick 

Oak Ridge National Laboratory 

3.1 Goal

This chapter supports the Residential Integration road mapping project for DOE’s BTP and 

addresses residential building research needs in areas where ORNL has historically had a lead 

technical responsibility: 

• Utility-led deep energy retrofits 

• Heating, ventilating, and air-conditioning (HVAC) 

• High-performance envelopes (roofs, walls, foundations, and moisture management) 

• Envelope materials research

• Validation of computer-predicted versus measured energy consumption 

• Materials characterization.

Also emphasized in these discussions are accelerated development of utility-led whole-house 

energy retrofits, thermal distribution, smart-grid-enhanced deep energy retrofits, and new 

maximum-high-performance residences exceeding anticipated IECC 2015 standards.

This material includes inputs from Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA), manufacturers of HVAC 

equipment, envelope materials, and energy management systems. 

3.2 Background

ORNL has worked closely with TVA on two projects that have produced a wealth of information 

about residential energy efficiency: 3 research houses with simulated occupancy since June 2008 

(the Campbell Creek houses), and 10 occupied deep-retrofit houses since March 2010. In both 

cases, the homes were selected after a TVA demographic analysis of its 9 million customers to 

determine the type, size, and characteristics of homes that are statistically near the average 

single-family residence. A most significant finding from analysis of the first year of very detailed 

performance data is that a 40% energy saving retrofit as defined by the Building America 

protocol for new houses (Hendron 2008) was attained at an incremental cost of $10,000 financed 

by a 10-year loan at 6% interest, which meets the Building America neutral-cash-flow criteria 

(energy cost savings exceeded the amortized cost of the loan). Loans with similar terms were 

available from the local utility that serves the Campbell Creek research houses at the time of this 

writing.

TVA has learned much as it expands its In-Home Energy Evaluation Program, and these lessons 

have strongly influenced this chapter by crystallizing the research that is needed to attain much 

greater energy savings from utility-led residential retrofits. 

ORNL is also collaborating with PNNL on a 50-home energy retrofit project in humid, mixedhumid, and marine climates. Specifically, ORNL is leading the technical assistance and 

coordination for 10 homes that will undergo energy retrofits in the Atlanta area. 
15 

3.3 Summary of Research Needs Identified

3.3.1 Utility-Led Deep Energy Retrofits

Review Manual J and Manual D with respect to variable-capacity equipment now available for 

the residential market and prepare a report suggesting how to revise to cover this equipment. 

• Duct Issues 

o Develop the technology to downsize abandoned ducts.

o Conduct a broad search for duct sealing techniques, employ the top three 

techniques in well-characterized deep-retrofit houses, and measure performance 

for one year. 

o Develop a duct model for residential retrofit designers.

o Instrument at least three well-characterized deep-retrofit houses with smart 

controls that have the potential to self learn, use homeowner input, and interface 

with the electric utility for demand-side management.

• Electric utility-sponsored home retrofits research.

o Identify optimum whole-house retrofit packages for at least one generating 

electric utility based on data from research houses and document the approach for 

replication by other electric utilities.

o Validate energy audit software with measured data. Use whole-house and 

submetered energy consumption data from occupied and simulated-occupancy 

homes to generate DOE Energy Home Score and Home Energy Rating System 

(HERS) values and compare to normalized measured energy savings. 

• Pilot the DOE Home Energy Score Program in at least 5 of the 156 TVA distributors’ 

service territories. 

o Implement for one full year a single major retrofit package in all three Campbell 

Creek research houses with simulated occupancy, and a matrix which reflects 

average, energy-saving, and energy-wasting occupants and average envelope, 

retrofitted average, and very-high-performance envelope houses will be filled out 

with the resulting energy savings.

o Work with key manufacturers to gather the information needed for software 

developers to accurately reflect the performance of advanced technologies 

operating in the research houses in future revisions of audit and simulation tools 

commonly used by retrofit auditors. 

o Develop reliable partners from among stakeholders in the building and 

manufacturing industries, financial institutions, and real estate businesses to help 

validate annual and peak load energy savings for use in electric utility resource 

planning models. 

o Conduct home retrofit research to enhance the effectiveness of ongoing utilitysponsored programs, based on data from the Campbell Creek houses and the 20 

occupied deep-energy retrofit houses. 
16 

• Identify needed data that utilities could collect before, during, and after retrofit. 

o Develop the protocol for local third-party case studies with homeowner 

satisfaction feedback before and after measured savings are shown to the 

homeowner to strengthen the effectiveness of marketing and incentives. 

o Include a home retrofit plan on the utility bill. This should include target energy 

savings, progress toward the final goal, and a reward when the goal is achieved. 

Use the data from the research houses to develop a method for generating this 

type of information for utilities to use for monthly feedback to homeowners. 

o Conduct research to provide interval data, smart meters, and in-home displays to 

enable “Customers as Partners” on systems goals (e.g., delaying the need for new 

generation capacity). 

o Provide the residential retrofit research to help expedite at least one utility’s effort 

to “go through a program development process until you crack the code with the 

silver bullet solution.” (Frank Rapley, TVA 2010). 

o Work with local government agencies to provide an electronic tool box on 

Chamber of Commerce websites, and develop a community residential energy 

retrofit savings competition with case studies documenting homeowner 

satisfaction with energy savings, comfort, and IAQ. 

o Considering house life-stage triggers requiring remodeling or system replacement, 

determine, once the life-stage trigger kicks in, how to deliver each major 

component of a whole-house retrofit faster, cheaper, and deeper to achieve greater 

peak and annual energy savings. Develop a method for generating customized 

home-retrofit plans to be included in monthly utility bills. A tool needs to be 

developed that can process the energy use, age and efficiency of major energy 

consuming systems, and the homeowners’ remodeling desires, energy saving 

priorities, and financial situation and generate a phased whole-house energy 

retrofit plan.

o Work with a manufacturer partner to develop low-cost enhanced control logic for 

air cycler controllers and demonstrate in research houses.

3.3.2 Research To Address Factors Affecting Availability of Commercially Viable 

Equipment With Variable-Capacity Compressors That Achieves Installed 

Performance That Meets DOE Goals for High Part-Load Efficiency and 

Dehumidification

• Conduct side-by-side field comparisons of variable-speed heat pump options with 

operation optimized for annual energy savings versus peak load reductions. 

• Field test to compare advanced vapor compressive cycles to inverter technology with 

variable refrigerant flow to central single indoor units and multi-split systems. 

3.3.3 Significant Envelope and Thermal Distribution Energy Savings Beyond 

IECC 2012 and IECC 2015

• Develop an industry-accepted protocol for establishing a National Opaque Wall Rating 

Label. Carry one envelope system through the procedure and present to DOE and the 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for approval. 
17 

• Develop a structurally insulated panel (SIP) kit for a very-high-performance affordable 

new house that meets anticipated IECC 2015 standards. 

• Develop a process for manufacturing exterior-applied retrofit SIP nail-base panels that 

meet anticipated IECC 2015 roof and wall requirements. 

3.3.4 Foundations

• Develop a foam glass bottom-course insulated block system to minimize thermal shorts 

with above-grade exterior wall brick cladding. 

• Conduct laboratory tests to characterize capillary wicking in concrete foundation walls, 

and use the data to develop a simple homeowner test kit to determine where interior 

insulation is appropriate.

• Perform side-by-side testing of interior basement insulation having very permeable 

facings in the mixed humid climate to generate validation data for hygrothermal 

foundation models and guidelines in the draft DOE Foundations Design Handbook

(2011). 

• Test Class 1 and 2 moisture retarders in below-grade walls in the field in mixed-humid 

climates and via modeling analysis.

3.4 Major Research Issues Associated With Deep Energy Retrofits

3.4.1 Utility-Led Deep Energy Retrofits

3.4.1.1 System Capacity

New high-efficiency HVAC systems with variable-capacity compressors are performing well in 

research houses. A very attractive feature of these systems is that they impose far smaller 

oversizing penalties than traditional systems do, and the HVAC installer can worry less about 

historic rightsizing issues. However, wasting retrofit funds on more HVAC capacity than 

necessary constitutes a barrier to achieving maximum affordable energy efficiency. To allow 

proper sizing of these advanced heat pumps in high-performance retrofits, Manual J and Manual 

S need to be revised to provide comprehensive guidance. Careful field data collection, heat pump 

model development, and computer simulation validation need to be conducted from multiple test 

sights surrounded by whole-house performance measurements to generate well-characterized 

datasets. 

3.4.1.2 Duct Issues

The November 2–4, 2010, Building America planning meeting identified major spaceconditioning gaps after whole-house retrofits as (1) design and installation of properly sized 

ducts, (2) moving ducts into conditioned space, and (3) guidelines for sealing inaccessible ducts. 

The “Space Conditioning and Hot Water” breakout named as its second-highest priority fixing 

ducts during whole-house retrofits by proper sizing. 

• Duct downsizing. Even after extensive envelope improvements in both R-value and 

airtightness, and homeowners’ investments in high-efficiency equipment, hard-to-reach 

ducts are being left in place. These ducts create the weak link in the chain. Could a 

system be developed that effectively downsizes these abandoned ducts, for instance by 

running a (puncture-resistant) balloon from the central plenum to the supply and return 

registers and selecting the degree of inflation according to a Manual D calculation? 

Injecting foam in the void between the properly sized balloon and the old duct could 

create a permanent down-sizing, allowing the balloon to be pulled out and used on the 
18 

next job. Something similar is done to reline and insulate old steam lines in industrial 

facilities.

• Duct sealing. A large fraction of ducts in deep retrofits will be left in unconditioned 

spaces. We now understand that these ducts are rarely sealed properly in the traditional 

way with mastic. Instead, a lot of mastic tape is being used, and the tedious nature of in 

situ duct sealing makes it prone to lower quality work than is desirable. Duct blasters can 

diagnose leaks, but time spent on testing is time lost time for duct sealing. To address this 

problem, a survey of duct-sealing techniques should be done, followed by testing and 

performance measurement of several promising innovative systems in deep-retrofit 

houses. A mastic that turns blue if a high-velocity air film is nearby would be the type of 

real-time visual feedback that could promote consistently high-quality, effective duct 

sealing. Shrink wrap duct insulation would be another technical breakthrough. 

• Duct insulation. Guidelines for duct insulation after envelope retrofits are also needed. 

To develop accurate guidance, it is necessary to develop a good duct model based on 

several of the Building America deep-retrofit houses and follow up with extensive 

monitoring to allow validation with measured data. Once calibrated, this tool should be 

the backbone for supporting the duct sealing and insulating guidelines. 

3.4.1.3 Smart Grid and Home Automation

On March 22–23, 2010, ORNL held a meeting with more than 200 stakeholders to help plan the 

most promising building energy research for the next 10 years. Participants in the “Residential 

Whole Building Integration” breakout represented electric utilities, manufacturers of appliances, 

HVAC, and control systems, several national laboratories, Building America teams, and leading 

energy efficiency builders in eastern Tennessee. The most important project was “Interoperability of smart energy devices (appliances, HVAC, lighting) with smart meters, need to 

characterize energy peaks,” to focus on standardization, communication protocols, streamlined 

process for commissioning, national laboratories providing third-party testing in the research 

houses, and partnering with organizations working on automation standards. 

The national laboratory representatives at the November 2010 Building America planning 

meeting also selected this project area as number one (“Smart Controls” with cooperative control 

of miscellaneous loads and self learning capabilities). The group indicated that to address this 

issue the test houses should be able to simulate different grid signals and interfaces to grid 

capabilities, and should be used for comparing communication protocols and developing a 

whole-house smart-grid interface. Partners that should be included are the Association of Home 

Appliance Manufacturers, trade associations in consumer electronics, ASHRAE (BacNet), the 

Electric Power Research Institute, TVA, the PV/inverter industry, the Society of Automotive 

Engineers, and manufacturers of home energy management systems. 

3.4.1.4 Electric Utility-Sponsored Home Retrofits and Support of Integrated Resource 

Planning

After the federal boost to energy retrofits through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, 

the most likely industry to carry the momentum into a sustainable market for whole-house 

energy retrofits is the utilities. At a Building America expert meeting in Chicago on November 

16, 2010, a key observation was that R&D is needed to lower the generating utilities’ risk in 

engaging in home retrofit programs, particularly in light of their other options for providing 

reliable, safe, low-cost energy. In its 2010 Integrated Resource Plan (IRP), TVA considers 
19 

achieving short-term energy efficiency and demand-response goals by expanding its residential 

retrofit incentive program to help attain 1400 MW of peak power savings by 2012, accelerating 

coal plant layups totaling 4730 MW by 2015, and delaying the need for the Bellefonte Nuclear 

Power Plant Unit 1 from 2018 to 2022. For energy efficiency to gain the confidence of utilities, 

energy savings predictions must be reliable. Several important research products are critical to 

addressing this need. 

• Balance of peak kilowatt and kilowatt-hour savings. The business driver for electric 

generating utilities is to offset the revenue lost from selling fewer kilowatt-hours with the 

savings from not expending resources for future generation capacity. Utilities will have 

the strongest interest in incentivizing residential retrofits that accomplish this goal. What 

are the optimum retrofit packages for generating assured peak kilowatt savings to offset 

the lost revenue from kilowatt-hour sales? Research is needed to identify whole-house 

retrofit packages for at least one generating electric utility based on hourly submetered 

research homes, and to document the approach for other electric utilities to follow to 

generate optimum packages for their climates and economic markets.

• Validation of energy audit software with measured data. The area that drew the top 

seed in the tools breakout session of the November Building America planning meeting 

was: “Validation of Software Standards for DOE recognition of audit software tools. 

Define accuracy, credibility, and capability.” A significant barrier to whole-house energy 

retrofits is lack of confidence in predicted energy savings due to large variances in 

modeled performance. Predicted energy savings from energy audit and design tools can 

predict annual energy consumption and savings quite accurately. However, when 

individual houses are evaluated on the basis of their as-built and installed energy 

efficiency characteristics (“asset-evaluated”), there is often considerable inconsistency 

between predicted and actual energy use. As the home energy retrofit industry is 

stimulated, homeowners’ and investors’ confidence in expected savings and return on 

retrofit investments must be established to promote long-term sustainability. Wholehouse and submetered energy consumption data from occupied and simulated-occupancy 

homes should be used to provide Home Energy Score and HERS values, these values 

compared with normalized measured energy savings representative of asset performance, 

the sources of discrepancies identified.

• TVA/ORNL pilot of DOE’s Home Energy Score Program. TVA and ORNL have 

worked together on residential research since 2002, aiming to scale up results from 18 

test houses to have a major impact on the TVA portfolio of demand-response and energy 

saving options. Through the pilot of the Home Energy Score Program, TVA and ORNL 

propose to identify best practices to guide the program as it rolls out to other utility-led 

programs. 

TVA’s In-Home Energy Evaluation Program home evaluators are certified by the 

Building Performance Institute (BPI), conduct a pre-retrofit walkthrough evaluation and 

post-retrofit inspection, currently collecting most of the 45 inputs needed to generate the 

Home Energy Score value of 1–10. 

The proposal is to generate Home Energy Scores before and after participating homes 

receive audits from the TVA In-Home Energy Evaluation Program. This score would be 

used as added incentive to encourage participation by more homeowners. The motivation 
20 

to the homeowners is that they would have a certified national label, which TVA hopes 

will evolve into a recognized added value when the home is sold. This would mitigate 

homeowners’ concerns about the value of their investments beyond the TVA incentives. 

It also would allow TVA to offer tiered incentives based on performance. Currently all 

eligible retrofits can be put toward the $500-per-house incentive. This proposal calls for 

the following: 

o Organize and fund an educational event for contractors on TVA’s Quality 

Contractor Network in the pilot area. This would include BPI training, systematic 

retrofit approaches, and presentation of results from the research houses under 

study by ORNL and TVA. 

o Offer the Home Energy Score pilot to all five TVA distributors whose territories 

have DOE/TVA/ORNL deep-retrofit research houses under study by ORNL. 

o Generate a predicted post-retrofit Home Energy Score during the initial evaluation 

and provide general information about how to attain a higher score by investing in 

a variety of retrofit packages.

o After the walkthrough inspection, change the model inputs to reflect the properly 

installed retrofits and generate the higher Home Energy Score. 

o Leave the BPI-certified score with the homeowners and urge them to show this 

score to the real estate agents/appraisers before placing their home on the market.

TVA/ORNL will evaluate the pilot after one year, as follows:

• Evaluate the impact of tiered TVA incentives, ranging from $1000 for 3-point 

improvement to $2500 for 5 or more points in addition to the incentives for retrofits are 

already in place like $2000 per house that is likely to result in about 20% energy savings. 

This is the current opportunity in four of the largest TVA distributors in southwestern 

Kentucky. We propose that DOE help find the sweet spot to encourage homeowners to 

chase after 30%, 40%, and 50% savings. The goal would be to align this incentive with 

the utilities cost savings from avoided electric generation capacity and purchased power 

expenses from other utilities. At this time TVA uses $0.045/kWh saved for a 10- to 15-

year period. 

• Evaluate the increase in participation and retrofits from this expanded offering compared 

to current program. 

• Compare predicted energy savings of participants in the pilot to measured post-retrofit 

savings, and to the 10 deep retrofits under study by ORNL/TVA in the same areas and 

housing markets. 

The three Campbell Creek research houses are providing great insight on prioritizing 

retrofit measures based on energy savings with average American energy-usage patterns. 

The experimental plan for this facility has always been to rotate simulated occupant 

energy behavior (wasting, average, and conserving) in each month. TVA and ORNL 

propose to provide a robust basis for predicting aggregate energy usage for utilities’ 

integrated resource planning by implementing the same major retrofit package in the 

three Campbell Creek houses, measuring their performance for a full year, and providing 
21 

the data to fill in the resulting energy savings in Table 1, which accounts for asset quality 

and occupant behavior. 

Table 1. Matrix of Three Levels of Energy Performing Houses and Three Levels of EnergyConsuming Occupants

Occupancy/House Type Builder Retrofit New High Performance

Energy waster X X X 

Typical homeowner X X X 

Energy conserver X X X 

These data would go a long way toward building a reliable model that would allow direct 

optimization of TVA’s balance of supply capacity, energy demand, and savings investments. The 

research approach would be to build this model for at least one of TVA’s major metropolitan 

distributors. After the approach is validated with DOE’s assistance, the electric utility would 

likely provide funds to and scale up the model to all 155 distributors. 

• Integrate next-generation technologies into energy audit and simulation software. 

Variable-capacity heat pumps, heat pump water heaters, ENERGY STAR® washers,

horizontal geothermal loop systems, and advanced MELs are all examples of 

technologies that are in test houses but are not accurately modeled in audit and simulation 

tools. TVA/ORNL propose to work with GE, Daikin, Mitsubishi, and Trane to gather 

information to make performance data on these technologies available to software 

developers for inclusion in future revisions to whole-building simulation tools commonly 

used by retrofit designers. 

• Develop reliable partners from among stakeholders in building and manufacturing 

industries, financial institutions, and real estate concerns to help validate Generating 

Electric Utility Resource Planning Models. Participation from such partners is essential to 

developing credible predictions of sustained energy savings that are scalable across an 

array of home types and energy use behavior representative of aggregated residential 

markets. 

• Home retrofit research to enhance the effectiveness of ongoing utility-sponsored 

programs. 

• Identify needed data that utilities could collect during the retrofit, not just before and 

after.

o Determine how utilities could encourage more homeowner involvement. Develop 

the protocol for local third-party case studies with homeowner satisfaction 

feedback before and after data on savings are collected and shown to the 

homeowner. These case studies will strengthen the effectiveness of marketing and 

incentives.

o Include a home retrofit plan on the utility bill. This should include target energy 

savings, progress toward the final goal, and some type of reward when the goal is 

achieved. Using the data from the research houses, develop a method for 

generating this type of information for utilities to use for monthly feedback to 

homeowners. 
22 

o Provide third-party interval data, smart meters, and in-home displays to provide 

customers with more information about their energy consumption and its relation 

to energy retrofits, enable direct communications from utilities, and create more 

choices. The goal of the research is to enable utilities to provide information that 

makes customers feel more like partners on systems goals such as accelerated 

retirement of old coal-fired power plants and delaying the need for new nuclear 

facilities.

o Provide the residential retrofit research to help accelerate at least one utility to “go 

through a program development process until you cracked the code with the silver 

bullet solution” (Frank Rapley, TVA 2010) 

o Working with local entities: 

 Citizens’ electronic residential retrofit tool box on Chamber of Commerce 

websites.

 Community energy retrofit savings competition. The core of this effort is 

to generate local case studies with solid energy performance data and 

homeowner testimony of satisfaction with not only energy savings but 

comfort and IAQ. 

3.4.1.5 Deep Energy Retrofit Projects Triggered by Homeowner Needs

R&D is needed to identify how to deliver each component of a whole-house retrofit faster, 

cheaper, and deeper (for greater peak and annual energy savings). The national laboratory 

brainstorm at DOE in November 2010 concluded that one of the three top-priority research 

projects was “the drive-by audit”―a low-cost, automated, accurate, diagnostic process and audit. 

The desired features of this audit focus on less inconvenience and more information and choices 

for the home owner and relaxing the tension between accuracy and expense.

Utility-sponsored in-home energy evaluations, retrofits, and inspections need to lead toward a 

phased, whole-house energy retrofit plan triggered by home life stages such as remodeling and 

system replacement, and matched to homeowners’ available cash flow over a 3-5-year time 

horizon. Personalized retrofit plans should be included in homeowners’ utility bills. A tool is 

needed that can process the energy use, age, and efficiency of all major energy-consuming 

features of the home along with the homeowners’ remodeling desires, energy saving priorities, 

and financial situations, and generate a phased whole-house energy retrofit plan. Research is 

needed to determine a set of rules for optimizing the sequencing of individual retrofit steps 

phased to match homeowners and home life stages. 

