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

Frank A. Felder; Rasika Athawale

doi:10.1007/s12053-017-9526-3

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

Frank A. Felder, Rasika Athawale

Rutgers University

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 language	English
Journal	Energy Efficiency
Volume	11
Issue number	1
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1007/s12053-017-9526-3
Publication status	Published - Jan 1 2018

Keywords

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

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Energy(all)

Access to Document

10.1007/s12053-017-9526-3

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of '“PACT-a-Mole”: the case against using the Program Administrator Test for energy efficiency programs'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this

Felder, F. A., & Athawale, R. (2018). “PACT-a-Mole”: the case against using the Program Administrator Test for energy efficiency programs. Energy Efficiency, 11(1). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12053-017-9526-3

@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 = "Felder, {Frank A.} and Rasika Athawale",

year = "2018",

month = jan,

day = "1",

doi = "10.1007/s12053-017-9526-3",

language = "English",

volume = "11",

journal = "Energy Efficiency",

issn = "1570-646X",

publisher = "Springer Netherlands",

number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - “PACT-a-Mole”

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

AU - Felder, Frank A.

AU - Athawale, Rasika

PY - 2018/1/1

Y1 - 2018/1/1

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

VL - 11

JO - Energy Efficiency

JF - Energy Efficiency

SN - 1570-646X

IS - 1

ER -