refinement. Definitions need to be refined and standardized so that all
utilities can calculate values unambiguously. A task force has recently
been formed to develop these definitions (Hirst, 1990a).
Furthermore, utilities often do not calculate and report these indexes,
many gaps remain in our interpretive data, and even the data we do
have can benefit from further refinement. As more and more utilities
report these index values for their programs, the data base of interpretive data can be expected to grow quickly.
In addition to the program-specific indexes discussed here, it might
be useful to develop indexes to measure a utility's overall performance
in the DSM area. Illustrative indexes and examples are discussed in Geller and
Nadel ( 1989). Additional work to refine these indexes would
Based on a paper presented at the National Association of Regulatory
Utility Commissioners Third National Conference on Integrated Resource
Planning, April 8-10,1991, Santa Fe, NM.
It should be noted that in addition to free riders, many programs also
have "free drivers"--people who did not participate in a program but were induced by the program to take DSM actions (e.g., program publicity, or the impact of the program on local availability of efficient equipment, sparked the
DSM action). Free drivers enter into the determination of net savings (discussed
earlier). Data explicitly quantifying free drivers are rarely collected.
The different cost-effectiveness perspectives, including the utility and
total resource perspectives, are discussed in Krause and Eto, 1988.
Much of the work summarized in the tables of this chapter were originally
developed as part of a project sponsored by the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority. Additional funding for this work was
provided by the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation. Eric Hirst
provided helpful comments on an earlier draft of this chapter.