In addition to investigating approaches to providing a low-cost “drive-by” audit, home energy 

assessors need better diagnostic tools to adequately characterize home conditions. Presently, only 

qualitative assessments regarding the insulation level in walls can be made with infrared thermal 

cameras. These assessments serve as an added layer of data uncertainty in home energy analysis 

software, which helps to preclude the determination of accurate and reliable home energy 

consumption and saving potential. Therefore, research is needed to develop a diagnostic tool that 

can be used to deduce the R-value of walls in existing buildings. This tool could help provide for 

wall R-values what blower-door analysis has provided for envelope air infiltration. 

To support utility integrated resource planning, utility home audits should be integrated with 

home energy ratings based on the rating system that provides the most reliable, meaningful, 
23 

useful information. TVA is contemplating the adoption of the best home rating procedure to 

incorporate into its growing in-home energy evaluation program. The percentage energy savings 

measured at the three Campbell Creek houses correlated very well with the HERS Index 

developed for each house. Compared to the base-case builder house with a HERS rating of 101, 

the retrofit house with a HERS of 68 consumed 67% and the very-high-performance house with 

a HERS rating of 34 consumed 35% over a full year of detailed measured performance. All 

retrofit research houses should have home energy scores calculated and compared (on the basis 

of source energy savings) to other houses in the same climate bins.

3.4.1.6 Low-Cost, Enhanced Control Logic for Air Cycler Controllers 

A major concern that has been uncovered in the very-high-performance (tight) houses under 

study is that their dryer ducts become plugged with lint more than those in conventional housing. 

The dryer sucks 150–250 cfm from the laundry room. If the surrounding space is very airtight, 

less air will be pulled into the dryer, which will result in slower velocities in the dryer duct and 

more lent depositing on the outlet vent. This finding begs for demand-enabled ventilation 

capabilities. When the electric or gas dryer or gas stove and all other gas appliances that are not 

pulling combustion air from outside the envelope are running, more mechanical ventilation is 

needed. Secondly, when the simple air cycler is used to open a motorized damper to bring in 

fresh air, it is totally dependent on the suction in the return plenum. Because suction can vary 

with variable-speed indoor fan motors, a feedback loop is needed to adjust the time of opening 

the fresh air damper depending on the HVAC indoor fan mode of operation. Continuous 

adjustment is needed to account for the varying amount of time the fan unit will be operating at 

high and low speeds. With a manufacturer partner develop low-cost, enhanced control logic for 

air cycler controllers. 

3.4.2 Factors Affecting Availability of Commercially Viable Residential Heat 

Pumps and Air Conditioner Units for New and Retrofit Application With 

Installed Performance That Meets DOE Goals for High Part-Load Efficiency 

and Dehumidification Performance

This will specifically address variable-capacity compressors. 

An informal session on variable-capacity heat pumps and AC units was held at the 2010 ACEEE 

conference. Manufacturers claim that variable-speed heat pumps and AC can be run to optimize 

overall annual efficiency, provide intelligent peak load reduction (e.g., modulating down to 

75%), eliminate inrush current, and operate at a power factor near 1.0. This session of about 30 

experts from HVAC manufacturers and electric utilities generated several research questions that 

address optimal selection metrics, whether this equipment should be optimized for full or part 

load, options and controls for its use for demand-response programs, and other issues.

3.4.2.1 Side-by-Side Field Comparisons

The most important action suggested by this knowledgeable group is conducting year-long, sideby-side field comparisons of several variable-capacity equipment options while operations are 

optimized for annual energy savings or for peak load reductions. Providing groups interested in 

maximum annual energy savings and peak savings with well-characterized field site data will go 

a long way toward answering these questions and ensuring that optimized HVAC units will be 

available to meet the near-term demand expected from a rapidly expanding retrofit market. 
24 

3.4.2.2 Zoned Concept

The research results from the first year of detailed measurements in the Campbell Creek test 

houses show that the zoned concept (one unit servicing each floor) controls temperature and 

humidity well. Smaller single-unit central air systems with zoned ducts are not showing first-cost 

savings; they also are having higher maintenance costs. Additional field testing is needed to 

compare advanced vapor compressive cycles to inverter technology with variable refrigerant 

flow to both central single indoor units located in mechanical rooms feeding central duct 

systems, and ductless multi-split systems with individual indoor units distributed in each zone of 

the house. 

Research findings from the Campbell Creek houses have lead to a retrofit of a 7-indoor-unit, 

single-outdoor-unit multi-split. Continued testing is needed to explore the tradeoffs of various 

optimized distributed space conditioning strategies. This need was voted the top research 

opportunity by the “Space Conditioning and Hot Water” breakout session at the November 2010 

Building America planning meeting. 

3.4.3 Envelope and Thermal Distribution Energy Savings Beyond IECC 2012 and 

IECC 2015 Code Goals for New Housing and Deep Energy Retrofits

Envelope research opportunities for high-R walls, roofs, and foundations: IECC 2012 will 

increase wall R-values in Zones 3 and 4 from R-13 to R-20, in Zone 5 from R-19 to R-20, in 

Zone 6 from R-19 to R-20+R-5, and in Zones 7 and 8 from R-21 to R-20+R-5. In addition 2012 

IECC will require all homes to have blower door testing and the air leakage not to exceed 5 

ACH50 (air changes per hour at 50 Pascal) for climate zones 1–3 and 3 ACH50 for all other 

climate zones. The most advanced framed house at Campbell Creek meeting all the standards for 

“Fully Aligned Air Barriers and Air Sealing” in EPA’s ENERGY STAR Homes checklist, 

measuring just under the limit with 2.4 ACH50. If DOE and partners are successful in proposed 

changes for IECC 2015 these required R-values and airtightness requirements are likely to climb 

even higher. The research needed to generate energy savings beyond these levels fall into two 

areas: moisture management and advanced envelope systems.

3.4.3.1 Moisture Research and Other Research Needs Affecting the Health, Safety, 

and Durability of High-R Envelopes, Including The Need To Expand the 

Scientific Basis for These Areas

• Moisture management research. Although since the late 1970s building efficiency 

brainstorming sessions around the world have emphasized the need for hygrothermal 

models for efficient use with commonly used building simulation tools, it has still not 

been accomplished, particularly for foundation analysis. The word moisture was 

mentioned in the November 2010 Building America brainstorming session 21 times. 

WUFI needs to be seamlessly linked with EnergyPlus. 

Spray foam for attics, crawlspaces, and basements is taking off with much success across 

the country, yet failures typically leading to moisture management issues are popping up 

and need to be analyzed, categorized, generic faults identified, and all documented in best 

practice guidelines and sprayer certification training.

External envelope solutions that enhance moisture control need to be developed. 

• Health, safety, and durability of high-R envelopes. The heavy focus on air-sealing 

existing homes will affect health and safety unless precautions are taken. The solutions 

for radon problems in new homes have been developed, but this problem is more difficult 
25 

to manage in existing homes. One idea that needs further research and development is a 

solar-powered sub-crawlspace, membrane depressurization fan.

On-demand ventilation needs further development. To attain the high performance 

required beyond the 50% solution suggested for IECC 2015 will most likely require 

demand ventilation that can sense occupants and the operation of unvented gas 

appliances, electric and gas dryers, and exhaust fans.

Research is also needed to address fire and flame spread issues in attics, crawlspaces, 

basements, and external walls.

• Expanding the scientific basis for developing high-performance foam materials for 

building envelopes. We are not far away from banning from our building materials all 

compounds with the potential to cause global warming. These fourth-generation products 

need early field testing to avoid problems of shrinkage, lower R-values per inch, and 

more restrictive acceptable application temperatures.

Properties of foam insulation must be optimized differently depending on whether they are used 

for attics, walls, or foundations. Designer foam is needed that can apply customized properties 

from a single nozzle: conductivity, fire resistance, structural, and permeability to vapor and air. 

3.4.3.2 Advanced Envelope Material And System Performance Targets and 

Specifications for Fire Resistance (Typically Covered by the Manufacturer), 

Permeability, Durability, Termite Resistance (ORNL Has Conducted Limited 

Termite Resistance Testing, but This Is Typically a Manufacturer Covered 

Expense), Thermal Resistance, Etc.

• An expanded materials and systems characterization program with DOE goals to exceed 

the proposed 2015 IECC of whole-house savings of 50% above IECC 2006 at installed 

costs 15% less than advanced framing with a continuous air barrier, insulated headers, 

insulated corners, sill-plate sealing, top-plate sealing, and wind baffles, and commercially 

available insulated sheathings and cavity insulations can provide. 

• A systematic building materials and systems evaluation protocol, similar to the DOE 

Lighting Caliper program. In 1995 ORNL first proposed a National Opaque Wall Rating 

Label, (J.E. Christian and J. Kosny, Towards a National Opaque Wall Rating Label, U.S. 

DOE Building Thermal Envelope VI Conference, 1995). Today all the tools and standard 

measurement protocols are available to completely cover envelope system, durability, 

thermal resistance, and airtightness, and ORNL proposes to perform a series of laboratory 

tests concurrent with the construction of a single demonstration house to establish an 

industry-accepted protocol for attaining a National Opaque Wall Rating Label. One 

envelope system will be carried through the full procedure and presented to DOE and 

EPA for approval. 

• 2015 New House Now! Increasingly stringent energy standards are likely to pose 

compliance challenges, particularly to smaller builders that simply cannot construct 50% 

more efficient houses using traditional construction techniques. This will create the need 

for premanufactured roof, wall, and foundation panel systems such as SIPs for aboveand below-grade applications. Potentially SIP kit houses could be shipped precertified to 

exceed IECC 2015 standards. ORNL’s studies of the four Wolf Creek houses have shown 

that SIPS could be constructed faster; attain better airtightness, and save more energy 
26 

than three other houses with advanced envelope systems. A great deal has been learned 

and SIP clearly outperforms optimal-value wood-frame construction in airtightness, 

energy savings, and speed of construction. Every SIP house that ORNL has been 

involved in since 2002 has measured airtightness below 2 ACH@50. None of the crews 

have been “experienced” SIP installers.

The only category that SIP construction historically struggles with is installed first cost 

compared to advanced framing systems, but this was with much lower R-value and airtightness 

requirements than those needed to go beyond IECC 2015. Custom SIP houses require in most 

areas a structural engineer’s design and stamp, but an affordable SIP kit with a complete open 

floor plan, factory-installed electric wiring, home-run plumbing, and central utility wall removes 

that barrier. With results and structural analysis from shaker table experiments completed, a 

design and cost report will be completed for a single 1600–2000-ft2 SIP kit house that will 

satisfy 130-mph wind and seismic criteria for construction permit approval. Construction-ready 

design drawings were previously completed under DOE research funding. 

A strong network of industry partners has been built as a result of DOE-funded research 

spanning from 2002 to 2011. A set of electronic, downloadable housing designs and cost reports 

for affordable SIP/insulating concrete form (ICF) kit housing for new and retrofit applications 

could help educate small builders and perhaps help them to recover from the housing recession. 

ICF foundation systems are ideal for setting SIP above-grade walls because they offer kit-type 

solutions that attain the high R-values, airtightness, and moisture management required to go 

beyond the IECC 2015 50% solution. Private industry will obviously develop plan variations 

once, with DOE’s help, a near-optimum package for a very utilitarian house plan is developed, 

built, and tested. The construction of the house would be financed by an already-identified 

partner.

3.4.3.3 High-Performance Retrofit Panel 

House retrofits that need new siding or additions are great candidates for SIPs. A process will be 

developed for creating high-performance panels for the exterior of deep-retrofit houses that strive 

to meet IECC 2015 standards for new house energy performance, which will transform a GIS 

picture into panel cut drawings.

3.4.3.4 Foundations

The Building America Foundations Expert Panel in 2009 generated a list of research needs that 

have yet to be addressed. ORNL was an active participant in the DOE Building America 

November 2010 Planning Meeting foundations breakout team.

• Foundation insulation detail with above-grade exterior-wall brick cladding that avoids the 

thermal short like an insulated bottom course of insulated block. All exterior insulation 

must be insect and moisture resistant. Foam glass has been discussed for years as a first 

course for brick-clad buildings. 

• Laboratory measurements are needed to determine capillary wicking from footers in 

water and wet soil into foundation walls. Testing is also needed of various types of 

concrete masonry units (CMUs) and poured concrete, with and without a capillary break 

between the footer and the foundation wall. Simple homeowner testing kits are needed to 

determine where interior insulation is appropriate for the foundation, especially for 

retrofit situations. 
27 

• Basement insulation systems have been installed successfully with very permeable 

facings, yet Smegal and Straube (2010) decline to suggest these systems for northern 

climates, stating that, “...vapor diffusion will be higher both ways, and air leakage 

condensation will be significantly greater across a perforated facer than a non perforated 

facer.” Side-by-side testing of systems has been conducted by the Consortium for 

Advanced Research Buildings (CARB) and the University of Minnesota, but testing is 

needed in the mixed humid climate, where more drying to the interior is possible, to 

generate solid validation data for hygrothermal models and ultimately the foundation 

retrofit electronic handbook on ORNL’s website. 

• Smegal and Straube (2010) show convincingly that Class 1 and 2 moisture retarders in 

below-grade walls on typical fiberglass-insulated walls will have unacceptable moisture 

problems. But more permeable facings such as drywall with latex paint will allow some 

drying to the inside. These systems need to be more carefully studied both in the field in 

mixed humid climates and via modeling analysis. Measurements are needed to determine 

whether EPS would work as well as XPS in foundation insulation moisture control 

systems, And to test 2-in. × 4-in. framing offset from the foundation wall by 1 in. to 2 in. 

and sprayed solid with open-cell foam insulation.

3.5 References

DOE. 2011. Building Design Foundations Handbook (draft). Washington, DC: U.S. Department 

of Energy. www.ornl.gov/sci/buildingsfoundations/handbook/index.shtml. 

Hendron, R. 2008. Building America Research Benchmark Definition: Updated December 20, 

2007. Golden, CO: National Renewable Energy Laboratory, NREL/TP-550-42662. 

www.nrel.gov/docs/fy08osti/42662.pdf. 

Smegal, J.; Straube, J. 2010. Building America Special Research Project—High-R Foundations 

Case Study Analysis. Somerville, MA: Building Science Corporation. 

www.buildingscience.com/documents/reports/rr-1003-building-america-high-r-foundations-casestudy-analysis.
28 

4 Deep Energy Upgrades and Improvements

Iain S. Walker 

Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory

4.1 Problem Summary

4.1.1 Problem Statement

We need to reduce the energy used in residential buildings by at least 50%. 

4.1.2 Solution—Upgrade and Improve Existing Homes

• Create a brand. The DOE BLUE SHEET for deep retrofits and the DOE ORANGE 

SHEET for normal retrofits. These sheets list the target values for various aspects of the 

homes (e.g., wall insulation, window performance, heating and cooling equipment 

efficiency, envelope and duct leakage, duct insulation, water heater EF, etc.) that will be 

required to meet deep retrofit requirements. These values will vary by climate/building 

location. The intent is to remove some of the guesswork from the process and to give 

contractors and homeowners something straightforward and simple to refer to that is 

endorsed by DOE.

• Keep it simple: low transaction costs.

• Use available technology; for example, highest Consortium for Energy Efficiency (CEE) 

tiers.

• Address technology gaps. 

• Ensure that health, safety, durability, and IAQ issues are addressed.

This problem has several categories:

• Technical. We need to find more efficient ways to provide heat, hot water, cooling, 

lighting, cooking, cleaning, bathing, security, healthy environments, etc. We need only a 

few new technologies. Deficient areas are ventilation controls, dehumidification in humid 

climates, and eliminating vampire loads. We need to provide low-energy entertainment, 

because this is an expanding field of household energy use. We need to expand technical 

efforts to include multifamily homes and rental properties. Some technical issues such as 

shared hot water equipment are unique to multifamily homes. Rental properties require a 

distinction between those who can legally make changes to the property and those who 

accrue the savings.

• Behavioral. A deeply retrofitted home has a tight envelope, energy-efficient lighting, and 

an efficient and reliable hot water source, so the remaining energy use is discretionary. 

To address this issue, we need to ask whether people can maintain their lifestyles and 

save energy. We need to ask the following fundamental questions about discretionary 

energy use: 

o Which appliances can be turned off when they are not in use? 

o How can occupants change their behaviors? Marketing and behavioral studies 

need to be performed to address this. 
29 

o Should the focus be on the mass market or on innovators? Innovators are active in 

home retrofits; the mass market will likely follow several years later. Short-term 

requires approaches that appeal to a wide audience. Specialized groups such as 

fixed-income retirees need to be targeted.

• Cheap energy (and carbon). Energy bills and devices that show homeowners the costs 

of specific end uses may be deceptive. Energy bills tend to be low in moderate and 

temperate climates, but high elsewhere. Air-conditioning in Florida and oil heat in New 

England are expensive, especially in older homes. Rather than focusing on saving money, 

we should probably craft messages about conserving resources for the next generations. 

• Resource allocation. About $150–$250 billion is spent in the United States each year to 

renovate homes. The range is the result of data from different sources: National 

Association of Home Builders and Remodeling Magazine. To get an idea for the financial 

scope of some popular retrofits see Table 2 (data from Remodeling Magazine, November 

2010). Given this potentially huge resource, we need to provide contractors and 

homeowners information so they can reduce premiums and tradeoffs for adding energy 

efficiency to these renovations. One strategy would be for DOE to regularly provide 

content about innovations and American Recovery and Reinvestment Act funding to 

industry publications such as Remodeling Magazine and Home Energy Magazine. Each 

Building America team should provide content and DOE should include expert 

comments. 

Table 2. National Averages of Remodel Costs in 2010 

(values from Remodeling Magazine, November 2010)

Type of Remodel Average Cost

Attic bedroom $51,428

Basement remodel $64,519

Bathroom remodel $16,634

Family room addition $85,740

Major kitchen remodel $58,367

Minor kitchen remodel $21,695

Roofing replacement $21,488

Siding replacement (vinyl) $11,357

Window replacement (wood) $18,226

• Partnerships. LBNL is initiating a partnership with Google and several Bay Area cities. 

Google is providing 50 TED5000 power meters to LBNL, which will coordinate with 

local communities to have them installed in homes that are retrofitted with Recovery Act 

funding. LBNL is also working with Google to beta test application programming 

interfaces that will enable LBNL to access and download the power meter data directly. 

To extrapolate, DOE may eventually have access to energy use data in many thousands 

of homes to better direct research plans and public policy. 

• Changing the construction industry. We may need to be more aggressive with the 

industry. New players such as Google and Microsoft are measuring energy use in homes, 

analyzing the data, and connecting to occupants, industry groups, utilities, and well-
30 

connected contractors. They will change the relationship between homeowners, utilities, 

and energy use. DOE needs to understand the complexities of this process (Figure 4) and 

find ways to streamline it. Two possible approaches may be helpful: 

o Encourage contractors to combine envelope and window upgrades with HVAC 

improvements, either by partnering with other contractors or by expanding the 

skill sets of their own employees. For example, technicians may be trained to seal 

ducts and envelopes and install furnaces. 

o Learn how to motivate homeowners to do retrofits and use less energy. 

Figure 4. Example of interactions required for retrofit 

(Credit: Greg Thomas, Performance Systems Development)

We need to partner with contractors and others who have direct contact with homeowners. This 

is beginning to happen with the Residential Energy Network’s (RESNET) collaboration with The 

Home Depot, for example. The key here is to use the homeowner contact infrastructure, 

including contractors, big box retailers, and new entrants such as Microsoft and Google to 

deliver DOE’s message. We need to recognize that almost no home improvements are based on a 

cost-effectiveness approach, but are done for appearance, utility, comfort, health, etc. We need to 

provide homeowner contacts with information and advice about how to include energy savings 

measures in all their activities, particularly when the incremental costs are low. So, for example, 
31 

if a wall is open because the interior finish is being replaced, the additional cost to insulate the 

empty cavity is low. 

4.2 Identifying Challenges for Home Builders and Renovators

Moisture, lead and asbestos, knob and tube electrical wiring, historic buildings, combustion 

safety versus airtightness, home type, and climate are among the challenges homebuilders and 

renovators face.

4.3 Identifying Challenges for Contractors

To help contractors make the transition to deep energy upgrades, DOE should provide them the 

opportunity to upgrade their skills. This would include qualifications and certifications, training 

on the use of diagnostic equipment and how to market energy reduction concepts. This includes 

the ability to debunk energy myths and extravagant claims that homeowners are continuously 

bombarded with. 

4.4 Identifying Challenges for Homeowners

DOE needs to connect to this market so every renovation has energy upgrades included to 

minimize costs. DOE should develop good advice and recommendations about the costs of 

energy audits, credit and market misinformation, energy efficiency claims, etc. This advice 

should be presented as targets (BLUE and ORANGE sheets) and techniques for achieving targets 

(which have details similar to the guides for new construction already produced by Building 

America). We should explore ways to persuade owners to upgrade rental homes, given that 

occupants rather than owners benefit from energy cost reductions. 

4.5 Identifying Challenges for the Market

Creating a robust deep retrofit market requires us to address: 

• Limited awareness by owners, inspectors, appraisers, realtors 

• Credibility gap on energy savings 

• Low value of unseen retrofits 

• Appearance, convenience, comfort, and health. 

To address these issues requires that credible energy savings data, protocols, and demonstration 

tools be developed that contractors can use to sell jobs. 

The current message for selling energy efficiency tends to focus on monetary savings that are 

often hard to justify or achieve given low energy costs. To broaden the appeal, we need to 

change (broaden) the energy conservation message. For example, the new message could be: 

“We’ll fix your comfort problem and save you $XX/year and save on pollution, reduce resource 

consumption.” 

Contractors and homeowners identified the complexity of deep retrofit work as a key barrier, so 

anything that simplifies decision-making or planning processes is valuable. One example is the 

effort required to realize rebates for both homeowners (who are recieving the benefit) and 

program administrators. An approach that deals with this issue is to provide rebates to 

equipment, lighting, and appliances at the dealer/distributor level. This is much more cost 

effective for program administrators due to much lower overheads; they only need to touch 20 

people nationally, not 20 million individuals. This approach also puts the money savings up front 

so there is no delay between installation and rebate as with current programs. For contractors, 
32 

instant savings are easier to sell to a homeowner than something that has to be applied for later. 

