energies Article Towards a More Realistic Cost–Benefit Analysis—Attempting to Integrate Transaction Costs and Energy Efficiency Services Thomas Adisorn 1,* , Lena Tholen 1, Johannes Thema 1 , Hauke Luetkehaus 2, Sibylle Braungardt 3, Katja Huenecke 3 and Katja Schumacher 3 1 Energy, Transport and Climate Policy Division, Wuppertal Institute, Doeppersberg 19, 42103 Wuppertal, Germany;
[email protected] (L.T.);
[email protected] (J.T.) 2 DLR Institute of Networked Energy Systems, Carl-von-Ossietzky-Str. 15, 26129 Oldenburg, Germany;
[email protected] 3 Oeko-Institut e.V., Merzhauser Straße 173, 79100 Freiburg, Germany;
[email protected] (S.B.);
[email protected] (K.H.);
[email protected] (K.S.) * Correspondence:
[email protected]; Tel.: +49-202-2492-246 Abstract: In order to calculate the financial return of energy efficiency measures, a cost–benefit analy- sis (CBA) is a proven tool for investors. Generally, however, most CBAs for investors have a narrow focus, which is—simply speaking—on investment costs compared with energy cost savings over the life span of the investment. This only provides part of the full picture. Ideally, a comprehensive or extended CBA would take additional benefits as well as additional costs into account. The objective of this paper is to reflect upon integrating into a CBA two important cost components: transaction costs and energy efficiency services—and how they interact. Even though this concept has not been carried out to the knowledge of the authors, we even go a step further to try to apply this idea. In so doing, we carried out a meta-analysis on relevant literature and existing data and interviewed a limited number of energy experts with comprehensive experience in carrying out energy services.