The burden of rapidly rising energy costs on low-income families has prompted concern for the health and well-being of low-income Americans and led to the passage of Public Laws 93-644 and 94-385. These laws establish energy conservation (weatherization) programs for low-income families and provide funds for weatherization grants. Under Public Law 93-644 Congress has assigned to the Community Services Administration (CSA) the leadership role in reducing the energy cost burden on lowincome Americans. The Community Services Administration's Weatherization Demonstration Program carried out through the National Bureau of Standards as one of its objectives an estimate of how much money can be saved through optimum weatherization. This report establishes a framework for systematically analyzing alternative methods of weatherizing low-income housing, and provides forecasts of the optimal level of weatherization for the 15 cities participating in the Community Services Administration's Weatherization Demonstration Program. Data collected during the Weatherization Demonstration Program will facilitate the testing and refinement of these forecasts.

A variety of computer simulation programs exist for the design and study of thermal performance and economic feasibility of solar domestic hot water and space heating systems. Several studies have indicated that the thermal performance algorithms contained in the different programs produce similar results. However, little comparative analysis has been done of the economic algorithms in these programs. This report compares the economic evaluation models in five computer programs widely used for analyzing solar energy systems: F-CHART 3.0, F-CHART 4.0, SOLCOST, BLAST, and DOE-2. Differences in analysis techniques and assumptions among the programs are assessed for their consistency with the federal requirements for life-cycle costing (10 CFR Part 436), effect on predicted economic performance and optimal system size, ease of use, and general applicability to diverse system types and building types. The FEDSOL program developed by the National Bureau of Standards specifically to meet the federal life-cycle cost requirements serves as a basis for the comparison. Results of the study are illustrated in test cases of two different types of federally owned buildings: a single-family residence and a low-rise office building. The study indicated that none of the programs except FEDSOL fully conformed with the federal requirements for life-cycle cost analysis of renewable energy projects. However, with considerable manipulation of data inputs and simplification of assumptions, they could provide similar predictions for one measure of economic performance, net present value savings.

The methodology outlined in this report employs a parametric analysis technique. The numerical values resulting from this analysis are valid only for the specified set of parameters selected by NBS. DoE is required by law to consider many other factors in setting minimum efficiency standards.

This research was conducted under the sponsorship of the Department of Housing and Urban Development by the Applied Economics Group, of the Center for Building Technology, at the National Engineering Laboratory, National Bureau of Standards. This report provides public and private decision makers with a computerized procedure for estimating the costs of lead-based paint abatement. This procedure is based on lead-based paint abatement cost figures collected during an extensive field test program in which lead-based paint hazard abatement activities were carried out in approximately 200 dwelling units .