This approach also makes it much simpler: there is less time, effort, disruption, uncertainty, and 

paperwork for the homeowner. 

Another step on the path to simplicity, scale and ease of use is to have a national energy code for 

homes. To overcome resistance at the state and local levels, we could make federal stimulus 

funds dependent on adopting a national energy code for buildings. DOE could develop a simple 

low-level prescriptive code for the current stimulus package that will also be useful in the future 

for other federal programs. 

Lastly, there is the issue of quality control and regulation. Good contractors currently face the 

difficulty of competing against those who are allowed to get away with poor work. There needs 

to be a national system of testing and inspection to remove the low cost – bad performance 

option. This should be developed in coordination with certification programs such as the BPI. 

4.6 Identifying Challenges for Weatherization and Utility Programs

Many challenges for weatherization and utility programs are based on industry-accepted myths 

and half-truths. For example, the cost (in time and effort) of testing for envelope leakage is raised 

repeatedly. In reality, the time is in preparing the envelope and installing the equipment. Once 

the blower door is installed it is a diagnostic tool for finding air leaks (with smoke), finding 

disconnected ducts (with a pressure pan), and guiding air sealing (so a contractor knows when 

the big holes are filled and if further tightening can be reasonably achieved). We need to 

emphasize that measuring envelope leakage (and duct leakage) is one of the very few things we 

can do for an energy audit that results in some accuracy in the input data. 

4.7 Changing the Metrics

DOE needs to focus on energy use instead of on measures such as efficiency and energy use per 

square foot. This removes the penalty for having a small low energy use home and discourages 

high energy use but low energy density housing that is characteristic of new U.S. construction 

(Figure 5). The terminology used to describe metrics (the lexicon of energy use) also needs to be 

changed to project a more positive image and send the right message. 
33 

Figure 5. Energy per square foot versus energy per household 

(National Renewable Energy Laboratory 2006. The Potential Impact of Zero Energy Homes.

Golden, CO: by NAHB Research Center, Upper Marlboro, MD.

www.toolbase.org/PDF/CaseStudies/ZEHPotentialImpact.pdf) 

4.8 R&D Questions 

1. How should we provide guidance to contractors? DOE needs to create simple basic 

specifications that are the targets for deep retrofits—the DOE BLUE SHEETS (see 

Figure 6). This simplifies the sale of retrofits, reduces paperwork, etc. These 

specifications can include diagnostic testing such as setting and achieving an airtightness 

level, setting and achieving a duct leakage level, and using CEE highest tier 

specifications for equipment. This is also needed for non-deep retrofits. Another idea is to 

produce two sheets: BLUE for deep retrofit (>70% + threshold) and ORANGE for 

normal retrofit (>35%). BLUE would be more advanced and ORANGE might upgrade 

home to IECC 2009 specifications. The ORANGE sheet should be developed such that 

efforts undertaken to achieve its goals do not preclude moving up to the BLUE level at a 

later date.

2. How should we partner with large corporations? DOE needs to connect to new large 

corporate entities entering this market: Google, Microsoft, and large retailers such as 

Lowes and The Home Depot, which will advertise these technologies and reach the large 

number of homes required for significant national energy savings and fossil fuel 

reductions. DOE should provide technical information and analyses and protect 

consumers. In return, DOE will be able to access large numbers of data on home 

performance to direct research and public policy. 
34 

CZ6 DOE BLUE SHEET

R5 windows 

R10 slab 

R20 below-grade wall

R40 above-grade walls

R60 roof/attic 

0.25 cfm50 / s.f. floor area 

ASHRAE 62.2 Mechanical Ventilation 

CEE Tier 2 Storage water heater

CEE Tier 1 Tankless water heater

95% AFUE Furnace 

90% AFUE Boiler

16 SEER A/C

10 HPSF heat pump 

< 5%Duct leakage 

R8 Duct insulation 

ENERGY STAR Dehumidifier

Highest CEE Tier for all appliances

All combustion appliances inside conditioned space are to be sealed combustion

Figure 6. Example of BLUE SHEET

3. How should we provide training for contractors? DOE should provide technical 

support to organizations such as ACI, BPI, and RESNET. DOE should review these 

programs to ensure they provide good technical information and some consumer 

protection, as well as technical support for revisions, reviews, and improvements. 

4. What technologies do we need? Although all the technology for deep retrofits is 

available, improvements can still be made. 

a. Ventilation control. Because healthy, durable homes with good IAQ form the core 

of deep retrofits, mechanical ventilation is essential. The energy required to 

condition ventilation air becomes 70%–80% of building load. Technologies are 

needed to control ventilation systems so IAQ levels are met. At the same time, 

they need to prevent overventilating and take advantage of incidental mechanical 

ventilation from kitchen and bath exhausts and clothes dryers. 

b. Hot water storage. Well-insulated tanks can be used to store solar-heated water. 

Tanks can be retrofitted to improve their insulation. 

c. Cavity insulation. Cavity-filling methods need to be refined to completely fill 

cavities without leaving voids and to cause less damage to walls (e.g., by using 

smaller holes to inject insulation into cavities). These will reduce costs, minimize 

damage, and increase appeal. Some methods may be able to use holes about 0.4 

in. diameter to fill cavities. Research is needed to evaluate this. 
35 

d. Window improvement (not just replacement). A few methods are available to 

retrofit windows. These include rebuilding windows to improve air sealing and 

using interior and exterior storm windows. Research is needed to assess the 

effectiveness of these window treatments and to develop improved methods for 

flexible/adjustable frames, nonglass glazings, etc.

e. Humidity control. In a conventional home in a humid climate, the sensible cooling 

system can be used to control humidity. Efficient homes, however, have smaller 

sensible loads, resulting in lower capacity air conditioning systems that have 

insufficient latent capacity. This can lead to excess humidity levels in humid 

climates or cases of high occupancy. The solution is to use dedicated humidity 

control systems and research is needed to develop more efficient, cost-effective 

dehumidification systems. 

f. Improved diagnostics. The retrofit industry focuses on envelope and duct 

airtightness, but also needs to consider insulation levels and window performance. 

A new area for measurement and verification is for ventilation system air flows, 

particularly as all deep retrofits will require mechanical ventilation systems and 

work is currently underway to include this in RESNET and other standards. Work 

is required to document the relative efficacy of possible ventilation air flow 

measurement techniques, including passive and active flow hoods and bag filling 

techniques.

5. How can we avoid IAQ and moisture problems? DOE should have a program that 

measures pollutants in homes and does pre- and post-retrofit analyses combined with 

field evaluation of new approaches and technologies such as formaldehyde (HCHO) 

scrubbers. Researchers also study the transfer of polluted garage air into homes to 

determine whether attached garages should be banned or strict requirements placed on 

garage to house air leakage and placement of HVAC systems in garages.

6. What is the new lexicon? Fuller et al. (2010) showed that words need to be chosen 

carefully to reach the mass market. For example, audit and retrofit have negative 

connotations. DOE should talk to behavioral scientists who understand the power of 

language to develop a new lexicon. 

7. How should we deal with externalities? Many aspects of existing homes—knob and tube 

wiring, lead paint, asbestos, poor air sealing and insulation, historic preservation, and 

occupant aesthetics—complicate improvements. DOE should examine these aspects and 

work with contractors to resolve the attendant issues.

8. How should we use information technologies such as smart meters and Google power 

meters? 

a. Can we access these data streams to help make research plans and policy? DOE 

should develop a national database of home performance based on these measured 

data to make informed decisions about R&D and policy making. 

b. Can we expand LBNL’s efforts with Google to all Google power meter homes? 

c. Does DOE want to partner with Google? 
36 

d. What useful information can we extract from the 15-minute data: identify high 

energy users, identify some large energy uses (e.g., heating and cooling), identify 

high baseline (e.g., outdoor lights at night). 

Commercially available information technologies focus on electricity consumption. In the long 

term, when all-electric homes are the norm, this is fine, but in the short term, we will continue to 

consume natural gas for heating and hot water. LBNL’s deep energy retrofit work for FY 2011 

focuses on how to couple gas metering to Google power meter and other technologies. More 

work is needed on small and easily installed gas meters, because current meters are too unwieldy 

and intrusive to be practical.

4.9 Current Status—LBNL Efforts in FY 2011

4.9.1 Deep Retrofits

The LBNL project monitors deeply retrofitted homes to demonstrate the feasibility of deep 

retrofits and identify key issues that need to be resolved to meet the energy saving goals. A deep 

retrofit aims at reducing energy use by more than 75% and meeting the definition used in 

Affordable Comfort Inc.’s (ACI) “1000 Home Challenge,” which includes a threshold energy 

use for homes that are already low energy users. Current activities include the development and 

demonstration of ways of measuring and monitoring the individual end uses for energy, 

performing diagnostic testing to characterize the buildings, learning about what motivates 

homeowners, and which approaches/technologies work well (and which do not). 

4.9.2 Hazard and Risk Mitigation

LBNL is working with other national laboratories to develop guidelines for knob and tube 

wiring, asbestos, lead paint, combustion appliances, and effective, climate-appropriate 

ventilation. This consists of reviewing codes, standards, and literature and providing summary 

and guidance information to NREL, which is leading and coordinating this effort. Specifically, 

LBNL is coordinating with other LBNL researchers, BPI, RESNET, the DOE labeling team, and 

the NREL modeling team on airtightening issues. These include: 

• Setting tightness limits for backdrafting

• Making recommendations for codes and standards, including California Title 24, U.S. 

Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), and deep retrofits 

• Teaching contractors that they should not airtighten to a limit.

4.9.3 Ventilation Strategies

LBNL’s activities in this area include:

• Assessing night vent strategies for precooling hot/dry, mixed dry, and cold climates. 

• Working with NREL to produce a technical report that documents the potential energy 

savings of this strategy and examine the effectiveness of reducing ventilation energy use 

in compliance with ASHRAE 62.2. This work will use LBNL’s REGCAP ventilation 

software to examine active, passive, and hybrid systems. This task will be performed in 

collaboration with another LBNL project, Residential Ventilation and Indoor Pollution. 

• Working with NREL to develop advanced controls for residential buildings by 

developing a prototype residential ventilation controller that communicates with other 

mechanical systems to reduce overventilation and its associated energy penalty, reduce 

the entry of outdoor pollutants during high pollutant events (e.g., high ozone levels), and 
37 

allow time shifting of ventilation to off-peak times (saving on energy bills, avoiding 

brown-outs and new installed generating capacity). This work includes developing new 

control algorithms and combining field testing and energy modeling of controllers to 

enhance the algorithms and provide enough information to create a marketable product. 

• Collaborating with the Haas School of Business at the University of California–Berkeley 

to find an industrial partner to bring the controller to market. 

• Providing technical assistance on the development of retrofit quality management 

procedures and protocols. LBNL is working with ASHRAE to change Standard 62.2 (and 

other relevant standards) to be more easily applicable to all housing, specifically to 

retrofits. LBNL is also developing new industry standards with RESNET, BPI, ACI, and 

DOE’s building labeling (auditing and modeling) efforts. This work focuses on 

addressing health, safety, comfort, and IAQ issues, and is an essential part of making 

major energy savings acceptable to the industry and homeowners. 

4.9.4 Improve Software Used in Analyses 

The national laboratories are collaborating with a team of experts to create a software evaluation 

for the ACI meeting in April. 

4.10 FY 2012 Issues—Continuation of FY 2011 Work

4.10.1 Deep Retrofits

• Continue to monitor deep retrofit homes to better identify dependence on weather and 

occupancy effects. 

• Add homes in more climates that meet a stricter definition of deep, such as “at least 75% 

energy savings.” 

• Refine the end point for deep retrofits and energy savings (include information from 1000 

home challenge that has fractional savings and a low-energy threshold). This would be 

the same as the “BLUE SHEET” but with the target end points revised to be a threshold. 

• Study solutions for large energy end uses such as swimming pools and spas that are not 

directly part of the structure. This is a topic of debate at rating organizations such as 

RESNET, and for contractors who sell energy savings. RESNET is specifically seeking 

more input from the national laboratories in this area. 

• Refine diagnostic and long-term monitoring techniques. 

• Facilitate the sharing and combining of field data between national laboratories and 

Building America teams.

4.10.2 Hazard and Risk Mitigation 

Although substantial progress will be made in FY 2011, continued efforts to update standards 

and provide input to DOE guidance documents will be required in FY 2012. 

4.10.3 Ventilation Strategies 

The advanced ventilation controller is expected to require construction and field testing of 

several prototypes in collaboration with an industrial partner as a prerequisite to full market 

acceptance. These additional efforts should occur in FY 2012; the goal is to have a final product 

at the end of FY 2012. 
38 

LBNL will provide technical assistance for developing retrofit quality management procedures 

and protocols. LBNL will continue to address health, safety, comfort, and IAQ issues through 

collaborations with ASHRAE, ASTM, RESNET, BPI, ACI, and DOE’s building labeling 

(auditing and modeling) efforts.

4.11 New for FY 2012

4.11.1 Create DOE BLUE/ORANGE Sheets

These sheets should list the simplest level of requirements that will generally result in 75%/35% 

savings. 

4.11.2 Connect to Google and Others for Information, Feedback, and Social 

Changes 

Google expects to have power metering in many homes, and DOE may acquire access to this 

database in return for analysis expertise. Privacy concerns are paramount: We must ensure that 

individuals cannot be identified in the results. Utilities are reluctant to share customer data, even 

with customer permission. However, some utility commissions, at least in California, are 

exploring ways to systematically provide privacy, address legal issues for utilities, and allow 

access to large numbers of data to promote solid research and form a much better basis for policy 

recommendations for DOE, state, and local authorities.

4.11.3 Develop a New Lexicon and Energize for the Future 

DOE should always promote a positive message and a leadership vision. Communications and 

outreach are critical to persuading industry that change is inevitable and desirable.

4.11.4 Listen to Experts

DOE should engage companies such as ReCurve, Performance Systems Development, and 

Greenhomes America, which are engaging the industry and consumers. The national laboratory 

teams should include the experiences of their contractors on the field demonstrations of deep 

retrofits. 

4.11.5 Get Away From Cost-Effectiveness Issues 

Homeowners are much less interested in cost effectiveness than they are in improved 

appearances, improved comfort and room layout, and health. They are less concerned about 

payback periods than about deriving a sense of investing in their homes. Most home upgrades, 

including those for energy, add value to a home. We therefore need to engage homeowners on 

the bases of comfort, health, and additional features to reduce energy use. One possibility is to 

focus less on what the retrofits should be and instead define what the targets are that a building 

needs to reach. This can simplify discussions with contractors and homeowners and make it 

easier to administer and show compliance with various federal, state, and utility programs. 

4.11.6 Develop Diagnostic Tools 

DOE should survey users and performers to address the debate about the value of air leakage 

testing for envelope and duct systems. This will provide information about how much time and 

effort the tests require and how users value the testing. It could lead to improved test methods 

and alternative techniques. DOE should also provide guidance on ventilation air flow 

verification, which will be required in any reasonable home retrofit. A study is needed that 

performs field evaluations of a range of ventilation air flow measurement techniques to provide 

input to industry standards. A secondary issue relates to utility and government rebates that 

require proof of home improvement and RESNET/BPI standards, where tests such as infrared 

scanning to evaluate insulation installation would be performed in addition to air leakage testing. 
39 

4.12 Multi-Year Milestones

4.12.1 FY 2012 

• Identify the number of homes to deeply retrofit in 2, 5, and 10 years. DOE has no control, 

but can help craft the framework. 

• Industry adopts new lexicon during 2011. Coordinate with RESNET, BPI, Efficiency 

First, CEE, ACEEE, EPA, Weatherization, product manufacturers. 

• Create DOE BLUE/ORANGE sheets.

• Pilot studies with Google, Microsoft, and other new buildings industry entrants. Engage 

enthusiastic people.

4.12.2 FY 2012/2013

• Coordinate with Affordable Comfort 1000 home challenge to get 1000 deep retrofits over 

next two years. Document energy savings and retrofit activities. 

• Link to DOE’s labeling effort. Define a clear separation between a simple label and an 

audit related to home upgrades. Focus this effort on the end point, not necessarily on 

energy changes.

• Develop new technology for dehumidification. 

4.12.3 FY 2012/2013/2014 

• Have competitions to raise public awareness. Have a prize to leverage private investment 

and ego. 

• Change building codes to make low-energy homes easier to permit 

(build/rebuild/renovate). Hard to set timeline, but three years for the entire United States 

seems reasonable. 

• Continue to support revisions to industry standards; BPI, RESNET, ASHRAE, ASTM, 

ACCA.

4.13 Reference

Fuller, M.C.; Kunkel, C.; Zimring, M.; Hoffman, I.; Soroye, L.; Goldman, C. 2010. Driving 

Demand for Home Energy Improvements: Motivating Residential Customers To Invest in 

Comprehensive Upgrades That Eliminate Energy Waste, Avoid High Bills, and Spur the 

Economy. LBNL – 3960E. 
40 

5 Residential Planning for Healthy, Efficient Homes Research

Brett Singer and Max Sherman 

Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory

5.1 Problem Summary

The United States is ramping up efforts to improve the energy efficiency of residential buildings. 

One key strategy is to reduce uncontrolled air leakage to reduce thermal energy loads. Absent 

other measures, reducing outdoor air exchange will lead to increased concentrations of pollutants 

emitted continuously from indoor finishing and furnishing materials and from intermittent 

activities such as cooking, candle use, and cleaning. Americans spend about two thirds of their 

time at home (Klepeis et al. 2001), so these exposures can have important health impacts. 

A recent LBNL hazard assessment found that at least 31 chemical air pollutants have been 

measured at potentially hazardous levels in a large fraction of thousands of homes sampled over 

the past two decades (Logue et al., in press). Formaldehyde commonly exceeds standards for 

noncancer effects and at levels that present cancer risks in excess of 10-5 for chronic exposure 

over a 10-year period. LBNL analysis indicates that most of the quantifiable population health 

risk from air pollutant exposure indoors is associated with fine particles, nitrogen dioxide (NO2), 

and acrolein; formaldehyde risk depends heavily on the unit risk estimate values used. According 

to the World Health Organization, more than 41 million disability adjusted life years are incurred 

annually in the United States from illness and injury. An LBNL scoping analysis of these and 

other pollutants finds that about 10% of this could result from inhaling pollutants in residences. 

Preliminary modeling indicates that the health burden caused by volatile organic compounds 

(VOCs) can be cut almost in half with balanced mechanical ventilation; exhaust-only ventilation 

would cut the health burden of these chemicals by 40% with less than half the incremental 

energy input. Formaldehyde is emitted primarily from material particles, but NO2 and acrolein 

are produced from intermittent activities such as cooking, cleaning, and candle burning, and 

enter with outdoor air. Increasing ventilation without mitigating outdoor air pollutants could 

increase health risks. Careful analysis of these questions is critical to planning efficient and 

effective ventilation. 

The analyses examined chemicals with established health standards. New chemicals that are core 

components or production by-products of new materials and changing consumer product 

formulations represent an additional, undetermined hazard. For example, there is a growing 

awareness of the potential (and in some cases established) hazards of flame retardants and other 

semivolatile organic compounds that spread from their source materials to other surfaces and 

contaminate indoor environments for decades. Many products related specifically to energy 

efficiency, such as spray foam and other types of insulation, are used increasingly; they may 

present exposure issues to home performance contractors and occupants. An additional but 

highly uncertain level of risk is associated with the ever-changing formulations of household 

products and materials. We lack the information needed to estimate the magnitude and 

distribution of indoor environmental health risks. The EPA 

(www.epa.gov/iaq/homes/retrofits.html) can be a good source of information. 

Residential pollutant exposures can be mitigated by source control, air cleaning, and ventilation. 

Emission source reduction is often preferred, but it requires consideration of a vast array of 

materials, products and activities. Air cleaning—which can include improvements in filtration 
41 

for forced air heating and cooling systems and room-scale devices—can be helpful, but most 

technologies carry steep energy costs and may not be practical in a residential environment. 

Advances are ongoing, but new technologies must be validated and assessed for undesirable side 

effects such as ozone formation by ion generator particle collectors. 

ASHRAE Standard 62.2 includes provisions for local and overall ventilation. The overall 

ventilation rate, specified as a continuous or equivalent intermittent mechanical ventilation rate, 

ostensibly is set to ensure acceptable IAQ. This rate and other aspects of the standard are not 

explicitly tied to specific health-protection targets. The standard provides no guidance for the 

most energy efficiency strategies to meet the requirements and only limited equipment 

performance standards. For example, there is no standard for kitchen exhaust removal efficiency. 

The standard is, nevertheless, widely regarded as best practice for protecting occupant health. 

Updating this standard and associated guidance is an established path to ensure research results 

are incorporated into professional practice. We need to understand the typical and expected 

contaminants in the residential environment and develop reasonable minimum strategies for their 

control. This requires research or the coupling of research on emission, transport, exposure, and 

control technologies. 

Reducing uncontrolled air leakage is essential to improving building efficiency. The energy cost 

to fully thermally condition the current stock of U.S. homes (e.g. before implementing Better 

Buildings) has been estimated as a few quads per year. Aggressive air tightening theoretically 

could cut this by as much as a factor of three. Realized energy benefits will be lower as some 

energy is used to ensure adequate ventilation and some cost savings are reinvested to improve 

comfort. A rough estimate of the magnitude of potential savings from aggressive tightening is 

therefore about 1 quad. 

5.2 R&D Questions

Three broad areas of R&D questions need to be answered to inform policy and planning to 

achieve a healthy, energy-efficient housing stock: 

• Characterize the baseline conditions of ventilation-related energy uses and health risks. 

This will inform ranking of near-term research and deployment efforts. Many elements of 

this situation are unknown but could be resolved with compilation and analysis of 

available data and targeted new data collection efforts. An important subset of questions 

focuses on preliminary assessment of potential health risks that have been underexplored, 

even though they could drive overall risk profiles. 

