The August 2003 blackout of the northeastern U.S. and CANADA caused great economic losses and inconvenience to New York City and other affected areas. The blackout was a warning to the rest of the world that the ability of conventional power systems to meet growing electricity demand is questionable. Failure of large power systems can lead to serious emergencies. Introduction of on-site generation, renewable energy such as solar and wind power and the effective utilization of exhaust heat is needed, to meet the growing energy demands of the residential and commercial sectors. Additional benefit can be achieved by integrating these distributed technologies into distributed energy resource (DER) systems. This work demonstrates a method for choosing and designing economically optimal DER systems. An additional purpose of this research is to establish a database of energy tariffs, DER technology cost and performance characteristics, and building energy consumption for Japan. This research builds on prior DER studies at the Ernest Orlando Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL) and with their associates in the Consortium for Electric Reliability Technology Solutions (CERTS) and operation, including the development of the microgrid concept, and the DER selection optimization program, the Distributed Energy Resources Customer Adoption Model (DER-CAM). DER-CAM is a tool designed to find the optimal combination of installed equipment and an idealized operating schedule to minimize a site's energy bills, given performance and cost data on available DER technologies, utility tariffs, and site electrical and thermal loads over a test period, usually an historic year. Since hourly electric and thermal energy data are rarely available, they are typically developed by building simulation for each of six end use loads used to model the building: electric-only loads, space heating, space cooling, refrigeration, water heating, and natural-gas-only loads. DER-CAM provides a global optimization, albeit idealized, that shows how the necessary useful energy loads can be provided for at minimum cost by selection and operation of on-site generation, heat recovery, cooling, and efficiency improvements. This study examines five prototype commercial buildings and uses DER-CAM to select the economically optimal DER system for each. The five building types are office, hospital, hotel, retail, and sports facility. Each building type was considered for both 5,000 and 10,000 square meter floor sizes. The energy consumption of these building types is based on building energy simulation and published literature. Based on the optimization results, energy conservation and the emissions reduction were also evaluated. Furthermore, a comparison study between Japan and the U.S. has been conducted covering the policy, technology and the utility tariffs effects on DER systems installations. This study begins with an examination of existing DER research. Building energy loads were then generated through simulation (DOE-2) and scaled to match available load data in the literature. Energy tariffs in Japan and the U.S. were then compared: electricity prices did not differ significantly, while commercial gas prices in Japan are much higher than in the U.S. For smaller DER systems, the installation costs in Japan are more than twice those in the U.S., but this difference becomes smaller with larger systems. In Japan, DER systems are eligible for a 1/3 rebate of installation costs, while subsidies in the U.S. vary significantly by region and application. For 10,000 m{sup 2} buildings, significant decreases in fuel consumption, carbon emissions, and energy costs were seen in the economically optimal results. This was most noticeable in the sports facility, followed the hospital and hotel. This research demonstrates that office buildings can benefit from CHP, in contrast to popular opinion. For hospitals and sports facilities, the use of waste heat is particularly effective for water and space heating. For the other building types, waste heat is most effectively used for both heating and cooling. The same examination was done for the 5,000 m{sup 2} buildings. Although CHP installation capacity is smaller and the payback periods are longer, economic, fuel efficiency, and environmental benefits are still seen. While these benefits remain even when subsidies are removed, the increased installation costs lead to lower levels of installation capacity and thus benefit.