Scientific Irrigation Scheduling Subcommittee. Tuesday, July 9 2013 1pm – 3pm, PDT. Agenda. Introductions [10 minutes] Objectives [5 minutes] Measure overview and history [5 minutes] Review of Quantec study [15 minutes] Measure appropriateness for RTF Standard Protocol [15 minutes]
Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.
Tuesday, July 9 2013
1pm – 3pm, PDT
“Jones made a motion that the RTF approve the Scientific Irrigation Scheduling Standard Protocol and move it to the “Proven” category with a sunset date of November 2017. Harris seconded the measure. Hadley said he would vote against the motion because it does not comply with the guidelines. We are using the 10 percent savings value within the best practice method, and we can’t test that number, he stated.
“Lauren Gage also expressed concerns about the calculator and said she would vote against the motion. Hope said he agreed with Hadley and would vote against the motion. The RTF discussed the data and concerns about whether it conforms to the guidelines.
“Hadley made a motion to table a decision on the SIS protocol until the RTF adopts new guidelines that address data source requirements for parameters used within standard protocols. Jones seconded the motion, which passed with 20 votes in favor and none against.”
Current savings estimates are based on research conducted by Quantec from 2003 - 2005
43% of irrigated acres are irrigated efficiently
The impact study compared growers known to use outside SIS services to growers known not to practice water management. I.e. – compare the best to the worst.
“It was therefore decided to select the treatment group from among growers who received water management services through GWMA or IRZ Consulting, and to select the control group from farms in close proximity to the treatment farms. The main advantage of this approach was that it offered a more consistent basis for defining water management practices among the treatment group and significantly helped the recruitment and data collection processes.
“To ensure comparability with the treatment group, each treatment field was matched with a local control field with the same crop grown by a farmer known not to practice water management.”
Impact appears to be on the least efficient irrigators.
Variance = ( [actual] – [ideal] ) / [ideal]
Sections to review:
-Section 2. Measure Classification (PDF page 6-7)
-Section 7.1 Creating a New Measure (PDF page 19- 20)
-Section 3. Standard Protocols (PDF page 42 – 49)
For two methods (UES and standard protocol),the RTF approves measures within three categories:
-RTF Guidelines for the Estimation of RTF Savings, Section 3.3
-Roadmap for the Assessment of Energy Efficiency Measures, Section 1.3.7
[energy intensity of water]
x [ideal water demand]
x [% savings from SIS]
x [1 - % baseline SIS-like saturation]