• Examine the costs and benefits of various technology and policy implementation 

pathways. These questions must be addressed by well-designed simulation that is based 

on data and physical processes. The goal is not to precisely predict reality, but rather to 

advance understanding of the relative impacts of potential energy and IAQ strategies. 

• Find opportunities for technology development, standards, and regulations to achieve 

healthy, efficient homes. 

R&D questions related to characterizing baseline ventilation energy and health risk follow: 

• What health impacts and costs (associated with residential chemical air pollutant 

exposures) can be mitigated? 
42 

• What are current and projected indoor air pollutant source profiles in U.S. homes? How 

do these vary between new high-performance, new conventional, retrofitted, and existing 

homes? 

• Are any materials being used in construction of energy-efficient new homes or retrofits 

that introduce chemicals at hazardous levels? 

• How do we reduce the likelihood of materials introducing new hazards, when standards 

and health effects are unknown? 

• How do formaldehyde and other materials-based VOC concentrations and emissions 

respond to increased ventilation? Many classes of contaminants do not respond simply 

because of material storage, chemistry, or low volatility. Formaldehyde—one of the most 

important VOCs for indoor exposure—exhibits this behavior.

• What are the baseline ventilation conditions (windows, fan use, effect of mechanical 

systems, etc.) in U.S. homes? Are there substantial differences by region, ethnicity, 

income level, housing type, urban versus rural, etc.? What is the relationship between 

outdoor temperature and window use? How frequently do people use windows and fans 

during pollutant-generating activities? 

R&D questions about costs and benefits of ventilation and other options to reduce risk follow: 

• What benefits are likely to be achieved by requiring mechanical ventilation? Are 

substantial variations in benefits achieved by balanced exhaust only, and supply only 

mechanical ventilation systems? How do these vary with airtightness? 

• What are the energy costs and cost-benefit relationships of each system type? How do 

these vary with airtightness?

• How is health risk divided among indoor air pollutants? Which pollutant sources 

contribute the greatest risk? What risk is associated with preventable exposures from gas 

cooking burners and other pollutants that could be removed by a kitchen exhaust fan? 

Should homes consider restaurant-style exhaust principles?

• What are the potential costs and benefits of cooking exhaust requirements, based on 

equipment performance? 

• What are the costs and benefits of incorporating available air treatment technologies in 

new or retrofitted energy-efficient homes? 

R&D questions about potential of specific measures to improve energy and health follow:

• What are the potential benefits and costs of kitchen exhaust performance standards? 

• What factors inhibit the use of kitchen exhaust? What benefits could be achieved by 

automated systems? 

• What are the potential benefits of smart ventilation systems that account for all 

mechanical systems and potentially window opening to provide mechanical ventilation 

only when needed? 

• What technology developments are needed to provide smarter, lower cost, and more 

robust mechanical ventilation systems? 
43 

5.3 Current Status

DOE, EPA, and HUD are collaborating to support LBNL research on the intersection of 

residential energy efficiency, ventilation, indoor environmental health risks, and mitigation 

options. The broad objectives are to inform the setting of a health risk-based residential 

ventilation standard and to advance understanding of the energy impacts of various ventilation 

and other risk mitigation approaches, including source control. 

This research is being conducted through modeling and simulation; data compilation, collection 

and analysis; and controlled experimentation. These are described below. 

The interagency research program initially focused on hazard identification and baseline health 

risk assessment. Toward this end, LBNL identified and analyzed published data from more than 

70 studies on measured indoor air pollutant concentrations relevant to U.S. residences (Logue et 

al. 2010). 

To identify hazards and support the modeling, LBNL conducted a search to identify publicly 

available information about chemical emissions from residential construction, finishing, and 

furnishing materials (Willem and Singer 2010). Concern about chemical emissions has led to an 

explosion of products claiming to be “green” or “low emissions.” Many such claims are verified 

by standards and certifications of varying transparency and provenance (some were created or 

heavily influenced by industry associations or stakeholders). Information about resulting 

chemical emission rates from products is not typically available. Federal guidance on what 

manufacturers need to supply and when would be appropriate. 

Hazard identification is also being pursued through detailed chemical analysis of air samples 

collected in new homes. A detailed examination of gas chromatography/mass spectrometry 

chromatograms from air samples collected during the California New Home Study is underway; 

this will provide a picture of VOCs in moderately energy-efficient homes built to California Title 

24 standards between 2002 and 2005. A similar review will be conducted on air samples 

collected in more recently built California houses. This approach will be extended to air samples 

collected from high-performance new homes and non-California conventional new homes 

through collaborations with Building America teams across the United States. 

The health impacts from indoor air pollutants can be considered in several ways. The hazard 

assessment examined the frequency of exceeding chronic or acute health-based guidelines or 

standards. Another approach is to translate pollutant exposures to health impacts through the 

metric of quality adjusted life years (QALYs) or disability adjusted life years (DALYs). LBNL is 

translating the exposure levels identified in the hazard assessment to total QALYs and to 

attribute the QALY burden by pollutant. Preliminary results indicate that most health risk is 

associated with fine particles, NO2, acrolein, and formaldehyde (Logue et al., in preparation). 

The goal of current modeling and simulation activities is to develop and apply frameworks for 

projecting and analyzing energy and IAQ impacts of various technologies and design approaches 

to building energy-efficient, healthy homes. The intent is to understand the cumulative impacts 

(in terms of quads of energy and QALYs saved) and their distribution. Preliminary efforts 

focused on California because it is the only state with enough data to conduct an analysis. The 

California Energy Commission funded two studies of ventilation and IAQ in new homes. A 

mail-out questionnaire focused on occupant-controlled ventilation and attitudes about ventilation 

and IAQ. A follow-up field study included measurements of home ventilation characteristics 
44 

(including airtightness and equipment performance), outdoor air exchange, air pollutant 

concentrations, and ventilation. 

LBNL developed the first modeling framework to analyze the health and energy impacts of 

central mechanical ventilation. This initial effort focused on time-averaged emissions of VOCs, 

including formaldehyde, but did not include fine particles. The analysis examined health costs of 

baseline conditions and health benefits and energy costs of exhaust only (most typical system 

used today) and balanced mechanical ventilation at the rates currently specified in ASHRAE 

62.2. We will complete and report on this analysis in FY 2011. 

The modeling framework needs to be expanded and further developed to include elements that 

have major impacts on health and energy, such as time-varying ventilation, pollutant emissions 

from intermittent sources, entry of particles from outdoors, and effects of pollutant removal 

indoors and in HVAC systems. 

Data are needed for the rest of the United States, for high-performance homes, and for retrofits. 

LBNL has designed and constructed an updated version of the national air leakage database and 

is conducting national outreach efforts to obtain and incorporate air leakage measurements into 

this database. An initial analysis of the acquired data will be conducted in FY 2011. The database 

will continue to be expanded and analyzed. 

In FY 2011, LBNL is developing a draft plan for a tiered national data collection effort, 

including questionnaires, short home visits for characterization, sampling of IAQ, and 

monitoring of window and fan use.

Also in FY 2011, LBNL is conducting pilot experiments to isolate and measure the effect of air 

exchange rate on formaldehyde, (HCHO) concentrations and inferred emissions in residential 

rooms. LBNL is also conducting laboratory experiments to assess the potential for HCHO 

transfer across energy recovery ventilators. 

With funding from the California Energy Commission, LBNL initiated research into the asinstalled and potential performance of residential cooking exhaust fans and range hoods, and will 

develop a framework for analyzing the energy and health implications of increasing use of 

installed systems, of the potential benefits of deploying best-in-class technologies, and of the 

potential benefits of energy-efficient, effective pollutant removal designs. 

5.4 Opportunities, Gaps, and Barriers

There are many potential opportunities and some substantial barriers to protecting health as we 

work to dramatically improve the energy efficiency of U.S. homes; applied research and 

demonstration projects can advance these goals. This section focuses on pertinent RD&D needs 

extending beyond those being addressed in the FY 2011 work scope. 

• Apply energy and health risk modeling framework to evaluate the benefits and costs of 

ventilation, source control, and other IAQ-related technologies and strategies.

Preliminary simulations will use data (e.g., from California studies) that are not fully 

resolved or region-specific to generate initial estimates of baseline conditions and the 

effects of various technology and design options. These applications may be parametric 

or distributional. One outcome will be prioritization of data collection efforts. 

• Compile, collect, and analyze data to support modeling of ventilation energy and indoor 

air-related health risks throughout the United States. The data collection effort will be 
45 

guided by prioritized needs from preliminary modeling and include several levels of data 

collection: survey only, limited measurements and monitoring, and intensive monitoring. 

To the greatest extent feasible, information from EPA, the National Institute of Science 

and Technology, and others and new data being collected in concurrent studies from the 

National Children’s Health Study and the Centers for Disease Control Green Housing 

Study should be used. However, since many key parameters are not being monitored in 

these studies, the need will remain for substantial dedicated data collection. For example, 

only limited information is available nationally about how people use windows, fans, and 

other equipment that contributes to ventilation. California data indicate that many people 

do not open windows regularly. 

• Develop, evaluate, and deploy smart and robust ventilation and ventilation control 

technologies. The energy and IAQ performance of a high-performance home will be 

limited without advances in ventilation equipment and control systems. LBNL’s patented 

control technology can integrate the operation of multiple mechanical systems for highly 

efficient and predictable ventilation control. Deployment and continuing development of 

this system will improve operation of ventilation systems to maximize IAQ benefits with 

minimal overall ventilation-related energy use. LBNL is partnering with Panasonic to 

study innovative ventilation systems. One potentially valuable development will be to 

integrate ventilation controls with online data from outdoor air quality monitoring 

stations; such an advance would capture the benefits of ventilation to reduce indoor 

sources and mitigate undesired pollutants from the outdoors. The University of California 

at Berkeley Haas School of Business has adopted this technology for a development 

project. Additional partnerships are thus likely.

• Develop, deploy, and field test advanced kitchen and bath exhaust systems. Efficient 

local removal of air contaminants and excess moisture are key elements in an efficient 

overall ventilation system. Some cooking exhaust fans effectively remove pollutants 

before they mix throughout the air, but many—including the most widely installed 

designs—are not. The lack of any industry standard performance test for capture 

efficiency of residential kitchen exhaust systems is a critical gap. Lack of awareness 

about pollutants generated during cooking is a substantial barrier to progress. There is a 

potentially large synergy in combining several developments, namely improved capture 

efficiency, quieter fans, and public education about the potential hazards associated with 

cooking and gas burners. Automatic exhaust fan operation initiated by a cooking burner 

in a kitchen and humidity or motion sensing in a bathroom also have great promise. 

Should these new systems prove beneficial, LBNL would work with the home ventilating 

industry to transfer this technology to enable the development of market products. 

• Incorporate energy efficiency guidance and equipment performance standards into the 

ASHRAE residential ventilation standard. Current ASHRAE ventilation standards do not 

differentiate between new and existing homes, even though pollutant profiles can differ 

substantially. Likewise, ventilation needs and optimum systems can vary by region and 

location. For example, concerns about the timing of ventilation vis-à-vis outdoor air 

pollution and heat island effects are important in many urban locations, but less critical in 

suburban or rural sites. The energy efficiency characteristics of ventilation and air 

cleaning technologies and strategies can be addressed for specific circumstances. Energy 
46 

impacts of air leakage are being dealt with through ASHRAE Standard committees 90.2 

and 119, which have multi-laboratory and multi-manufacturer involvement. 

• Provide guidance on energy-efficient, effective filtration and air cleaning for residential 

applications. Increasing concerns about IAQ have led to increased use of residential air 

cleaning and filtration in portable and stand-alone applications and as components 

integrated with central HVAC systems. Such devices and systems may improve energy 

efficiency by reducing the amount of outside air needed to dilute or remove emitted 

pollutants, depending on how effectively they are deployed. Analysis of the energy and 

health impacts of these devices is relevant to this research topic and to residential 

miscellaneous electric loads (MELs). 

• Develop equivalence paradigms for energy-efficient alternatives to ventilation. This 

approach may be most valuable for new homes, which would typically require higher 

ventilation rates that could be reduced with material source control measures. Such 

approaches are quite different than the more prescriptive approaches currently used. 

These approaches are performance based by specifying the appropriate IAQ-related 

targets and enabling innovative solutions to show equivalence. 

• Evaluate needs, strategies, and technologies for humidity control and innovative 

dehumidification. In high-performance homes, humidity control is important to maintain 

good IAQ. The issue needs to be evaluated because few good data are available. 

Innovative technologies need to be developed to address dehumidification energy 

efficiently.

o Diagnostics. The need to develop new test methods and standard practices to 

support retrofit and new technologies will increase. This could include advanced 

envelope and duct leakage testing procedures. A collaborative effort that includes 

many Building America participants and teams is required.

o Technology evaluation. As the industry and R&D organizations develop new 

technologies for energy-efficient IAQ control, they will continue to need field and 

theoretical evaluations to facilitate market acceptance. The current year effort of 

evaluating energy recovery ventilators for formaldehyde performance is a good 

example. New technologies will continue to require such evaluations. 

• Advance understanding of energy and IAQ impacts of garages, basements, and attics 

within the air-sealed building envelope. Attached buffer spaces, particularly garages, can 

be a major source of contaminants, but are not well understood. The value from an 

energy and an IAQ perspective of garage compartmentalization needs to be explored and 

its impact on standards and best practices reviewed. 

5.5 Multi-Year Milestones

The following are adapted from LBNL’s FY 2011 annual operating plan: 

• Identify data needs to support analysis of a health risk-based ventilation standard.

• Complete a modeling framework design to analyze health and energy impacts of 

mechanical ventilation and other health risk mitigations. 

• Quantify the baseline health impacts of airtightening without ventilation, and the health 

benefits and energy costs of exhaust and balanced mechanical ventilation. 
47 

• Characterize new home VOC profiles and differences between conventional and highperformance new homes.

• Compile sufficient data for national and regional analysis of airtightness data. 

• Complete pilot experiments to assess the effect of ventilation rate on formaldehyde levels 

in new residential rooms. 

• Propose scope and methods for a national data collection effort. 

FY 2012 milestones: 

• Write detailed protocols for national field data collection effort. 

• Pilot data collection efforts for all field study components. 

• Upgrade modeling framework to handle intermittent sources and particle dynamics. 

• Develop (with stakeholder input) appropriate test methods for assessing pollutant capture 

performance of cooking exhaust fans. 

• Evaluate options (filtration, intermittency) to ensure that increased ventilation does not 

adversely affect IAQ when outdoor air pollution is high. 

• Identify technology development needs for smart ventilation systems. 

• Analyze costs and benefits of advanced kitchen and bath ventilation. 

• Initiate data collection efforts.

• Support incorporation of findings to ASHRAE standards and relevant codes. 

• Publish results in archival journals and make available to public as LBNL reports.

FY 2013-2014 milestones: 

• Complete data collection efforts.

• Conduct a national analysis of energy and health implications of ventilation strategies and 

technologies. 

• Publish results in archival journals and make available to public as LBNL reports.

• Publish ASHRAE Standards (62. 2-2013, 90.2-2013, 119-2013 and 136-2013). 

• Publish ASTM test methods to support diagnostics. 

• Provide policy analyses to DOE. 

5.6 References

Klepeis, N.E.; Nelson, W.C.; Ott, W.R.; Robinson, J.P.; Tsang, A.M.; Switzer, P.; Behar, J.V.; 

Hern, S.C.; Engelmann, W.H. 2001. “The National Human Activity Pattern Survey (NHAPS): a 

Resource for Assessing Exposure to Environmental Pollutants.” Journal of Exposure Analysis 

and Environmental Epidemiology 11(3):231–252. 

Logue, J.M.; McKone, T.E.; Sherman, M.H.; Singer, B.C. 2010. “Hazard Assessment of 

Chemical Air Contaminants Measured in Residences.” Indoor Air, DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-

0668.2010.00683.x. Published online 10 July 2010. 
48 

Logue, J.M.; Price, P.N.; Sherman, M.H.; Singer, B.C. Quantifying the Health Burden of Indoor 

Air Pollution Using Health Adjusted Life Years. (In press) 

Logue, J.M.; Price, P.N.; Sherman, M.H.; Singer, B.C. The Indoor Air Quality Benefits and 

Energy Costs of Residential Ventilation. (In preparation) 

Russell, M.; Sherman, M.H.; Rudd A. 2005. “Review of Residential Ventilation Technologies.” 

HVAC&R Research Journal 13(II):325–348, 200. LBL-57730. 

Sherman, M.H., Logue, J.M.; Singer, B.C. 2010. “Infiltration Effects on Residential Pollutant 

Concentrations for Continuous and Intermittent Mechanical Ventilation Approaches.” HVAC&R 

Research. LBNL-3978-E.

Sherman, M.H.; Chan, W.R. 2006. “Building Air Tightness: Research and Practice” in Building 

Ventilation: The State of the Art (Santamouris, Wouters, Eds) Earthscan, pp. 137–162. 

Sherman M.H.; Walker, I.S. 2009. “Measured Air Distribution Effectiveness for Residential 

Mechanical Ventilation Systems.” HVAC&R Research Journal 15(2):211–230. 

Sherman, M.H. 2009. “Infiltration in ASHRAE’s Residential Ventilation Standards.” ASHRAE 

Transactions, LBNL-1220E. 

Sherman, M.H. 2008. “Multizone Age-of-Air Analysis.” International Journal of Ventilation

7(3):159–167. LBNL-63193. 

Sherman, M.H.; McWilliams, J.A. 2007. “Air Leakage of U.S. Homes: Model Prediction.” In 

Proceedings of ASHRAE/DOE/BTECC Thermal Performance of the Exterior Envelopes of 

Buildings X, LBNL 62078. 

Singer, B.C.; Delp, W.W.; Apte, M.G. 2010. Natural Gas Variability in California: 

Environmental Impacts and Device Performance: Experimental Evaluation of Installed Cooking 

Exhaust Fan Performance. Interim Project Report to California Energy Commission for Contract 

CEC-500-05-026. Submitted November 2010. 

Walker, I.S.; Sherman, MH. 2007. “Humidity Implications for Meeting Residential Ventilation 

Requirements.” In Proceedings of ASHRAE/DOE/BTECC Thermal Performance of the Exterior 

Envelopes of Buildings X, LBNL 62182. 

Willem, H.; Singer, B.C. 2010. Chemical Emissions of Residential Materials and Products: 

Review of Available Information. Berkeley, CA: Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. 

LBNL-3938E. 
49 

6 Residential Miscellaneous Electric Loads R&D Agenda

Rich Brown 

Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory

6.1 Problem Summary

MELs are about 20% of residential primary energy use today and projected to grow to about one 

third of energy use in the next 20 years (DOE 2009). The most recent residential survey data 

from EIA also show that the increased saturation of consumer electronics may be offsetting 

efficiency gains in major appliances (DOE 2011). In low-energy homes, MELs can be 40% or 

more of whole-house energy use, which means that to achieve DOE’s goals of 50% or greater 

whole-house energy savings, the MELs end use must be addressed along with the traditional end 

uses (Brown et al. 2006). 

MELs energy use tends to be spread among many devices in a given home (50–100 plug-in 

devices in a home is typical); the services provided and the drivers of energy use vary greatly 

between the end uses within MELs (e.g., from home entertainment, to cooking, to power tools). 

The largest clusters of MELs energy use in homes, and the areas of greatest growth, are home 

offices and home audiovisual systems, where electronic devices predominate. This poses a 

problem for developing policies to address this energy use because electronic products tend to 

change rapidly, which makes it hard to develop energy use reduction strategies, which may not 

be effective across successive generations of products as new features and functionality are 

introduced. In addition, many MELs (particularly electronics) have power supplies that introduce 

losses in active use and in standby. 

For most MELs devices, the largest uncertainty and variation in energy use is due to occupant 

energy use patterns, not variation in device energy use under test conditions. Moreover, for many 

MELs devices, their presence and energy use in a given house are closely associated with 

occupant tastes, preferences, and behaviors. Nevertheless, occupants rarely have any information 

about how much energy the MELs, collectively and individually, are consuming in their homes. 

6.2 R&D Questions

Given the energy challenge posed by MELs, we need to develop a comprehensive set of 

technologies and policies to reduce their energy use. The ultimate goal is to enable a MELs enduse that consumes the least energy possible while still meeting occupant needs. Research is 

needed in the following areas: 

• Better understand the diffuse and varied MELs end-use.

o How do we collect meaningful energy use data on MELs in actual use?

o What are the high priority MELs devices to address? 

o What usage modes account for most of the energy use? 

o How much do MELs contribute to peak loads? 

o What is the potential for controls (whole-house and device level) to reduce MELs 

energy use? 

o What are the drivers of MELs device proliferation (what energy services are 

driving increased saturation of MELs)?
50 

• Develop component and system designs that efficiently deliver MELs services.

o What functions and components of MELs devices drive energy use (power 

conversion, displays, etc.)?

o In a given MELs device category, what technologies and design strategies can 

make that device, and its components, more efficient? 

o What information, training, and incentives would effectively persuade MELs 

device manufacturers to design more efficient products? 

o Are there ways to limit the proliferation of MELs devices (e.g., multifunction 

devices)?

o How do we influence the purchase of MELs devices in an energy retrofit or new 

construction situation?

• Develop controls that more closely match delivered energy services to occupant needs. 

o In a given MELs device category, what control technologies and strategies can 

make that device more efficient (e.g., occupancy and ambient light sensing, 

interdevice control)?

o What technologies and standards need to be developed to realize a vision where 

MELs devices cooperatively manage their energy use in a distributed manner, so 

their energy consumption is proportional to the services being delivered? 

o How effectively can energy use feedback systems affect MELs energy use? What 

other information is needed to educate homeowners about MELs energy use and 

make it easy to reduce that energy use?

o How can usability of MELs be improved to encourage energy savings? 

o Should MELs interact with the electricity grid? If so, how and how do we 

optimize the interaction to reduce energy consumption and bills? 

