Field Test Evaluation of Conservation Retrofits of Low-Income, Single-Family Buildings in Wisconsin: Blower-Door-Directed Infiltration Reduction Procedure, Field Test Implementation and Results

Gettings, M.B.

Oak Ridge National Laboratory

关键词: Air Quality;    Wisconsin;    Implementation;    Payback Period;    Energy Conservation;   

DOI  :  10.2172/788351
RP-ID  :  ORNL/CON-228/P5
RP-ID  :  AC05-00OR22725
RP-ID  :  788351

美国|英语

来源: UNT Digital Library

【 摘 要 】

A blower-door-directed infiltration retrofit procedure was field tested on 18 homes in south central Wisconsin. The procedure, developed by the Wisconsin Energy Conservation Corporation, includes recommended retrofit techniques as well as criteria for estimating the amount of cost-effective work to be performed on a house. A recommended expenditure level and target air leakage reduction, in air changes per hour at 50 Pascal (ACH50), are determined from the initial leakage rate measured. The procedure produced an average 16% reduction in air leakage rate. For the 7 houses recommended for retrofit, 89% of the targeted reductions were accomplished with 76% of the recommended expenditures. The average cost of retrofits per house was reduced by a factor of four compared with previous programs. The average payback period for recommended retrofits was 4.4 years, based on predicted energy savings computed from achieved air leakage reductions. Although exceptions occurred, the procedure's 8 ACH50 minimum initial leakage rate for advising retrofits to be performed appeared a good choice, based on cost-effective air leakage reduction. Houses with initial rates of 7 ACH50 or below consistently required substantially higher costs to achieve significant air leakage reductions. No statistically significant average annual energy savings was detected as a result of the infiltration retrofits. Average measured savings were -27 therm per year, indicating an increase in energy use, with a 90% confidence interval of 36 therm. Measured savings for individual houses varied widely in both positive and negative directions, indicating that factors not considered affected the results. Large individual confidence intervals indicate a need to increase the accuracy of such measurements as well as understand the factors which may cause such disparity. Recommendations for the procedure include more extensive training of retrofit crews, checks for minimum air exchange rates to insure air quality, and addition of the basic cost of determining the initial leakage rate to the recommended expenditure level. Recommendations for the field test of the procedure include increasing the number of houses in the sample, more timely examination of metered data to detect anomalies, and the monitoring of indoor air temperature. Though not appropriate in a field test of a procedure, further investigation into the effects of air leakage rate reductions on heating loads needs to be performed.