Presentation on theme: "1Managed by UT-Battelle for the Department of Energy Scott Pigg Energy Center of Wisconsin Bruce Tonn Oak Ridge National Laboratory David Carroll APPRISE."— Presentation transcript:
1Managed by UT-Battelle for the Department of Energy Scott Pigg Energy Center of Wisconsin Bruce Tonn Oak Ridge National Laboratory David Carroll APPRISE National WAP Evaluation: Indoor Environmental Quality Field Study Findings
2Managed by UT-Battelle for the Department of Energy Presentation Overview Purpose Field Study Design Pre Weatherization Findings Pre/Post Thermostat Behavior Findings
3Managed by UT-Battelle for the Department of Energy PURPOSE OF THE FIELD STUDY
4Managed by UT-Battelle for the Department of Energy Purpose in Context Impact evaluation – Program characterization – Energy and cost savings – Cost effectiveness – Non-Energy impacts Indoor environmental quality study Occupant survey
5Managed by UT-Battelle for the Department of Energy Specific Information Goals Carbon Monoxide – A series of measurements of different sources of CO in the home Radon – Short term measurement of radon levels for the first floor and foundation level Formaldehyde – Short term measurement of formaldehyde concentrations in living space Temperature and Humidity – Longer term measurement of temperature and humidity at the central thermostat Moisture Assessment – Visual inspection of above grade and foundation level moisture issues
6Managed by UT-Battelle for the Department of Energy STUDY PROTOCOL
7Managed by UT-Battelle for the Department of Energy Field Study Procedures Sample – 88 agencies in 35 states – 325 treatment and 189 control single family homes Time Period – Heating season field period: November 2010 - March 2011 – Cooling season field period: June 2011 - August 2011 Testing – Housing unit diagnostics and combustion appliance tests Monitoring – Short term – 7-day radon and 7-day formaldehyde samplers – Longer term – CO, temperature, humidity data loggers
8Managed by UT-Battelle for the Department of Energy Field Study Sample low mid high very high Radon stratum Map boundaries are Census 2000 super-PUMAs Winter sample Summer sample
9Managed by UT-Battelle for the Department of Energy Field Study Visits Visit #1 – Post Audit / PreWX (11/10 through 1/11) – PreWx diagnostic testing, instrumentation, placement of samplers Visit #2 – Visit #1 + 7 Days – Retrieval of radon and formaldehyde samplers / conduct occupant survey Visit #3 – 30 days PostWX – PostWX diagnostic testing and placement of samplers Visit #4 – Visit #3 + 7 Days – Retrieval of radon and formaldehyde samplers and data loggers
10Managed by UT-Battelle for the Department of Energy PRE-WEATHERIZATION IEQ FINDINGS
11Managed by UT-Battelle for the Department of Energy Carbon Monoxide Heating Systems – Central fuel fired system in 75% of homes; 40% atmospherically vented – Small percentage with inadequate draft (< 10%) – Small percentage with high CO production (<10%) Water Heaters – About 20% incidence of atmospheric water heaters with marginal drafts – Higher incidence for measurements during warm weather – Only 1 in 200 water heaters had high CO production
12Managed by UT-Battelle for the Department of Energy Carbon Monoxide - continued Ambient CO Levels – Ambient CO levels never exceeded 5 ppm for about two- thirds of homes. – About one in ten homes had one or more episodes of CO elevation that peaked at 20 ppm or higher prior to weatherization (the highest was ppm). – A small percentage of homes (5%) exhibited persistent low- level CO.
13Managed by UT-Battelle for the Department of Energy Radon The study data indicate that 12% ±2 of single-family homes treated by the program have pre-weatherization radon levels are above the EPA guideline level of 4 pCi/l. In a few states, this fraction likely exceeds 25 percent of homes. The study confirms that elevated radon is relatively rare in mobile homes and site-built homes in counties identified by EPA as having low radon potential. Note: Evaluation funding is being used to remediate homes that were measured to exceed the EPA guideline.
14Managed by UT-Battelle for the Department of Energy Formaldehyde Formaldehyde levels were measured on the first floor above grade for a sub-sample of 145 homes The average program home has a pre-weatherization indoor formaldehyde concentration of 14 ± 1 ppb, and most homes tested below 30 ppb. Mobile homes may have higher formaldehyde levels than site-built homes, and weatherization may have a larger impact on these levels, but the available sample precludes solid conclusions.
15Managed by UT-Battelle for the Department of Energy Humidity and Moisture Issues Program homes tend to be on the dry side during the heating season: nearly half (44 ± 5%) have wintertime relative humidity below 30 percent, but ten percent or fewer (6 ± 4%) has relative humidity above 50 percent. Fewer than 35% of foundations and 40% of above- grade spaces had observed moisture problems. Water stains were the most common observed moisture problem in both foundations and above-grade spaces. About three in ten above-grade spaces had water stains and about one fifth of foundations had water stains.
16Managed by UT-Battelle for the Department of Energy PRE/POST INDOOR TEMPERATURE FINDINGS
17Managed by UT-Battelle for the Department of Energy Temperature – PreWX Findings Wintertime indoor temperatures in program homes average 70.3 ± 0.5F, but range from less than 60F to more than 80F. Households that showed evidence of practicing thermostat setback have indoor temperatures that average 3.0 ± 0.7F lower than households that do not practice setback prior to weatherization. One quarter to one third of single-family program homes have a programmable thermostat prior to weatherization; temperatures average 1.5 ± 0.5F lower than in homes with a manual (or no) thermostat.
18Managed by UT-Battelle for the Department of Energy PreWX Indoor Temperature
19Managed by UT-Battelle for the Department of Energy One in four households showed evidence of thermostat setback before Weatherization % of homes with Evidence of Setback Mean indoor temperature (F) Overall 24% ±570.3 ±0.5 Manual (or no) thermostat (74 ±4%) 19% ±470.8 ±0.4 Programmable thermostat (26 ±4%) 34% ±969.2 ±0.5 3370-I22 4084-I22 Households that practice setback average 3.0 ± 0.5 F lower indoor temperature
20Managed by UT-Battelle for the Department of Energy Pre & Post-weatherization Indoor Temperature Measurements Degrees FTreatment (n=292) Control (n=168) Mean Pre weatherization70.270.7 Mean Post weatherization70.370.6 Mean Change+0.14 ± 0.17 -0.13 ± 0.17 Minimum Change-6.6-5.7 Maximum Change+5.9+5.2
21Managed by UT-Battelle for the Department of Energy Conclusions This study measured a slight increase in indoor temperature associated with weatherization (0.27 degrees). One source of the change in indoor temperature could be that weatherized homes cool more slowly when temperatures drop or thermostats are set back. This study only addresses the potential for short-run behavior change, not the long-run. The study findings suggest that there is no short-term “take back” effect from weatherization.