6.3 Current Status

With the growth of the MELs end use over the last 20 years has come increased activity to better 

understand and address this energy use. The most comprehensive information about the MELs 

end use is from the national RECS survey of a few thousand residential buildings, in which 

housing characteristics and monthly, whole-building utility bills are collected. These monthly 

bills are then statistically disaggregated to estimate end use energy consumption, using building 

characteristics, equipment ownership, and exogenous factors such as weather to explain variation 

in energy use. In these models, miscellaneous and electronic loads are included in the “Other” 

end use category, which is simply a statistical residual that cannot be attributed to one of the 

traditional end uses (heating, cooling, lighting, etc.), and is therefore subject to errors that result 

from data collection or model specification. RECS collects very few data about the presence and

characteristics of MELs devices in the study homes, so very little can be said about which 

devices are responsible for the Other energy use.

To help identify the large energy users in the MELs end use, researchers began supplementing 

the top-down RECS data with bottom-up estimates of MELs energy use by device, based on 

energy consumption data from controlled, laboratory conditions. These bottom-up studies 

provide a high-level estimate of how energy is used in the residential sector, and what types of 
51 

devices may be most responsible for that energy use. The shortcomings of these studies, 

however, are that they nearly always study the devices in isolation (i.e., device by device) rather 

than as a collection of devices in a building (thereby missing the correlation between device 

uses). Moreover, the laboratory data on MELs energy use is collected under simulated use 

conditions, which may not accurately represent the field use patterns that actually drive energy 

use. 

To overcome this analytical uncertainty, researchers typically employ field metering, usually 

conducted at the branch-circuit level to identify large individual loads such as heating, cooling, 

and water heating. Because MELs devices tend to be spread among the branch circuits and their 

use is aggregated with other devices, the traditional field metering techniques have limited value 

for quantifying MELs energy use. With improvements in electrical metering technology over the 

last several years, a more intensive type of metering—at the device level—has been developed. 

These field studies have shown promising results but have been conducted on only a very small 

sample of buildings, and only a small sample of devices within these buildings, because the cost 

of metering equipment is high and the activity is labor intensive.

6.3.1 U.S. Department of Energy Activities

LBNL undertook the first studies to quantify the MELs end use in the 1980s and 1990s (Meier 

1987, Meier et al. 1992, Sanchez et al. 1998). Beginning in the late 1990s, the DOE Building 

Technologies Program commissioned a series of analyses to better understand electronics and 

miscellaneous device energy use and savings potential, to inform both program design and the 

Annual Energy Outlook forecasts (Roth et al. 2002, Roth et al. 2007, Roth and McKenney 2007, 

Roth et al. 2006, Zogg and Alberino 1998). These studies were all bottom-up estimation studies. 

Recognizing that the lack of field energy use data is a significant barrier to better understanding 

the MELs end use, LBNL has been developing field methods for measuring device-level energy 

use (Brown et al. 2011). They used small, relatively inexpensive wireless power meters to 

develop an improved method for collecting device-level energy and power data. These meters 

form a mesh network based on Internet standard protocols and can form networks of hundreds of 

metering points in a single building. Because the meters are relatively inexpensive (<$100 each) 

and do not require manual data downloading, they can be left in the field for months or years to 

collect long time-series energy use data. LBNL has also developed a field protocol to collect 

comprehensive, robust data about the characteristics of MELs devices in a home. 

To complement the direct energy measurements using wireless meters, the Fraunhofer Center for 

Sustainable Energy (FhCSE, under contract to LBNL) has also been exploring whole-house nonintrusive load monitoring (NILM) techniques, in which individual appliance power consumption 

information is disaggregated from single-point measurements. The goal of this work is to 

develop techniques that can reliably measure MELs energy use for much lower cost than 

individual device meters, which will allow much larger field studies and less expensive energyuse feedback systems. The initial work reviewed the literature in the NILM field from last 30 

years and published a review paper at an IEEE conference (Zeifman and Roth 2011). The NILM 

techniques that have been tried in the past fall into two sampling rate regimes: low-frequency 

(~1Hz) or high-frequency (>10kHz). In general, the low-frequency algorithms are not suitable 

for MELs, and the best high-frequency algorithms successfully identify the energy use of 

individual appliances only about 75% of the time. This indicates more algorithm development is 

needed for accuracy. Fraunhofer also tested improved signal processing algorithms in the 

laboratory and found that combined classification algorithms show promise. This research is 
52 

currently being documented and the study team plans to publish the findings in the open 

literature during summer 2011. 

To begin to address the energy use of MELs and other end uses, NREL has conducted laboratory 

and field assessments of commercially available Automated Home Energy Management 

(AHEM) systems.

The DOE appliance standards program is currently conducting rulemakings or developing test 

procedures for several MELs products: Battery Chargers & External Power Supplies (this will 

significantly reduce standby loads in many electronic products), Ceiling Fans and Ceiling Fan 

Light Kits, Cooking Products, Dehumidifiers, Pool Heaters, Television Sets, and Torchieres. 

DOE is also considering rulemakings for several electronic products such as computers, displays, 

and set-top boxes. To support these rulemakings, LBNL is developing a database of short-term 

field metering data for MELs devices.9

6.3.2 ENERGY STAR

ENERGY STAR continues to maintain and update its specifications for a wide variety of MELs 

devices (see Table 3). For some products, DOE is now helping develop test procedures in 

collaboration with EPA.

Table 3. Residential MELs Product Categories With ENERGY STAR Specifications

Electronics Miscellaneous Devices

Existing Products

Computers* Vent fans (includes range hoods)*

Displays* (includes computer monitors and digital 

picture frames) Ceiling fans*

Set-top boxes and cable boxes* Decorative light strands 

(e.g., holiday lights)

Imaging equipment (printers)* Water coolers

Televisions* Dehumidifiers*

Audio/video equipment* Room air cleaners and purifiers

Battery chargers*

Cordless phones

New or Possible Future Products

Small network equipment 

(e.g., wireless access points)* Countertop appliances (e.g., toasters)

Game consoles* Spa baths

Uninterruptible power supplies* Security systems

Projectors Garage door openers

Home storage

*ENERGY STAR specification for this product category is being updated or under development in FY 2011.

 

9 http://minotaur.lbl.gov/aeud/
53 

6.3.3 Other Activities

CEE (www.cee1.org/resid/rs-ce/rs-ce-main.php3) has formed an electronics committee for its 

member utilities around the country to coordinate its programs that address electronics products. 

These utility programs have mainly focused on efficient televisions, patterned after the 

ENERGY STAR specification. Some programs have tried to address collections of devices using 

smart plug strips, with mixed success (O’Neil et al. 2010). 

The California Energy Commission Public Interest Energy Research (PIER) program has funded 

a series of studies to better quantify the energy use of MELs and develop technologies to reduce 

this energy use. Beginning around 2000, PIER funded a study to quantify the impact of lowpower mode (standby) energy use in California homes (Nordman and McMahon 2004), and a 

related study that quantified the overall impact of residential MELs in the state (Porter et al. 

2006). Based on these studies, PIER concluded that networking and consumer electronics were 

large drivers of MELs energy use, and subsequently funded work by LBNL to begin to address 

the impact of digital networks (Lanzisera et al. 2010), and work by Ecos to identify technologies 

for reducing electronics energy use (Moorefield and Calwell 2011). 

Finally, a significant field study of MELs energy use was conducted last year in Minnesota 

(Bensch et al. 2010). This study found that MELs energy use was spread across a broad range of 

devices, but concentrated in the home entertainment and home office area. They found a 

significant potential for energy reduction using simple control technologies built into products, 

such as computer power management and automatic brightness control in televisions. 

6.3.4 Industry Activities

In 2007 the information technology industry started the Climate Savers Computing Initiative 

(www.climatesaverscomputing.org) to promote efficient design of computers and enabling of 

power management features. It focuses primarily on commercial end users, but also has strong 

element of consumer outreach and education. The Consumer Electronics Association (CEA) also 

has a consumer education campaign about energy use in electronics, but it is buried in a website 

designed to promote the benefits and purchase of consumer electronics 

(http://digitaltips.org/green). The Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance also has a consumer 

education campaign about efficient electronics (http://energyefficientelectronics.org ).

A few voluntary technology standards address MELs energy use. For instance, CEA maintains 

test procedures for set-top box and audiovisual equipment energy use (CEA-2013-A, CEA-2022, 

and IEC 62087). 

6.4 Opportunities, Gaps, and Barriers

Based on the studies described and LBNL’s experience in studying MELs, solving the “MELs 

problem” will require a collection of many strategies, ranging from efficient product components 

(e.g., efficient power supplies) to efficient products (e.g., PC power management) to managing 

groups of connected devices (e.g., home theater or home office) to whole-house control (e.g., 

automated home energy management and occupant feedback). A portfolio of research activities 

is needed, in three general areas: 1) Better understanding the diffuse and varied MELs end-use, 

2) Developing component and system designs that efficiently deliver MELs services, and 3) 

Developing controls that more closely match delivered energy services to occupant needs. 

Market trends indicate that networking and communication capabilities will be added to 

essentially all residential products over the next decade, primarily for convenience and 

functionality, but also due to Smart Grid initiatives. While these connectivity functions have the 
54 

potential to enhance energy efficiency, they are primarily being added to products for other 

reasons and therefore will likely impede energy efficiency without intervention by the energy 

efficiency community. The key to realizing the energy savings potential of networking and 

communications are energy-aware technology standards for device interoperability and usability. 

Because communication capabilities are already being added to devices, stand-alone energy 

control systems probably will not be viable in residences, for cost and consumer acceptance 

reasons. Consumer acceptance of stand-alone control systems is a problem because the only 

control method generally available to these systems is to turn off the power to the device, which 

makes products behave unpredictably (e.g., “on” switches are disabled). On the other hand, 

“distributed” control that is built into devices using the native control interfaces is most likely to 

succeed in the market. The technologies for achieving this type of distributed, cooperative 

control have not been fully proven, however. This research need was identified as a top priority 

at the Building America Fall 2010 planning meeting, “Smart cooperative controls for MELs” 

(NREL 2011). 

A significant development in the MELs area has been the decision by the DOE Appliance 

Standards Program to pursue rulemakings for several types of MELs devices in the coming 

years. To support this standards process, research is needed to better characterize the energy use 

of MELs devices to identify the best targets for standards and variability across the housing 

stock, as well as collect better data on the performance of efficiency technologies for MELs. For 

instance, LBNL is considering applying the MELs field protocols described previously to collect 

energy consumption data on electronic devices from a larger sample of homes, for use in 

standards rulemakings.

An important industry standard (ECMA-393) was recently adopted that will allow sleeping PCs 

to maintain their network presence, thus eliminating a significant barrier to saving 50% or more 

of PC energy use. To encourage adoption of this standard, it needs to be demonstrated in a 

variety of applications so its savings potential can be accurately verified.

6.5 Multi-Year Milestones

6.5.1 FY 2011 Milestones

• Complete long-term field metering of MELs in three homes and publish results.

• Publish NILM algorithm development and testing results.

• Develop an R&D plan, to include identifying key MELs with further research, candidate 

efficiency technologies to investigate, ways to work with manufacturers to encourage 

more efficient products, and communication and control standards that are needed.

6.5.2 FY 2012 Milestones

• Participate in committees defining standards for interoperability of MELs communication 

and control.

• Develop and demonstrate networked management of MELs using “native” control 

interfaces.

• Conduct field demonstration to quantify savings from PC network proxying (ECMA393).
55 

• Work with industry to improve MELs product design process (e.g., identify what 

incentives are needed for highly efficient mobile electronic designs to be used for ACpowered devices).

• Test commercially available networked plug-load controls (e.g., Modlet).

• Continue to develop and field test NILM methods.

• Assess usability of MELs energy control user interfaces.

• Assess consumer response to information about MELs energy use for purchase and 

operation.

• Field test MELs packages with efficient devices and improved controls.

• Develop and refine energy test procedures to cover additional types and operational 

modes of MELs products (e.g., participate in IEC committee developing test procedures 

for “network standby” modes). 

6.6 References

Bensch, I.; Pigg, S.; Koski, K.; Belshe, R. 2010. Electricity Savings Opportunities for Home 

Electronics and Other Plug-In Devices in Minnesota Homes: A Technical and Behavioral Field 

Assessment. Madison, WI: Energy Center of Wisconsin. ECW Report Number 257-1. 

www.ecw.org/ecwresults/257-1.pdf. 

Brown, R.; Lanzisera, S.; Cheung, H.Y.; Lai, J.; Jiang, X.; Dawson-Haggerty, S.; Taneja, J.; 

Ortiz, J.; Culler, D. 2011. “Using Wireless Power Meters to Measure Energy Use of 

Miscellaneous and Electronic Devices in Buildings.” In Proceedings of the Energy Efficient 

Domestic Appliances and Lighting (EEDAL) in Copenhagen, Denmark. 

Brown, R.; Rittelmann, W. Parker, D.; Homan, G. 2006. “Appliances, Lighting, Electronics, and 

Miscellaneous Equipment Electricity Use in New Homes.” In Proceedings of the 2006 ACEEE 

Summer Study on Energy Efficiency in Buildings in Asilomar, CA. Washington, DC: American 

Council for an Energy Efficient Economy (also LBNL-62440). 

Lanzisera, S., Nordman, B.; Brown, R.E. 2010. “Data Network Equipment Energy Use and 

Savings Potential in Buildings.” In Proceedings of the 2010 ACEEE Summer Study on Energy 

Efficiency in Buildings in Asilomar, CA. Washington, DC: American Council for an Energy 

Efficient Economy (also LBNL-3510E). 

Meier, A. 1987. “Saving the ‘Other’ Energy in Homes.” Energy Auditor and Retrofitter. 

November/December. pp. 13–19. 

Meier, A.K., Greenberg, S.; Rainer, R. 1992. “Emerging Miscellaneous Uses of Electricity in 

Homes.” Energy–The International Journal 17(5):509–518. 

Moorefield, L.; Calwell, C. 2011. Research Findings on Consumer and Office Electronics. 

Sacramento, CA: California Energy Commission, PIER Energy-Related Environmental Research 

Program. CEC-500-2011-028. www.energy.ca.gov/2011publications/CEC-500-2011-028/CEC500-2011-028.PDF. 

Nordman, B.; McMahon, J. 2004. Developing and Testing Low Power Mode Measurement 

Methods. Sacramento, CA: California Energy Commission. P500-04-057. 
56 

NREL. 2011. Summary of Prioritized Research Opportunities: Building America Program 

Planning Meeting, November 2010. Golden, CO: National Renewable Energy Laboratory, 

prepared for Building America, Building Technologies Program, U.S. DOE. 

O’Neil, N.; Braman, M.; Hardy, G. 2010. “Out of Control: Barriers to Smart Power Strip 

Implementation.” In Proceedings of the 2010 ACEEE Summer Study on Energy Efficiency in 

Buildings in Asilomar, CA. Washington, DC: American Council for an Energy Efficient 

Economy. 

Porter, S.F.; Moorefield, L.; May-Ostendorp, P. 2006. Final Field Research Report: California 

Plug-Load Metering Study. Durango, CO: Ecos Consulting. www.efficientproducts.org/ 

documents/Plug_Loads_CA_Field_Research_Report_Ecos_2006.pdf. 

Roth, K.; Goldstein, F.; Kleinman, J. 2002. Energy Consumption by Office and 

Telecommunications Equipment in Commercial Buildings--Volume I: Energy Consumption 

Baseline. Washington, DC: Prepared by Arthur D. Little for the U.S. Department of Energy. 

A.D. Little Reference no. 72895-00. www.eere.energy.gov/buildings/info/publications.html. 

Roth, K.; McKenney, K.; Ponoum, R.; Paetsch, C. 2007. Residential Miscellaneous Electric 

Loads: Energy Consumption Characterization and Savings Potential. Cambridge, MA: TIAX 

LLC. TIAX Reference No. D0370. 

Roth, KW.; McKenney, K. 2007. Energy Consumption by Consumer Electronics in U.S. 

Residences. Cambridge, MA: Tiax LLC. TIAX Reference – D5525. 

Roth, K.W., Ponoum, R.; Goldstein, F. 2006. U.S. Residential Information Technology Energy 

Consumption in 2005 and 2010. Cambridge, MA: Tiax LLC. TIAX Reference No. D0295. 

Sanchez, M.C., Koomey, J.G.; Moezzi, M.M.; Meier, A.K.; Huber, W. 1998. Miscellaneous 

Electricity Use in the U.S. Residential Sector. Berkeley, CA: Lawrence Berkeley National 

Laboratory. LBNL-40295. 

U.S. DOE. 2009. 2009 Buildings Energy Data Book. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of 

Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. 

http://buildingsdatabook.eere.energy.gov/. 

U.S. DOE. 2011. Homes have more energy-efficient appliances, but the efficiency gains are 

partly offset by more consumer electronics [Press Release]. Energy Information Administration, 

U.S. Department of Energy. March 28. www.eia.doe.gov/pressroom/releases/press355.cfm 

(accessed April 5, 2011). 

Zeifman, M.; Roth, K. 2011. “Nonintrusive Appliance Load Monitoring: Review and Outlook.” 

In Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Consumer Electronics in Las Vegas, NV. IEEE. 

Zogg, R.A.; Alberino, D.L. 1998. Electricity Consumption by Small End Uses in Residential 

Buildings: Final Report. Cambridge, MA: Arthur D. Little, Inc. Reference 34732-00. 
57 

7 Research Needs for Achieving Cost-Effective Deep Energy 

Retrofits (Site Built and Manufactured Housing) and HighPerformance New Manufactured Housing

Subrato Chandra 

Pacific Northwest National Laboratory

7.1 Context

The specific scope of work for this chapter is to identify: 

• Research needs to achieve cost-effective deep energy retrofits for site built and 

manufactured housing

• Strategies to reduce risks to occupants from health and safety issues that could be caused 

during and by the deep energy retrofits.

• Strategies to reduce risks to house durability caused by deep energy retrofits.

• Research needs for retrofitting manufactured housing and identify research needs to 

achieve high-performance, cost-effective new manufactured housing.

• The need for computer modeling accuracy versus cost, time, and accuracy required for 

input data. 

7.2 Introduction

At more than 20% (Table 1.1.3 of the Buildings Energy Data Book [BEDB] 2009) 

(http://buildingsdatabook.eren.doe.gov/), residential energy use is a significant part of U.S. 

energy use and greenhouse gas emissions. Accordingly, DOE is investing significant resources to 

reduce residential energy use and develop the technical and scientific capability for deep energy 

retrofits. Building America has more than 15 years experience and demonstrated success in 

conducting systems engineering and research to cost-effectively improve the energy efficiency, 

IAQ, comfort, and durability of new housing. It has only recently, however, started similar 

systems-based research for deep retrofits in existing homes. One goal of Building America is to 

document strategies to cost-effectively reduce whole-house energy use in existing homes by 30% 

in all climates by 2014 (Lee 2010). 

Deep retrofits in existing homes are not cheap, easy, or common. A few inspired individuals 

have completed serious deep retrofits that aim to save more than 70% of pre-retrofit energy use. 

Some of these homes are net power producing. Case studies or data from six of these homes, five 

in cold climates and one in Florida, are available from links cited in the Reference section. There 

are, of course, more examples of case studies of deep retrofits of individual homes that achieve 

the more modest goal of 30% or higher savings (McIlvaine et al. 2010). 

Community-scale case studies of retrofits, with varying levels of savings, have also been 

completed. For example, Shonder et al. (1998) documented 32% savings in 200 apartments in 

Fort Polk, Louisiana, through lighting retrofits, low-flow showerheads and replacing the airsource heat pumps with ground-source heat pumps with desuperheaters. Fuller et al. (2010) 

completed a comprehensive review of large-scale retrofit efforts over the past 30 years: “... there 

is no proven formula—and only limited success to date with reliably motivating large numbers 
58 

of Americans to invest in comprehensive home energy improvements, especially if they are 

being asked to pay for a majority of the improvement costs...” 

Persistence of savings and cost effectiveness are other major challenges. As documented by 

Fuller (2010), in the Bonneville Power Administration weatherization efforts in the Pacific 

Northwest (which ultimately weatherized 900,000 homes in the 1980s and early 1990s), “savings 

per household (relative to non-participants) declined over the course of the Long-Term 

Weatherization Program, from 3,060 kWh/home in 1986 to 2,180kWh/home in 1988 and 1,330 

kWh/home in 1989.” 

The lack of cost effectiveness is shown in two examples. In the recent Clean Energy Works 

Portland project (Peters et al. 2010) the annual savings estimated in 64 homes that completed 

retrofits in 2009 and 2010, ranged from $28 to $650/yr with a median value of $216/yr. The 

median loan amount for similar projects was $12,633. The average median simple payback is 

thus about 50 years. Earlier, in the 1980s, for the Hood River Conservation Project that 

implemented extensive retrofits in over 80% of all eligible homes in an Oregon community, the 

cost was $1.70 per initial saved kilowatt-hour (Fuller et al. 2010). That translates to a simple 

payback of more than 25 years, given the low cost of electricity in the Pacific Northwest. 

These examples also show that a major barrier to retrofits is the relatively low cost of energy. 

The average “energy burden” for households that are ineligible for federal assistance is only 

2.3% of household income (Table 2.3.15 of BEDB 2009) and in many cases lower than phone 

and cable bills. Thus, home energy costs do not seem to strongly motivate most Americans.

This discussion suggests that a fruitful area for research will be to lower the cost of deep retrofits 

and weatherization through systems engineering and documenting the cost effectiveness of 

energy retrofits and the attendant potential value added through enhanced comfort, IAQ, building 

durability, and improved aesthetics. In other words, the same fundamental Building America 

approach that has worked for new housing has the potential to be successful for retrofits. The 

following research needs spring from that fundamental philosophy. 

7.3 Research Needs

The research needs are identified in four categories

• Site-Built and Manufactured Housing Retrofits

• Manufactured Housing Retrofits

• Manufactured Housing New Construction

• Software.

