“PACT-a-Mole”: the case against using the Program Administrator Test for energy efficiency programs

Frank Felder, Rasika Athawale

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article

Abstract

A combination of reasons is resulting in the reevaluation of cost-benefit analysis of the energy efficiency programs. In particular, the Total Resource Cost test and the Societal Cost test are being questioned as to whether they should be replaced by the Program Administrator Cost test. This paper makes the case against replacing these tests.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1-11
Number of pages11
JournalEnergy Efficiency
DOIs
Publication statusAccepted/In press - May 9 2017

Fingerprint

Energy efficiency
Costs
Cost benefit analysis

Keywords

  • Cost effectiveness
  • Energy efficiency programs
  • Net energy saving
  • Non-energy benefit
  • TRC

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Energy(all)

Cite this

“PACT-a-Mole” : the case against using the Program Administrator Test for energy efficiency programs. / Felder, Frank; Athawale, Rasika.

In: Energy Efficiency, 09.05.2017, p. 1-11.

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article

Felder, F & Athawale, R 2017, '“PACT-a-Mole”: the case against using the Program Administrator Test for energy efficiency programs', Energy Efficiency, pp. 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12053-017-9526-3
Felder F, Athawale R. “PACT-a-Mole”: the case against using the Program Administrator Test for energy efficiency programs. Energy Efficiency. 2017 May 9;1-11. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12053-017-9526-3
Felder, Frank ; Athawale, Rasika. / “PACT-a-Mole” : the case against using the Program Administrator Test for energy efficiency programs. In: Energy Efficiency. 2017 ; pp. 1-11.
@article{f037bd35118e445fab26676471669b8b,
title = "“PACT-a-Mole”: the case against using the Program Administrator Test for energy efficiency programs",
abstract = "A combination of reasons is resulting in the reevaluation of cost-benefit analysis of the energy efficiency programs. In particular, the Total Resource Cost test and the Societal Cost test are being questioned as to whether they should be replaced by the Program Administrator Cost test. This paper makes the case against replacing these tests.",
keywords = "Cost effectiveness, Energy efficiency programs, Net energy saving, Non-energy benefit, TRC",
author = "Frank Felder and Rasika Athawale",
year = "2017",
month = "5",
day = "9",
doi = "10.1007/s12053-017-9526-3",
language = "English",
pages = "1--11",
journal = "Energy Efficiency",
issn = "1570-646X",
publisher = "Springer Netherlands",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - “PACT-a-Mole”

T2 - the case against using the Program Administrator Test for energy efficiency programs

AU - Felder, Frank

AU - Athawale, Rasika

PY - 2017/5/9

Y1 - 2017/5/9

N2 - A combination of reasons is resulting in the reevaluation of cost-benefit analysis of the energy efficiency programs. In particular, the Total Resource Cost test and the Societal Cost test are being questioned as to whether they should be replaced by the Program Administrator Cost test. This paper makes the case against replacing these tests.

AB - A combination of reasons is resulting in the reevaluation of cost-benefit analysis of the energy efficiency programs. In particular, the Total Resource Cost test and the Societal Cost test are being questioned as to whether they should be replaced by the Program Administrator Cost test. This paper makes the case against replacing these tests.

KW - Cost effectiveness

KW - Energy efficiency programs

KW - Net energy saving

KW - Non-energy benefit

KW - TRC

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85019124534&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85019124534&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s12053-017-9526-3

DO - 10.1007/s12053-017-9526-3

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85019124534

SP - 1

EP - 11

JO - Energy Efficiency

JF - Energy Efficiency

SN - 1570-646X

ER -

Access to Document