Spain's CAE framework provides two broad ways to quantify energy savings. Standardised measures use official catalogue sheets for recurring actions with predefined formulas and evidence. Singular projects address actions that cannot be adequately quantified through an applicable catalogue sheet. The choice affects design, data collection, verification effort and risk. It should follow the technical facts rather than a preference for the route that appears easier.
How standardised measures work
A standardised measure describes an eligible action, its scope, calculation formula, required variables and supporting documents. The residential, tertiary and industrial catalogues cover many common improvements. Examples of useful references include residential codes RES010, RES020, RES022, RES030, RES040, RES060, RES070, RES220 and RES230, although a code must never be selected by number alone.
The project must satisfy the current wording of the selected sheet. Technology, baseline condition, location, implementation date and evidence all need to fit. If the actual installation falls outside the sheet's boundaries, applying its formula by analogy may overstate or misclassify the saving.
When a non-standardised action may be appropriate
A non-standardised route may suit a custom process change, integrated control strategy, unusual operating profile or multi-system intervention that lacks an adequate standardised sheet. A non-standardised action may be considered only where the project’s characteristics cannot be covered by an applicable catalogue sheet; it must not be used to bypass a sheet’s baseline, conditions or exclusions. Being innovative does not by itself justify this route; the technical reason must be explained.
These projects usually require a fuller account of system boundaries, baseline selection, variables, adjustments, data quality and calculation uncertainty. Metering may be needed before and after implementation. The measurement plan should be agreed early enough to capture the pre-project condition.
Choosing between the routes
First search the current catalogue by sector, technology and replaced system. Test every scope condition against the proposed work. If a sheet applies cleanly, its standardised route generally provides a more prescribed evidence path. If no sheet applies, document why and assess whether the expected saving and available data support a non-standardised action.
Use a decision checklist: Is the action in the current catalogue? Does the old equipment meet the baseline definition? Are all formula inputs available? Does the project combine actions that must be separated? Would the catalogue formula represent the actual scope? Can a singular baseline be supported with records rather than assumptions?
Avoid double counting
A project may contain several eligible actions, but their savings cannot simply be added if they interact. Insulation changes heating demand; a later boiler replacement then operates against that reduced demand. Lighting improvements can affect cooling or heating loads. The calculation order, boundaries and any interaction treatment must follow the applicable methodology.
Separate invoices and asset lists help identify each action, but accounting separation alone does not solve technical overlap. The project team should map energy flows, define which baseline belongs to each measure and document how shared effects are allocated. The same saving must not be claimed through multiple applications or CAE agreement or private energy-savings transfer contracts.
Plan for verification
For standardised actions, create a variable-to-evidence table linking every formula input to a photograph, data sheet, invoice or other accepted record. For singular work, add the source, collection interval, meter identification, calibration information where relevant and treatment of missing or abnormal data.
Do not assume that a larger calculated saving makes the non-standardised route better. More complex claims can require more engineering and face greater uncertainty. Compare routes using evidence availability, methodological fit and verifiability. Final recognition remains subject to the rules and review in force; an early assessment is not a guarantee.