7.4 Site-Built and Manufactured Housing Retrofits

7.4.1 Pilot Deep Energy Retrofits

• Continue the PNNL/ORNL team approach of achieving and monitoring pilot deep retrofit 

homes that began in 2010. Initiate new pilots that achieve savings in all climates and 

cover single and multifamily applications. These pilots will be used to document the 

costs, savings, and challenges associated with deep energy retrofits. 

The PNNL team approach focuses on systems engineering during equipment replacement or 

ownership changing events. For instance, if the HVAC equipment is to be replaced, rightsize the 

equipment, incorporate return air transfers if needed, ensure airtight ductwork, and install an 
59 

outdoor air ventilation system simultaneously. If roofing is to be replaced (a more than $14 

billion/yr industry per table 2.6.2 of BEDB 2009), explore opportunities to remove some roof 

sheathing to access normally inaccessible attic areas and seal the ducts, air tighten the ceiling 

plane, fix leaky can lights, and add ceiling insulation. Explore adding wall insulation if siding is 

to be replaced (more than $5 billion/yr per BEDB, 2009) or complete interior painting is to be 

done. If a foreclosed home is being renovated by a county under the HUD neighborhood 

stabilization program, conduct a full systems engineering analysis to identify and implement all 

cost-effective options subject to available budget. Early success with this approach was 

documented by McIlvaine et al. (2010). They document 10 completed renovations that have 

simulated energy savings of 9%–48% (average 31%). 

• Instrument and monitor these homes to determine actual energy savings and 

improvements in IAQ and comfort. Interview and otherwise engage the occupants to 

evaluate their comfort and satisfaction with the retrofits and document any lessons 

learned.

o Reduce retrofit-related health, safety, and durability risks. In cooperation with 

other laboratories and organizations such as Gas Technology Institute and BPI, 

develop a simple-to-use, well-illustrated checklist that a home energy professional 

can use to identify risks and recommend strategies to mitigate. Examples may 

include how to use an infrared camera to identify thermal shorts, how to use 

moisture meters to identify wood moisture levels in critical areas, how to check 

for defective or worn out electrical wiring, and how to assess whether fireplaces 

and atmospherically vented combustion equipment are likely to cause health and 

safety issues.

o Laboratory home 50%+ deep grid-friendly retrofits. In cooperation with smartgrid researchers at PNNL, retrofit one of the two side-by-side PNNL laboratory 

homes in Richland, Washington, to research and showcase a grid-friendly 50%+ 

retrofit package for cold climates. Include water conservation measures. Partner 

with General Electric and other manufacturers that are introducing grid-friendly 

appliances.

o Integrate ductless heat pumps. Monitor the performance of these systems with or 

without forced air systems in the PNNL laboratory homes and elsewhere to 

quantify the energy performance and room-to-room comfort. Develop air 

distribution and mixing strategies if significant room-to-room temperature 

differences are found. Engage with BPA and other utilities that are also interested 

in this area. Evaluate combined ductless heat pump and heat pump water heater 

(HPWH) strategies in various climates and home types.

o Retrofit HPWHs. Conduct prototype HPWH retrofits in cooling climates to 

quantify the interactions with air-conditioning and domestic hot water and 

impacts on relative humidity issues. In heating climates, investigate HPWH 

integration with exhaust ventilation system to lower the negative impacts on 

heating energy consumption. Work with HPWH manufacturers. Evaluate 

strategies in the PNNL laboratory homes. Publish guidelines for retrofits after cost 

and performance data are obtained by performing several prototype retrofits in the 

field in several climates and by monitoring their performance. 
60 

o Replace water supply line. This offers the opportunity to switch to a structured or 

home run piping layout. Common practice is “like and kind” replication of pipe 

runs. Low-flow fixtures, WaterSense rated toilets, and tankless gas/heat pump 

water heaters would be included in more comprehensive retrofits. Floor airsealing, floor (or crawlspace wall) insulation, and duct sealing are not directly 

related to the plumbing replacement, but could synergistically improve energy 

and water efficiency. 

7.5 Manufactured Housing Retrofits

• Repair leaky ducts. Work with leading factory-built home manufacturers to develop and 

field test effective strategies for repairing leaky duct systems. Sealing high-pressure duct 

joints, sealing torn areas of the belly effectively and permanently to bring leaky floor 

ducts into closer coupling with the conditioned space, and creating interior duct systems 

in homes with vaulted ceilings to bypass inaccessible and leaky attic ducts are good 

strategies. Publish guidelines for retrofits after cost and performance data are obtained by 

performing several prototype retrofits in the field in several climates and monitoring their 

performance. 

• Replace exterior insulating sheathing and windows. Manufactured homes typically have 

6-in. to 12-in. overhangs, and windows are rarely flashed (typically they are just caulked 

after being nailed in). This presents unique opportunities and challenges for insulating 

poorly insulated walls and replacing leaky, poorly performing windows. Evaluate several 

strategies in laboratory homes. Publish guidelines for retrofits after cost and performance 

data are obtained by performing several prototype retrofits in the field in several climates 

and monitoring their performance. 

7.6 Manufactured Housing New Construction

• Beyond code and ENERGY STAR compliance guidelines. Evaluate and analyze the 

proposed new code for manufactured housing that is expected to be released by January 

2012 and compare to ENERGY STAR for Homes version 3 standards. Develop a guide 

for home manufacturers on cost-effective ways to meet beyond code performance levels. 

• High-performance modular homes. Work with International Builders Show Village 

sponsors to demonstrate innovative envelope, equipment, and solar technologies 

incorporated in factory-built homes for International Builders Show 2012 and 2013.

7.7 Software Needs

• Assess energy retrofit software usefulness. Several software tools are in use by energy 

auditors and home performance contractors. Interview a dozen or more auditors to assess 

the tools they use and how satisfied they are with ease of use, accuracy, and general 

usefulness. Summarize the information so it is useful to software developers and auditors.

• Use Google SketchUp applications. Value generally needs to be added beyond energy 

efficiency to achieve large-scale market penetration of energy-efficient products and 

services. Software that uses the Google SketchUp or a similar platform should be 

developed to show homeowners how attractive some visible energy conservation items 

can look (e.g., interior ducts or added exterior insulation combined with window 

replacements).
61 

7.8 Conclusions

For the last 15 years Building America has successfully increased the market share of new 

energy-efficient, high-performance homes by working with builder partners to increase their 

profits and customer satisfaction through systems engineering. The results have been 

communicated to other builders and stakeholders through market transformation and 

communications efforts led by the PNNL/ORNL team. Sustained guidance and support from 

DOE should enable the proposed research activities and market transformation activities to lead 

to an increased market share of deep energy retrofits of existing homes.

7.9 References

DOE. Buildings Energy Data Book (BEDB). 2009. http://buildingsdatabook.eren.doe.gov/. 

Fuller, M.C. et al. 2010. Driving Demand for Home Energy Improvements. LBNL – 3960E, 

http://drivingdemand.lbl.gov/. 

Lee, D. 2010. “Goals and Priorities – Building America Residential Integration Program.” 

Presented at the Gas Technology Institute expert meeting on retrofits, Chicago, IL. 

Links with Case Study and/or Data for Very Deep Energy Retrofits (>70% savings) 

http://infomonitors.com/dpr/ (Florida example).

www.affordablecomfort.org/initiatives.php?PageID=16 (four case studies in cold climates 

available at this link).

www.buildingscience.com/documents/digests/bsd-139-deep-energy-retrofit-of-a-sears-roebuckhouse-a-home-for-the-next-100-years (cold climate).

McIlvaine, J.; Sutherland, K.; Schleith, K.; Chandra, S. 2010. “Exploring Cost-Effective, High 

Performance Residential Retrofits for Affordable Housing in the Hot Humid Climate.” 

Seventeenth Symposium on Improving Building Systems in Hot and Humid Climates, August 

24–26, 2010, in Austin, TX. www.baihp.org/pubs/index.htm. 

Peters, J.S.; Moran, D.; Armstrong, A. 2010. Clean Energy Works Portland Pilot Process 

Evaluation, Final Report. Research Into Action, Inc. 

Shonder, J.A.; Hughes, P. J.; Thornton, J.W. 1998. “Using Calibrated Engineering Models to 

Predict Energy Savings in Large-Scale Geothermal Heat Pump Projects.” ASHRAE Transactions

104(1B):944–954. 
62 

8 Building America Market Transformation Opportunities

Michael Baechler

Pacific Northwest National Laboratory

8.1 Problem Summary and Introduction

Building America is a significant contributor to residential building science with an emphasis on 

energy efficiency. The knowledge produced by the program is of high value to builders, 

remodelers, industry allies, and managers of residential efficiency programs. However, several 

issues complicate the dissemination of consistent and meaningful information to the program’s 

target audiences in a way that will transform markets. Building America: 

• Has a complex structure. This is becoming more so with the addition of 10 research 

teams to the current five, and with a greater emphasis on existing homes in addition to 

new construction. The more teams and products, the greater the difficulty in maintaining 

consistent technical and informational content, products, and vocabulary. The need has 

never been greater to explain potentially conflicting research results from a program 

perspective.

• Emphasizes systems engineering. Achieving energy savings through systems engineering 

requires that many technologies, techniques, and models be applied. The fundamental 

programmatic message to builders is to follow the approach, not simply to adopt specific 

technologies. Describing and selling an abstract approach is more difficult than selling a 

specific technology (such as compact fluorescent lamps, PV, or high-R windows). 

• Is a player in a crowded market. The program’s outreach to builders must strengthen and 

leverage the good work from other programs. 

The Home Energy Score is a key new tool and activity intended to improve information delivery 

to consumers. Vice President Joe Biden and DOE Secretary Steven Chu announced the launch of 

the Home Energy Score Pilot program on November 9, 2010. The Home Energy Score is 

presented on a label as a quick way for homeowners to understand how their home’s energy 

performance compares to that of others in the same region (DOE 2010). In developing this 

strategy, the Vice President’s Middle Class Task Force (2009) noted that: “Consumers do not 

have access to straightforward and reliable information on home energy retrofits that they need 

to make informed decisions.” 

The launch of this activity emphasizes DOE’s commitment to improving information delivery 

and the priority given to renovating homes. Supporting and coordinating with this program will 

be important objectives for Building America market transformation activities. 

The great strengths that Building America brings to market transformation are its recognition as 

an important source of tested and documented information and the relationships that the DOE 

managers, laboratory researchers, and Building America teams have developed with specific 

builders and other industry players over years of interactions and accomplishments. The program 

has paid less attention to reaching the broader population of builders that have not received direct 

intervention from a Building America team. Building America must do a better job of leveraging 

the strengths to reach the broader market and have greater impact on the speed and scale of the 

adoption of energy efficient construction and renovations. 
63 

Building America has held two all-team meetings since selecting 15 teams to participate in the 

program. Both meetings have resulted in substantial team input related to market transformation 

activities. Many perceptions shared in the team meetings are consistent with the issues raised in 

the preceding paragraphs. 

The following key findings from participants at the July and November 2010 Building America 

meetings10

• Building America research is not accessible to stakeholders.

included multiple gaps that relate to market transformation:

• Metrics and the number and quality of data collected need to be standardized.

• Consumers do not see the value in efficiency—we need to educate consumers and 

homeowners.

• We need to explore ways to deal with the unpredictable (confidence in energy savings, 

simulated occupancy).

• Data must be transparent and peer reviewed.

Building America is a successful research program and has made a difference in the market for 

new homes. Building America technical information and builder training has done much to 

strengthen deployment programs such as ENERGY STAR for New Homes. For example, 

builders participating in both ENERGY STAR and Building America build a disproportionate 

number of new ENERGY STAR homes in key markets as opposed to builders that participated 

in ENERGY STAR only. Thus builders participating in both programs helped to improve 

ENERGY STAR’s penetration rate (Baechler et al. 2006). DOE’s companion program to 

Building America, the Builders Challenge, continues to recruit builders and label new highperformance homes. Also, a private-sector service offered by Masco developed with technical 

assistance from Building America warranties energy performance for consumers and helps 

ensure building science principles are properly applied in hundreds of thousands of new homes. 

Building America can help to fill gaps and needs, including outreach to new home builders who 

do not work with a Building America team and to contractors, remodelers, and installers working 

on existing homes, which Building America has recently turned its attention to. Building 

America is not alone in recognizing and attempting to transform these markets. The following 

sections describe strategies that Building America can follow to leverage its own strengths, and 

those of market allies, to have an even greater impact on both new and existing homes. 

8.2 Building America Market Transformation Strategies

“The term market transformation refers to the strategic process of intervening in a market to 

create lasting change in market behavior by removing identified barriers or exploiting 

opportunities to accelerate the adoption of cost-effective energy efficiency as a matter of 

standard practice” (ACEEE 2010). 

Building America’s focus on new construction has developed strong relationships with builders 

and the building industry. Its emphasis on field applications has won over the nation’s largest 

builders who have worked directly with Building America teams to improve the energy 

 

10 At the November team meeting, team and laboratory members participated in a brainstorming session on 

implementation. The gaps and needs identified in the July meeting were expanded. Findings were presented in 

Bianchi (2010).
64 

efficiency, quality, and value of their houses. Building America has also developed strong 

industry allies, or at least set the foundation for growing these relationships. As Building 

America (and the entire Building Technologies Program) ramps up retrofit activities, these 

relationships must be replicated for new construction and renovations. 

DOE’s ambitious goal is to retrofit 1.3 million homes by the end of 2013 and to continue to 

aggressively enhance the energy and value performance of new homes. To substantially 

contribute to these goals in a timely way, Building America must find a way to reach, educate, 

and motivate contractors and builders who will not be directly touched by Building America 

teams. The program needs to continue creating and documenting research findings and design 

solutions. That information must be presented using consistent language and media directed to 

the identified target audiences. However, current approaches will not be enough to engage nonpartner builders and contractors. 

Residential construction and renovation involves many small contractors working in local 

markets (Will and Baker 2007). In 2008 there were a reported 270,000 building construction 

contractors and an unknown number of self-employed individuals (Bureau of Labor Statistics 

2010). The Joint Center for Housing Studies at Harvard used data collected in the 2002 

Economic Census of Construction to estimate more than 500,000 remodeling businesses that 

year, including the self-employed (Will and Baker 2007). The 2005 remodeling market value 

amounted to $280 billion (Will and Baker 2007). For a sense of scale, this accounted for nearly 

40% of residential construction in 2005 (Bendimerad 2008). 

Building America is not alone in trying to reach this market. Table 3 identifies opportunities and 

barriers related to this market. The strategies described in this chapter use the strong technical 

information and builder relationships developed by Building America to reach out to a broader 

audience of builders, renovators, and installers and to better coordinate with multiple deployment 

programs. The following strategy recommendations include brief descriptions of specific actions 

needed to pursue the strategy and a qualitative sense of the required budget above and beyond 

existing activities.

8.2.1 Strategy 1: Use Building America Documentation Products To Strengthen 

the Building America Brand and Market Allies 

Building America should continue to develop programmatic-level documentation. Building 

America has developed a strong library of technical publications, including technical reports 

from the teams, Best Practices documents, and case studies that transcend individual team efforts 

to provide a programmatic perspective on efficient home design packages. Although individual 

team recommendations and documentation may vary in approach and depth, the programmatic 

documents place these differences in the context of overall program research. Whereas a single 

team may focus on a particular solution or viewpoint, the programmatic documents can present 

that solution as one of multiple approaches.

This documentation helps to ensure a consistent program vocabulary and brand. A common 

lexicon is important to avoid market confusion. To help ensure consistency, DOE requested that 

PNNL prepare outlines for case studies to be developed under the program. These outlines were 

prepared last summer (2010) and were used in developing task orders for the new Building 

America teams. 

• Make Best Practices and other documentation available to all market allies. Potential 

allies who use the information include: 
65 

o The Appraisal Institute, to develop new training materials for appraisers to 

include the value of energy efficiency in its appraisals. 

o The State of Wisconsin, to develop a new website for its new construction 

program promoting ENERGY STAR and Builders Challenge. 

o The American Institute of Architects, in support of training materials for solar 

design. 

o The DOE Codes Program, to help populate the Codes Resource Center. 

• Pursuing this action is straightforward.

o Continue to develop Best Practices and other deployable documentation. 

o Work with DOE management to develop clear and simple guidelines for when 

graphics and manuscripts can be released. 

o Reach out to critical organizations such as BPI, the Appraisal Institute, real estate 

professionals, home builders associations, educators, and others to use the 

material. 

o Respond to requests promptly for high-resolution materials.

The cost to pursue this strategy is low. Some additional time will be needed to coordinate across 

teams and laboratories tasked with maintaining communication with market allies, but materials 

are already being produced and are included in the budget. 

8.2.2 Strategy 2: Form an Ongoing Market Transformation Working Group Within 

Building America

Building America teams have shown tremendous interest in market transformation activities. 

Invite each team and participating national laboratory to participate in a market transformation 

working group. This group can provide input into communications products and tools, as well as 

organizations and programs that should be targets of Building America outreach. This working 

group would be instrumental in working with DOE to form and implement a market 

transformation plan and assigning roles to implement the plan. However, the group will require 

leadership to focus on those activities best suited to Building America and its mission as opposed 

to the transformation of the entire residential construction market.

The cost of participating in meetings and calls would be low if meetings are conducted in 

combination with team meetings. 

8.2.3 Strategy 3: Continue To Support Standard-Setting Organizations

Work began last year to directly support standard setting organizations. The first organization to 

receive support is BPI. PNNL is establishing a Web-based system to accept and track comments 

on BPI’s proposed standards. BPI has requested additional help in responding to comments. 

PNNL is providing limited help with responses as an extension of the Web-based system 

designed to track comments. The system is transparent to users placing comments or questions. 

To their eye, the system is linked to the standard-setting organization, such as BPI. The primary 

investment in this system was made in FY 2010. Support to standard-setting organizations 

enables Building America to target its information and technology where it will most effectively 

influence industry practices. The support essentially leverages the volunteer efforts that industry 

leaders put into technical review panels, boards, and committees. The system will be validated 
66 

with BPI and can then offered to other organizations attempting to set energy efficiency 

standards or protocols. The system can be expanded to provide technical assistance to any 

practitioner who wishes to submit a question to the standard-setting organization, whether related 

to a standard or not. Establishing standards and supporting the organizations that create them 

help to create workforce capabilities that are critical to quality management and give builders 

and contractors access to the tools and information they need to implement energy efficiency 

technologies. 

The cost to develop this capability was covered in FY 2010. Additional costs would be modest to 

reach out to other organizations and coordinate with their standard-setting activities. 

8.2.4 Strategy 4: Leverage Relationships With Builders To Establish a More 

Formal Organization of Builder Partners 

There are several ways to do this:

• Formally make Building America partner builders a part of the program. To date most 

builder interaction has been exclusively done through the teams. 

• Establish an organization that builder partners can join to share information. The 

organization may be structured to address new construction and renovation contractors. 

The organization may also be structured around topics such as quality management, 

Builders Challenge, ENERGY STAR, or technical issues. 

• Allow all builders with an interest to join this voluntary, information-sharing 

organization. 

• Use this builder partners organization as a sounding board to determine the tools that 

builders need to achieve better energy performance and to review or evaluate Building 

America products. 

• Support the organization by preparing technical specifications, volume purchases, and 

demonstrations of new technologies. 

• Use the builder organizations to engage manufacturers and vendors. For example, at 

national meetings such as the International Builders Show, organize speed dating 

opportunities where builders can learn about energy efficiency technologies and 

techniques. Invite service providers such as quality management consultants, raters, 

warranty programs (Masco’s Environments for Living), and energy efficient mortgage 

(EEM) providers to participate in the speed dating. Invite branding programs such as 

ENERGY STAR and Builders Challenge to participate as well. This organization could 

serve as an important platform for training builders and renovation contractors in the use 

of the Home Energy Score label and the Scoring Tool.

Initial costs are low for inviting in builder partners. Coordinating the organization by maintaining 

e-mail lists, setting up conference calls, organizing events, and establishing other means of 

communication would entail higher costs. Organizing meetings at the IBS and inviting vendors 

would require coordination time. Higher costs could include conducting surveys, developing 

specifications for new products, organizing volume purchases, and other forms of assistance. 

However, establishing the builder partner organization does not create a specific commitment to 

complete more expensive forms of assistance and research. Those projects could be decided 

individually. 
67 

8.2.5 Strategy 5: Reach Out to Manufacturers and Vendors

Most manufacturers and vendors sell highly efficient and standard equipment. Unfortunately, 

most consumers cannot tell the difference and often must make very quick decisions about 

replacement or repair. We need to persuade this group to make the upsell for efficient equipment 

and to develop a systems perspective. “If Building America can help manufacturers of 

replacement equipment like heat pumps, air conditioners, windows, water heaters, siding, etc. to 

develop a systems approach to replacements and educate them on the possibilities, they may start 

including air sealing, duct sealing and insulation as part of replacement projects. 

Moderate costs are expected to establish these relationships and maintain e-mail lists, set up 

conference calls, and organize speed dating activities. Ongoing education will be required to 

achieve success with the systems approach. Building America should coordinate with other 

organizations such as the Codes Program, Emerging Technologies, ENERGY STAR, BPI, and 

RESNET, which also seek to maintain relationships with manufacturers and vendors. 

8.2.6 Strategy 6: Reach Out to Other Programs 

Work with other programs such as ENERGY STAR, the Codes Program, Emerging 

Technologies, BPI, RESNET, CEE, state and regional programs, and others to share mailing 

lists, invite builder participants, and share programs. 

This strategy is likely to reduce overall costs, although it will require time to establish 

relationships and coordinate resources. 

Each of these strategies approaches the market from different perspectives. The strategies are 

intended to reinforce each other. They would work best if implemented in tandem. However, 

individual strategies, or even specific activities within the strategies, could be implemented. 

8.3 Summary of Residential Construction Market Transformation Opportunities 

and Barriers

Table 4 summarizes market opportunities and barriers. The column “Building America 

Strategies” suggests ongoing (shown with a dash [-]) and new activities (shown with an asterisk 

[*]) that address each market barrier or opportunity. 
68 

Table 4. Summary Table of Building America Strategies for Market Barriers and Opportunities

Market Barriers and Opportunities General Strategies Building America Strategies1

New Construction – Leveraging Opportunities for Energy Efficiency 

Documentation and Resource Development Disciplined program branding and 

messaging reduces confusion and 

enhances communication.

- Continue to develop documentation to 

consistently present program goals, encourage (or 

enforce) common lexicon, and present all team 

research perspectives.

Team participation indicates high interest 

and motivation in market transformation 

activities.

Establish market transformation and 

communication standing committee

* Establish a standing market transformation and 

communication committee to harness team 

experience and insight.

Builder partners are highly motivated and a 

strong resource, but few data have been 

collected to identify needs and 

understanding.

Gather information about technology 

gaps, training needs, branding 

preferences, business models, and other 

factors.

* Question teams and builder partners about the 

information, products, and approaches that work 

best for them and identify the gaps.

Branding differentiates efficient houses:

ENERGY STAR for New Homes offers a 

well established and recognized brand for 

new construction 

Builders Challenge offers a consumer label 

that allows for the comparison of energy 

performance in homes

Consumers are willing to pay more for 

certified, branded, green, energy-efficient 

homes.

The Builders Challenge label allows for 

energy performance comparison across 

houses as well as indication of specific 

performance and quality measures.

Branding helps builders differentiate their 

product. 

- Continue to support the Builders Challenge 

program.

* Develop a “builder’s working group” that builders 

can participate in even if they are not part of 

partnerships. Target documentation products for 

these members such as catalogs of technologies. 

* Coordinate with the EPA to reach out to 

ENERGY STAR builders for speed dating and 

builder’s alliance.

Masco Environments for Living uses 

Building America principles to offer 

guaranteed energy performance that 

builders subscribe to and offer to consumers 

Branding and performance guarantee. Continue to provide team access and 

documentation as a building block for these types 

of programs. 

Regional, state, and utility programs. Sponsored programs often include 

incentives and aggressive recruitment 

and education activities.

CEE includes many utility and other 

sponsors.

Coordinate with regional, state and utility 

programs

Energy Efficient Mortgages All national secondary mortgage markets 

and federally insured programs offer 

energy mortgages at point of home sale 

(Baden 2010).

EEMs are poorly understood in the 

market (Mann 2009).

* Encourage contractors to promote EEMs.

* Encourage real estate professionals to promote 

EEMs.

* Develop case studies emphasizing EIMs and 

EEMs 

* Invite HUD and other providers to builder speed 

dating.

- Include information about energy efficient 
69 

Market Barriers and Opportunities General Strategies Building America Strategies1

mortgages in builder and consumer 

documentation.

Energy efficient training such as “Houses 

that Work”

Provide training and training materials. - Encourage the Energy Efficient Building 

Association and other training providers to use 

Building America resources and lexicon.

Quality management programs and awards. Packaged programs and award programs 

exist but builder participation is limited 

and builder confusion is high.

- Continue to develop quality management tools 

and documentation

* Develop a quality management website that 

provides introductory information and resource 

links.

* Encourage vendors to participate in speed 

dating events.

* Expand energy efficiency certification programs 

(BPI, RESNET, apprenticeships) to reach new 

construction trades.

Recognize exemplary builders using the 

Energy Value Housing Awards and Builders 

Challenge awards.

Recognize and award excellence. Continue to support Energy Value Housing 

Awards and Builders Challenge award programs.

Encourage communication and sharing 

across university and college programs.

University outreach and coordination - Continue to sponsor coordinating events and 

support teams and laboratories to work with 

universities and colleges.

Emerging Technology Programs Technology purchases and new product 

specification

- Encourage builders to use volume purchase 

opportunities and join user groups. A current 

example is the High-R Windows volume 

purchase.

* Product specifications for new generations of 

technologies are tested in more commercial 

buildings. Existing building partners and a new 

builder’s alliance could be used to identify 

technology gaps where specifications and 

solicitations could be useful.

* Invite user groups to join “builder’s alliance.”

Energy Codes Resource Center Technical assistance to builders

Enforcement of code standards

- Populate codes resource center with Building 

America documents and resources.

* Use e-mail lists generated by the codes program 

to invite builders to join the Building America 

builder organization.

*Publicize Building America activities on the codes 

website, which receives 3 million hits per month.
70 

Market Barriers and Opportunities General Strategies Building America Strategies1

New Construction – Reducing Barriers to Energy Efficiency

Builders who are not partners have limited 

access to information about building 

science, new technologies, and Building 

America findings.

Develop education programs for builders 

and product distributors.

Develop Golden Carrot2 Programs to 

promote specific technologies.

Develop technology purchase programs 

to increase awareness and drive down 

costs.

Develop certification for specific trades.

- Continue to develop Best Practices and case 

studies, and participate in builder conferences.

* Develop a builder’s alliance that builders can 

participate in even if they are not part of 

partnerships. Target documentation products for 

these members such as catalogs of technologies. 

* Sponsor speed dating events to allow vendors to 

meet builders and distributors.

* Expand energy efficiency certification programs 

(BPI, RESNET, apprenticeships) to reach new 

construction trades.

Appraisers do not value energy efficiency. Improve appraiser standards and 

practices.

- Continue to provide training materials to trade 

organizations.

* Engage trade organizations aggressively to 

require training and to develop training curricula 

and other documentation.

Real estate sales professionals do not sell 

energy efficiency.

Develop business cases showing 

improved sales and profit for real estate 

professionals. Consumers are willing to 

pay more for certified and branded, green, 

energy-efficient homes.

* Continue to provide training materials to trade 

organizations.

* Engage trade organizations aggressively to 

require training and develop training curricula and 

other documentation.

Emerging Technology Programs Technology purchase and new product 

specifications

* Promote the program through the builder 

alliance

* Create new volume purchases and product 

specifications to fill gaps in product selection.

Renovation – Leveraging Opportunities for Energy Efficiency

Documentation and Resource Development Disciplined program branding and 

messaging reduces confusion and 

enhances communication.

Continue to develop documentation to 

consistently present program goals, encourage (or 

enforce) a common lexicon, and present all team 

research perspectives.

Home Performance With ENERGY STAR This program offers a template for state 

and local programs to implement. The 

program is marketed to sponsors, not to 

remodelers.

- Prepare case studies on program experience. 

* Develop planned business case document for 

contractors.

* Share technical support documentation to inform 

consumers and contractors.

Home Energy Score and other labeling 

programs for existing homes

Branding and informational labeling 

programs enable consumers to compare 

energy performance across houses and 

* Develop planned business case document for 

contractors.

* Develop quality criteria and support 
71 

Market Barriers and Opportunities General Strategies Building America Strategies1

may indicate specific performance and 

quality measures.

documentation for installations.

* Provide documentation to support training and 

communication.

* Work with a builder partner organization to train 

builders and contractors.

Certification organizations (BPI, RESNET, 

Appraisal Institute) are establishing 

professional certifications and installation 

standards.

Certification and standards establish 

professional protocols and criteria to 

enhance credibility and quality 

management.

- Continue to develop infrastructure to support 

standard setting.

- Continue to provide documentation to aid in 

training programs

* Provide technical support to those offering 

comments.

* Provide technical support for non-standard 

based questions and comments.

Energy Improvement Mortgages (EIMs) 

such as Power Saver loans (HUD 2010).

All national secondary mortgage markets 

and federally insured programs offer 

energy mortgages at point of home sale 

(Baden 2010).

EEMs and EIMs are poorly understood in 

the market (Mann 2009).

* Encourage contractors to promote EEMs.

- Encourage real estate professionals to promote 

EEMs.

* Develop case studies emphasizing EIMs and 

EEMs.

Emerging Technology Programs Technology purchases and new product 

specifications

* Welcome all interested contractors in a voluntary 

builders working group.

* Promote programs through the builder working 

group.

* Create new volume purchases and product 

specifications to fill gaps in product selection.

Home Energy Magazine Magazine for energy performance 

professionals

* Sponsor and create Building America column 

that builds on previous articles incorporated in the 

magazine.

Energy Codes Resource Center Technical assistance to builders

Enforcement of code standards

- Populate codes resource center with Building 

America documents and resources.

* Use e-mail lists generated by codes program to 

invite builders to join the Building America builder 

organization. 

* Publicize Building America activities on the 

codes website, which receives 3 million hits per 

month.

Renovation – Reducing Barriers to Energy Efficiency

Home performance renovators have limited 

access to information about new 

Develop education programs for builders 

and product distributors.

- Continue to develop Best Practices and case 

studies, and participate in builder conferences.
72 

Market Barriers and Opportunities General Strategies Building America Strategies1

technologies and Building America findings. Develop Golden Carrot2 Programs to 

promote specific technologies.

Develop technology purchase programs 

to increase awareness and drive down 

costs.

Develop certification for specific trades.

* Develop a builder’s working group that builders 

can participate in even if they are not part of 

partnerships. Target documentation products for 

these members such as catalogs of technologies. 

* Sponsor speed-dating events to allow vendors to 

meet builders and distributors.

* Expand energy efficiency certification programs 

(BPI, RESNET, apprenticeships) to reach new 

construction trades.

Fragmented industry installers focus on 

piecemeal installations (roofers, plumbers, 

HVAC, painters)

When equipment fails or requires 

maintenance consumers must make 

decisions very quickly based on available 

funding. 

Sales opportunities based on routine 

maintenance and replacement does not 

upsell efficiency. 

* Develop home performance business cases and 

training for installers.

* Develop labels or other products to leave with 

homeowners that alert them to replace failed 

equipment with high-efficiency products. 

* Work with local sponsors to provide coupons 

and hotlines for efficient products.

* Target property management firms for these 

materials.

Appraisers do not value energy efficiency. Improve appraiser standards and 

practices.

- Continue to provide training materials to trade 

organizations and the Appraisal Institute.

* Engage trade organizations aggressively to 

require training and develop training curricula and 

other documentation.

Real estate sales professionals do not sell 

energy efficiency.

Develop business cases showing 

improved sales and profit for real estate 

professionals. Consumers are willing to 

pay more for certified and branded, green 

and energy-efficient homes.

* Continue to provide training materials to trade 

organizations.

* Engage trade organizations aggressively to 

require training and to develop training curricula 

and other documentation. 1 Ongoing activities are shown with a dash (-) at the beginning of each strategy; new activities are shown with an asterisk (*). 2 Golden Carrots are prizes offered in energy-efficient design competitions.
73 

8.4 References

ACEEE 2010: www.aceee.org/topics/market-transformation. 

Baden, S. 2010. “Financing: The Key to Unlocking Residential Energy Efficiency.” Posted on 

the Home Energy Magazine web site. http://homeenergy.org/consumerinfo/finance/index.php. 

Baechler, M.; Steward, H.; Elliott, D. 2006. “Clues to Technical Intervention’s Role in New 

Home Market Transformation: A Measure of Penetration Rates Using Building America and 

ENERGY STAR Datasets.” In Proceedings of the 2006 ACEEE Summer Study, ACEEE, 

Washington, D.C. 

Bendimerad, A. 2008. Developing a Leading Indicator for the Remodeling Industry. Joint Center 

for Housing Studies. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University. 

Bianchi, M. 2010. Draft Report: Summary of Prioritized Research Opportunities. Golden, CO: 

National Renewable Energy Laboratory. 

Bureau of Labor Statistics. 2010. Career Guide to Industries, 2010-11 Edition. 

www.bls.gov/oco/cg/cgs003.htm. 

Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ). 2009. Recovery Through Retrofit: Saving 

Homeowners Money and Creating Jobs. Washington, D.C. 

www.whitehouse.gov/administration/eop/ceq/initiatives/retrofit.

Department of Energy (DOE). 2010. Homeenergyscore.gov. 

Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). 2010. 

www.hud.gov/offices/hsg/sfh/title/ti_home.cfm. 

Mann, S. 2009. “Energy Efficient Mortgages” Home Energy Magazine March/April. 

http://homeenergy.org/article_preview.php?id=593&article_title=Energy_Efficient_Mortgages. 

Will, A.; Baker, K. 2007. The Performance of Remodeling Contractors in an Era of Industry 

Growth and Specialization. Joint Center for Housing Studies. Cambridge, MA: Harvard 

University. 
74 

Appendix – Barriers, Gaps, and Opportunities Identified by the National Laboratories

NREL – Assessing and Improving the Accuracy of Energy Analysis for Residential Buildings

Barrier or Gap Opportunity Area 

There is a general perception that software-based energy analysis 

of inefficient existing homes tends to over predict pre-retrofit 

energy use and retrofit energy savings.

Use empirical data from the field to assess and track the 

accuracy of reference software.

Technical 

Pathway 

Analysis

Many metrics are used to assess the accuracy of software 

predictions and therefore comparing metrics across studies can be 

difficult.

Develop a single reference containing standardized definitions 

for error, potential sources of error, and accuracy.

Technical 

Pathway 

Analysis

Potential issues with software tools and their inputs are only 

partially identified.

Use a rigorous process to identify potential issues by 

comparing predicted versus metered energy use and savings. Technical 

Pathway Gather modeling experts, assemble field test results, and Analysis conduct comparative software tests to identify potential issues.

As software tools are improved, reference software results in 

published comparative test suites become outdated.

Update reference program results using improved reference 

software. Technical 

Pathway 

Analysis Modify or add test cases that are designed to determine 

whether specific improvements have been implemented 

correctly.

Building characteristics and utility billing data from actual houses 

have not been available in large scale for comparing software 

predictions with metered data.

Collect empirical datasets from field analysis activities so they 

can be used to evaluate the accuracy of analysis methods.

Technical 

Pathway 

Analysis

Potential issues with software tools and their inputs, even when 

identified, are not prioritized.

Prioritize potential issues based on estimates of potential 

impact.

Technical 

Pathway 

Analysis

Uncertainty in input values used by software tools to predict 

energy use is not fully known.

Create a process to estimate the uncertainty of input values 

for software tools. Technical 

Pathway Measure the variability in energy assessment data through Analysis controlled field studies.

New or improved measurement technology may be needed for 

energy assessments.

Improve measurement technology and develop new 

measurement technology that will lead to more accurate, 

affordable, and safer energy assessments.

Technical 

Pathway 

Analysis

ORNL – Deep Retrofits
75 

Barrier or Gap Opportunity Area 

Variable-capacity compressors have fewer oversizing

performance penalties, so requiring ACCA Manual J to 

rightsize the air conditioner may be unnecessary. 

Carefully collect field data, develop heat pump models, and 

validate computer simulations from multiple test sites 

surrounded by whole-house performance measurements to 

generate well-characterized datasets.

System 

Evaluations

Investigate if there are better metrics than Seasonal Energy 

Efficiency Ratio (SEER) and heating season performance 

factor (HSPF).

Conduct side-by-side comparisons for a full year of operation 

of different variable-speed options with various sequences of 

operation.

Provide well-characterized field site data to groups that are 

interested in maximum annual energy savings and peak 

savings.

During energy efficiency retrofits, even extensive ones, air 

distribution ducts are usually not replaced.

Develop procedures and possible technologies for downsizing 

installed air ducts according to ACCA Manual D.

Measure 

Guidelines

Air distribution ducts are left in unconditioned spaces after 

deep energy retrofits; the traditional way of sealing ducts with 

mastic often is still not effective.

Develop air sealing techniques that are self diagnosing (color 

change tape, for example) or error proof.

Emerging 

Technologies

A good duct model based on deep energy retrofits is not 

available, but is necessary to create guidelines for duct 

insulation.

Develop a good duct model based on deep retrofit houses.

Technology 

Pathway 

Analysis

Guidelines for duct insulation after an enclosure retrofit are

not available.

Develop guidelines for duct insulation organized by duct 

location.

Measure 

Guidelines

Smart energy devices, such as appliances, HVAC, and 

lighting are not interoperable with smart meters.

Develop standardization, communication protocols, 

streamlined process for commissioning so the benefits of 

connecting smart energy devices with smart meters.

Measure 

Guidelines

Test devices in occupied and simulated occupied research 

houses.

Test House 

and Pilot 

Community 

Evaluations
76 

Barrier or Gap Opportunity Area 

The most likely industry to develop a sustainable market for 

whole-house energy retrofits is energy utilities, but there are 

perceived risks in utility engagement.

Develop software tools so the energy savings predictions are 

reliable.

Technical 

Pathway 

Analysis

Develop reliable utility, building, and manufacturing partners, 

financial institutions, and real estate stakeholders to help 

validate utility electrical capacity resource planning models.

Stakeholder 

Need 

Evaluation

Develop research-driven, electric utility-sponsored home 

retrofit programs.

Partner 

Program 

Development

A significant barrier to whole-house home energy retrofits is 

the lack of confidence in predicted energy savings.

Validate energy audit software with measured energy use.

Test House 

and Pilot 

Community 

Evaluations

Quantify energy savings from prioritized lists of retrofit 

measures.

Technical 

Pathway 

Analysis

Integrate next-generation technologies into energy audit and 

simulation software. This includes variable capacity heat 

pumps, heat pump water heaters, hot water savings from 

ENERGY STAR washers, horizontal geothermal systems, and 

advanced miscellaneous electric loads.

Technical 

Pathway 

Analysis

Homeowners choose not to spend their capital in energy 

efficiency retrofits. 

Establish successful deep energy retrofit projects spawned by 

homeowner needs.

Test House 

Evaluations

Develop energy retrofit plans that take place when equipment 

fails and in case of weather event damage.

Measure 

Guidelines

There is no knowledge about how to deliver each component 

of a whole-house retrofit faster, cheaper, and deeper.

Develop a low-cost, automated, integrated, and accurate 

diagnostic and audit tool that is less intrusive.

Technology 

Pathways
77 

Barrier or Gap Opportunity Area 

Develop a tool that can process the energy use, age, and 

efficiency of all the home’s major energy-consuming features 

with the homeowner’s remodeling desires, energy savings 

priorities, and financial situation. The tool needs to generate a 

phased whole-house energy retrofit plan and respect privacy 

issues.

Dryer ducts in high-performance homes are easily plugged 

with lint. Develop demand-enabled ventilation capabilities. Emerging Technologies

There is a desire to eliminate ducts in unconditioned spaces 

that will drive the increased use of multi-splits. This will 

generate more holes in airtight enclosures. Continuous fan 

operation may lead to high energy consumption and humidity 

control issues in some climates.

Testing of mini-splits in well-controlled houses is necessary to 

explore the tradeoffs of various optimized distributed space 

conditioning strategies.

Test House 

and Pilot 

Community 

Evaluations

The International Energy Conservation Code (IECC) 2012 will 

increase R-value requirements in enclosures. If DOE and its 

partners successfully propose changes for IECC 2015, these 

values are likely to increase even further. The building 

industry is not fully equipped to meet the requirements cost 

effectively.

Conduct moisture research to determine health, safety, and 

durability of high-R enclosures.

System 

Evaluations

Determine advanced enclosure material performance targets 

for fire resistance, permeability, durability, termite resistance, 

thermal resistance, etc. This includes establishing an 

expanded materials characterization program and a systematic 

building materials evaluation protocol similar to the DOE 

Lighting Caliper program.

System 

Evaluations

Conduct research on pre-manufactured externally applied roof 

and wall panel systems that can comply with the stringent 

energy standards.

System 

Evaluations

Support ASTM whole wall analysis standard for single- and 

multi-family housing.

Measure 

Guidelines

Develop foundation insulation detail with above-grade wall 

exterior brick cladding that avoids the thermal short.

Measure 

Guidelines

Conduct a series of laboratory measurements to determine 

capillary wicking in foundation walls and footers.

Test House 

and Pilot 

Community 

Evaluations

Measure the performance of permeable facings over interior 

foundation insulation in mixed humid climates.

Test House 

and Pilot 

Community 
78 

Barrier or Gap Opportunity Area 

Evaluations

Test the performance of expanded polystyrene (EPS) in 

foundation insulation moisture control systems and compare it 

with that of XPS

Test House 

and Pilot 

Community 

Evaluations

Test 2 × 4 frame offset from foundation wall 1-2 in. sprayed 

solid with open cell foam insulation.

Test House 

and Pilot 

Community 

Evaluations

Increase of spray foam application in attic, crawlspaces, and 

basements leads to moisture management issues. Develop best practice guidelines for spray foam application. Measure Guidelines

The heavy focus on air sealing will affect health and safety 

unless precautions are taken. Radon is still a problem and 

solutions for existing houses are not yet fully available.

Develop solutions for radon issues in existing homes. An 

example is a solar-powered radon sub-crawlspace membrane 

depressurization fan.

Measure 

Guidelines

Develop on-demand ventilation solutions that can sense the 

presence of occupants and the operation of unvented gas 

appliances, electric and gas dryers, and bath and kitchen 

exhaust fans.

Emerging 

Technologies

All global warming potential compounds in building materials 

may be banned in the near future. The building industry does 

not have replacements fully vetted yet.

Laboratory and field test the next generation of building 

materials to avoid issues when applied to enclosures (for 

example, shrinkage, lower R-values, and more restrictive 

application temperatures)

System 

Evaluations
79 

LBNL –Deep Energy Upgrades and Improvements

Barrier or Gap Opportunity Area 

The energy use in residential buildings needs to 

be reduced by at least 50% and packages of 

measures are not properly documented.

Create brand: the DOE Blue Sheet for deep retrofits 

and the DOE Orange Sheet for normal retrofits. Measure Guidelines

Entertainment systems are not low energy. Develop equipment and controls to reduce energy 

consumption from entertainment systems. System Evaluations

Multifamily and rental units need special attention 

to energy efficiency.

Conduct research on how to manage shared hot 

water equipment that is unique to multifamily 

homes.

System Evaluations

Investigate ways to address the distinction between 

those who can legally make changes to a rental 

property and those who accrue the energy savings.

Measure Guidelines

A deeply retrofitted home has a tight envelope, 

energy-efficient lighting, and an efficient and 

reliable hot water source, so the remaining energy 

use is discretionary.

Conduct research on how to address occupant 

behavior to reduce energy use in homes.

Test House and Pilot Community 

Evaluations

Determine which appliances can be turned off when 

they are not in use. System Evaluations

Perform marketing and behavioral studies to 

address how occupant behavior can change to 

reduce energy use.

Test House and Pilot Community 

Evaluations

Conduct research on mass market and innovations 

to determine how to deploy energy efficiency 

improvements.

Measure Guidelines

About $150-$250 billion are spent in the United 

States each year to renovate homes with little 

emphasis on energy use. Some experts indicate 

that the premium and tradeoff would be negligible 

for intelligent renovations that save more energy.

Generate documentation about Building America 

research findings to industry publications such as 

Remodeling Magazine and Home Energy 

Magazine, including expert comments.

Measure Guidelines

New energy use data holders measure energy use 

in homes, analyze the data, and connect to 

occupants, industry groups, utilities, and wellconnected contractors. They will change the 

relationship between homeowners, utilities, and 

energy use. The retrofit industry is not fully aware 

of this development.

Develop partnerships with energy use data holders 

(for example, Google) and local jurisdictions to 

obtain energy use data from a large number of 

houses.

System Evaluations

Encourage contractors to combine envelope and 

window upgrades with HVAC improvements, either 

by partnering with other contractors or by 

expanding the skill sets of their own employees. For 

example, technicians may be trained to seal ducts 

Test House and Pilot Community 

Evaluations
80 

Barrier or Gap Opportunity Area 

and envelopes and install furnaces.

Investigate how to motivate homeowners to do 

retrofits and use less energy.

Test House and Pilot Community 

Evaluations

Partner with contractors and others who have direct 

contact with homeowners, recognizing that almost 

no home improvements are based on a costeffective approach, but are done for appearance, 

utility, comfort, health, etc. Provide homeowner 

contacts with information and advice about how to 

include energy savings measures in all their 

activities, particularly when the incremental costs 

are low.

Measure Guidelines

Homebuilders and renovators face many 

challenges when working in homes: moisture, lead 

and asbestos, knob and tube electrical wiring, 

historic buildings, combustion safety versus air 

tightness, home type, and climate.

Create opportunities for builders and renovators to 

upgrade their skills, including qualifications, 

certifications, and training, so they can make the 

transition to deep energy upgrades.

Better Buildings/Workforce 

Guidelines

There is limited energy efficiency awareness.

Develop good advice and recommendations about 

the costs of energy audits, credit and market 

misinformation, energy efficiency claims, etc. This 

advice should be presented as targets (blue and 

orange sheets) and techniques for achieving 

targets.

Measure Guidelines

Explore ways to persuade owners to upgrade rental 

homes. Measure Guidelines

Investigate offering rebates on equipment, lighting, 

and appliances at the dealer/distributor level. ENERGY STAR Appliances

There is a credibility gap on energy saving 

predictions.

Develop credible energy savings data, protocols, 

and demonstration tools. Technical Pathway Analysis

There is low value on unseen retrofits. Renovation 

focus is on appearance, convenience, comfort, 

and health.

Focus on energy efficiency measures that are 

associated with other benefits that the homeowner 

is looking for.

Measure Guidelines

There is no common minimum energy code in the 

United States.

Make federal awards be dependent on adopting a 

national energy code for buildings. Develop a 

simple low-level prescriptive code to be used with 

current awards.

Building Codes
81 

Barrier or Gap Opportunity Area 

Good contractors currently face the difficulty of 

competing against those who are allowed to 

perform poor work.

Develop a system of testing and inspection to 

identify the low cost-bad performance contractors. Better Buildings

High energy use but low energy density housing is 

characteristic in new U.S. construction.

Focus on energy use instead of energy efficiency 

(energy use per area, for example). Technical Pathway Analysis

Improvements in technology are needed to deliver 

deep energy retrofits.

Develop technologies to control ventilation systems 

so IAQ levels are met. At the same time, they need 

to prevent overventilating and take advantage of 

incidental mechanical ventilation from kitchen and 

bath exhausts and clothes dryers.

System Evaluations

Develop retrofit insulation for hot water storage 

tanks. Measure Guidelines

Conduct research on cavity insulation methods that 

completely fill cavities without leaving voids using 

holes as small as 0.4 in. in diameter.

System Evaluations

Conduct research to assess the effectiveness of 

new window treatments to improve air sealing and 

using interior and exterior storm windows. Research 

is also needed to assess the effectiveness of these 

window treatments and to develop improved 

methods for flexible/adjustable frames, non-glass 

glazing, etc.

System Evaluations

Develop efficient, cost-effective dehumidification 

systems for high-performance homes. System Evaluations

Improve diagnostics of insulation levels, window 

performance, and ventilation system airflow. Measure Guidelines

Airtight houses are more prone to moisture and 

IAQ problems.

Develop a program to measure pollutants in homes 

pre- and post-retrofit combined with field evaluation 

of new approaches and technologies.

Test house and Pilot Community 

Evaluations

Conduct research to study the transfer of polluted 

garage air into homes to create recommendations System Evaluations
82 

Barrier or Gap Opportunity Area 

on attached garages.

Audits and retrofits have negative connotations.

Ask behavioral scientists who understand the power 

of language to develop a new lexicon to reach the 

mass market.

Better Buildings

Information technologies, such as smart meters, 

are not currently used for energy efficiency 

programs.

Develop a national database of home performance 

based on the measured data to make informed 

decisions about R&D and policy making.

Test House and Pilot Community 

Evaluations

Conduct research to determine the useful 

information that can be extracted from the 15-

minute data, such as high energy users, large 

energy uses, and high baseline.

Determine how to couple gas metering to electricity 

smart meters and other technologies.
83 

LBNL – Residential Planning for Healthy, Efficient Homes Research

Barrier or Gap Opportunity Area 

There is a lack of data on ventilation energy and indoor airrelated health risks in the United States.

Apply energy and health risk modeling framework to 

evaluate the benefits and costs of ventilation, source 

control, and other IAQ-related technologies and strategies.

Technical Pathway 

Analysis

Compile, collect, and analyze data to support modeling of 

ventilation energy and indoor air-related health risks 

throughout the United States. 

Test House and 

Pilot Community 

Evaluations

The energy and IAQ performance of a high-performance

home will be limited without advances in ventilation 

equipment and control systems.

Develop, evaluate, and deploy smart and robust ventilation 

and ventilation control technologies. 

System 

Evaluations

Some cooking exhaust fans effectively remove pollutants 

before they mix throughout the air, but many—including the 

most widely installed designs—do not. The lack of any 

industry standard performance test for capture efficiency of 

residential kitchen exhaust systems is a critical gap. Lack of 

awareness about pollutants generated during cooking is a 

substantial barrier to progress.

Develop, deploy, and field test advanced kitchen and bath 

exhaust systems.

System 

Evaluations

Current ASHRAE ventilation standards do not differentiate 

between new and existing homes, even though pollutant 

profiles can differ substantially. Likewise, ventilation needs 

and optimum systems can vary by region and location.

Incorporate energy efficiency guidance and equipment 

performance standards into the ASHRAE residential

ventilation standard.

Measure 

Guidelines

Increasing concerns about IAQ have led to increased use of 

residential air cleaning and filtration in portable and standalone applications and components integrated with central 

HVAC systems.

Provide guidance on energy-efficient, effective filtration and 

air cleaning for residential applications.

Measure 

Guidelines

Develop equivalence paradigms for energy-efficient 

alternatives to ventilation.

Technical Pathway 

Analysis

Few good data are available on humidity control and 

innovative dehumidification in high performance homes.

Evaluate needs, strategies, and technologies for humidity 

control and innovative dehumidification.

System 

Evaluations

Develop new test methods and standard practices to 

support retrofit and new technologies.

Measure 

Guidelines

Evaluate new technologies for energy-efficient IAQ control. System 

Evaluations

Attached buffer spaces, particularly garages, can be a major 

source of contaminants, but are not well understood.

Advance understanding of energy and IAQ impacts of 

garages, basements, and attics within the air-sealed 

building envelope.

System 

Evaluations
84 

LBNL – Residential Miscellaneous Electric Loads R&D Agenda

Barrier or Gap Opportunity Area 

MELs are about 20% of residential primary energy use 

today and projected to grow to about 1/3 of energy use in 

the next 20 years. In low-energy homes, MELs can be 40% 

or more of whole-house energy use, which means that to 

achieve DOE’s goals of 50% or greater whole-house energy

savings, MELs end uses must be addressed along with the 

traditional end uses.

Conduct long-term field metering of MELs in several homes.

Test House and 

Pilot Community 

Evaluations

Develop and publish whole-house nonintrusive load 

monitoring techniques, in which individual appliance power 

consumption information is disaggregated from single-point 

measurements.

Test House and 

Pilot Community 

Evaluations

Develop an R&D plan to identify key MELs, focus on further 

research, investigate candidate efficiency technologies, 

identify ways to work with manufacturers to encourage more 

efficient products, and develop communication and control 

standards.

System 

Evaluations

Assess the usability of MELs energy-control user interfaces. System 

Evaluations

The largest clusters of MELs energy use in homes, and the 

areas of greatest growth, are home offices and home 

audiovisual systems, where electronic devices predominate. 

This poses a problem for developing policies to address this 

energy use because electronic products tend to change 

rapidly, which makes it hard to develop energy-use 

reduction strategies, and strategies may not be effective 

across successive generations of products as new features 

and functionality are introduced.

Develop and demonstrate networked management of MELs 

using “native” control interfaces.

System 

Evaluations

Conduct field demonstration to quantify savings from use of 

network-presence proxies in PC networks.

Test House and 

Pilot Community 

Evaluations

Work with industry to improve MELs product design process 

(e.g., identify incentives for highly efficient mobile-electronic 

designs to be used for AC-powered devices).

System 

Evaluations

For most MELs devices, the largest uncertainty and 

variation in energy use is due to occupant use patterns, not 

to variations in device energy use under test conditions. 

Moreover, for many MELs devices, their presence and 

energy use in a given house are closely aligned with 

occupant tastes, preferences, and behaviors. Nevertheless, 

occupants rarely have any information about how much 

energy the MELs, both collectively and individually, are 

consuming in their home.

Assess consumer response to information about MELs 

energy use, both for purchase and operation.

Test House and 

Pilot Community 

Evaluations

There is a lack of standards to realize a vision where MELs 

devices cooperatively manage their energy use in a 

Participate in committees defining standards for 

interoperability of MELs communication and control.

Emerging 

Technologies
85 

Barrier or Gap Opportunity Area 

distributed manner.

Test commercially available networked plug load controls.

Test House and 

Pilot Community 

Evaluations

Field test MELs packages with efficient devices and 

improved controls.

Test House and 

Pilot Community 

Evaluations

Develop and refine energy test procedures to cover 

additional types and operational modes of MELs products 

(e.g., participate in IEC committee developing test 

procedures for “network standby” modes).

Test House and 

Pilot Community 

Evaluations
86 

PNNL – Research Needs for Achieving Cost-Effective Deep Energy Retrofits (Site Built and Manufactured Housing) and HighPerformance New Manufactured Housing

Barrier or Gap Opportunity Area 

Deep retrofits in existing homes are not cheap, easy, or 

common. Persistence of savings and cost effectiveness of 

deep energy retrofits are major challenges.

Initiate, instrument, and monitor pilot deep retrofit homes to 

document the costs, savings, and challenges associated 

with deep energy retrofits.

Test House and Pilot 

Community 

Evaluations

Publish guidelines for retrofits after cost and performance 

data are obtained by performing several prototype retrofits 

in the field in several climates and monitoring their 

performance.

Measure Guidelines

A major barrier to retrofits is the relatively low cost of 

energy.

Focus on systems engineering during equipment 

replacement or ownership changing events. Measure Guidelines

There are retrofit-related health, safety, and durability 

risks.

Develop a simple-to-use, well-illustrated checklist that a 

home energy professional can use to identify risks and 

recommend strategies to mitigate.

Measure Guidelines

Ductless heat pumps are available, but their performance 

is not well documented in real houses.

Monitor the performance of ductless heat pump systems 

with or without forced air systems in test homes, to 

quantify the energy performance and room-to-room 

comfort. 

Test House and Pilot 

Community 

Evaluations

Develop air distribution and mixing strategies if significant 

room-to-room temperature differences are found. System Evaluations

Engage with utilities that are also interested in ductless 

heat pumps area. 

Stakeholder Partner

Program

Evaluate combined ductless heat pump and heat-pump 

water heater (HPWH) strategies in various climates and 

home types.

Test House and Pilot 

Community 

Evaluations

HPWHs are available, but their performance is not well 

documented in real houses.

Conduct prototype HPWH retrofits in cooling climates to 

quantify the interaction with air-conditioning and domestic 

hot water and impact on relative humidity issues. In 

heating climates, investigate HPWH integration with 

exhaust ventilation system to lower the negative impacts 

on heating energy consumption. 

Test House and Pilot 

Community 

Evaluations

Publish guidelines for retrofits after cost and performance 

data are obtained by performing several prototype retrofits 

in the field in several climates and monitoring their 

performance.

Measure Guidelines

Water supply line replacements occur but deep retrofit 

opportunities are unrealized

Investigate replacing water supply line, offering the 

opportunity to switch to a structured or home run piping 

Test House and Pilot 

Community 
87 

Barrier or Gap Opportunity Area 

layout. Evaluations

Many manufactured homes have leaky ducts. Effective 

strategies to fix leaks and bringing ducts into conditioned 

spaces are needed

Investigate repairing leaky ducts in manufactured housing 

retrofits. Work with leading factory-built home 

manufacturers to develop and field test effective strategies 

for repairing leaky duct systems and bringing them inside 

conditioned spaces. 

Test House and Pilot 

Community 

Evaluations

Manufactured homes with their small overhangs and 

poorly flashed windows present unique wall and window 

retrofit opportunities

Investigate replacing exterior insulating sheathing and 

windows in manufactured houses. Evaluate several 

strategies in laboratory homes. 

Test House and Pilot 

Community 

Evaluations

Publish guidelines for retrofits after cost and performance 

data are obtained by performing several prototype retrofits 

in the field in several climates and monitoring their 

performance.

Measure Guidelines

The upcoming new energy code for manufactured 

housing is likely to be much more stringent. 

Manufacturers need cost-effective compliance paths to 

meet the new code.

Evaluate and analyze the proposed new code for 

manufactured housing that is expected to be released by 

January 2012 and compare to ENERGY STAR for Homes 

version 3 standards. Develop a guide for home 

manufacturers on cost-effective ways to meet beyond code 

performance levels.

Measure Guidelines

Innovative energy savings technologies are not 

appreciated until they can be readily seen and touched.

Work with International Builders Show Village sponsors to 

demonstrate innovative enclosure, equipment, and solar 

technologies incorporated in factory-built homes for 

International Builders Show 2012 and 2013.

Show Home 

Demonstration and 

Case Study

There is a credibility gap on energy saving predictions.

Assess energy retrofit software usefulness. Interview a 

dozen or more auditors to assess the tools they use and 

how satisfied they are with ease of use, accuracy, and 

general usefulness. Summarize the information so it is 

useful to software developers and auditors.

Technical Pathway 

Analysis

Energy saving retrofits need to be attractively displayed to 

clearly articulate the nonenergy benefits and the 

enhanced value added.

Use Google SketchUp applications. Value generally needs 

to be added beyond energy efficiency to achieve largescale market penetration of energy-efficient products and 

services. Software that uses the Google SketchUp or 

similar platform should be developed to show homeowners 

how attractive some visible energy conservation items can 

look (e.g., interior ducts or added exterior insulation 

combined with window replacements).

Measure Guidelines
88 

PNNL – Building America Market Transformation Opportunities

Barrier or Gap Opportunity Area 

Building America research is not accessible to stakeholders.

Use Building America documentation products to strengthen 

market allies.

Measure 

Guidelines

Form an ongoing market transformation working group within 

Building America Better Buildings

Continue to support standard-setting organizations. Building Codes

Leverage relationships with builders to establish a more 

formal organization of builder partners.

Stakeholder 

Partner Program

Reach out to manufacturers and vendors. Stakeholder 

Partner Program

Reach out to other programs. Stakeholder 

Partner Program

Sponsor and create a Building America column for Home 

Energy Magazine that builds on previous articles 

incorporated in the magazine.

Stakeholder 

Partner Program

Develop a “builder’s working group” that builders can 

participate in even if they are not part of partnerships. 

Stakeholder 

Partner Program

Target documentation products for these members such as 

catalogs of technologies. 

Stakeholder 

Partner Program

Coordinate with the EPA to reach out to ENERGY STAR 

builders for speed dating and builder’s alliance.

Stakeholder 

Partner Program

Encourage builders to use volume purchase opportunities 

and join user groups. A current example is the High-R 

Windows volume purchase.

Product specifications for new generations of technologies 

are tested in more commercial buildings. Existing building 

partners and a new builder’s alliance could be used to 

identify

Emerging 

Technologies/ 

Volume Purchase

Coordinate with regional, state, and utility programs. Stakeholder 

Partner Program

Disciplined program branding and messaging reduces 

confusion and enhances communication.

Continue to develop documentation to consistently present 

program goals, encourage (or enforce) common lexicon and 

present all team research perspectives. Measure 

Guidelines Establish common vocabulary and publishing rules for 

Building America teams and labs.
89 

Barrier or Gap Opportunity Area 

Team participation indicates high interest and motivation in 

market transformation activities, but activities need better 

coordination.

Establish market transformation and communication 

standing committee. Establish a standing market 

transformation and communication committee to harness 

team experience and insight.

Better Buildings

Builder partners are highly motivated and a strong resource, 

but few data have been collected to identify needs and 

understanding.

Gather information about technology gaps, training needs, 

branding preferences, business models, and other factors. 

Question teams and builder partners about the information, 

products, and approaches that work best for them and 

identify the gaps.

Stakeholder 

Partner Program

Energy efficiency mortgages (EEMs) and energy 

improvement mortgages (EIMs) are poorly understood in 

the market.

Encourage contractors and real estate professionals to 

promote EEMs.

Develop case studies emphasizing EIMs and EEMs. Invite 

HUD and other providers to builder speed dating. Include 

information about EEMs in builder and consumer 

documentation.

Stakeholder 

Partner Program

Provide training and training materials to energy efficiency 

professionals. Encourage the Energy and Environmental 

Building Association, BPI, RESNET, and other training 

providers to use Building America resources and lexicon.

Packaged quality management programs and award 

programs are available, but builder participation is limited 

and builder confusion is high.

Continue to develop quality management tools and 

documentation.

Develop a quality management website that provides 

introductory information and resource links. Encourage 

vendors to participate in speed dating events. Expand 

energy efficiency certification programs (BPI, RESNET, 

apprenticeships) to reach new construction trades.

Stakeholder 

Partner Program

Continue activities of the Quality Management Working 

Group within the Building America committee structure.

Continue to support Energy Value Housing Awards and 

other award programs.

Communication and sharing across university and college 

programs with Building America are limited.

Continue to sponsor coordinating events and support teams 

and laboratories to work with universities and colleges.

Stakeholder 

Partner Program

Code information is not well integrated with Building 

America documentation.

Continue to populate codes resource center with Building 

America documents and resources. Use e-mail lists 

generated by the codes program to invite builders to join the 

Building America builder organization. Publicize Building 

America activities on the codes website, which receives 3 

million hits per month.

Stakeholder 

Partner Program
90 

Barrier or Gap Opportunity Area 

Builders who are not partners have limited access to 

information about building science, new technologies, and 

Building America findings.

Continue to develop Best Practices and case studies, and 

participate in builder conferences.

Develop a builder’s alliance that builders can participate in 

even if they are not part of partnerships. Target 

documentation products for these members such as catalogs 

of technologies. 

Sponsor speed dating events to allow vendors to meet 

builders and distributors.

Expand energy efficiency certification programs (BPI, 

RESNET, apprenticeships) to reach new construction trades.

Stakeholder 

Partner Program

Appraisers do not understand or value energy efficiency. 

This limits lenders’ ability to fund energy efficiency.

Improve appraiser standards and practices.

Continue to provide training materials to trade organizations.

Engage trade organizations aggressively to require training 

and to develop training curricula and other documentation.

Stakeholder 

Partner Program

Real estate sales professionals do not understand or sell 

energy efficiency.

Develop business cases showing improved sales and profit 

for real estate professionals. Consumers are willing to pay 

more for certified and branded, green, energy-efficient 

homes. Stakeholder 

Partner Program Continue to provide training materials to trade organizations.

Engage trade organizations aggressively to require training 

and develop training curricula and other documentation.

Home Performance with ENERGY STAR is marketed to 

sponsors, not to remodelers.

Prepare case studies on program experience. 

Develop planned business case document for contractors.

Share technical support documentation to inform consumers 

and contractors.

Stakeholder 

Partner Program

Home Energy Score and other labeling programs for 

existing homes are not well known.

Develop planned business case document for contractors.

Develop quality criteria and support documentation for 

installations.

Provide documentation to support training and 

communication.

Work with a builder partner organization to train builders and 

contractors.

Stakeholder 

Partner Program

Certification and standards establish professional protocols 

and criteria to enhance credibility and quality management.

Continue to develop infrastructure to support standard 

setting.

Continue to provide documentation to aid in training 

programs

Stakeholder 

Partner Program
91 

Barrier or Gap Opportunity Area 

Provide technical support to those offering comments.

Provide technical support for non-standard based questions 

and comments.

Fragmented industry installers (roofers, plumbers, HVAC, 

painters) focus on piecemeal installations. When equipment 

fails or requires maintenance consumers must make 

decisions very quickly based on available funding and 

information.

Develop home performance business cases and training for 

installers.

Develop labels (scannable and traditional) or other products 

to leave with homeowners that alert them to replace failed 

equipment with high-efficiency products. 

Work with local sponsors to provide coupons and hotlines for 

efficient products.

Target property management firms for these materials.

Stakeholder 

Partner Program
DOE/GO-102011-3242 ▪ July 2011

Printed with a renewable-source ink on paper containing at 

least 50% wastepaper, including 10% post-consumer waste.