1 database for energy efficiency resource update project information and final results a deer...
TRANSCRIPT
1
Database for Energy Efficiency Resource
Update ProjectInformation and Final Results
A DEER Presentation at CALMAC Meeting
Pacific Energy Center, San FranciscoSeptember 21, 2005
2
DEER UpdateIntroduction and History
DEERMeasure Cost Study
Objectives and EE Regulatory/Policy Context
Project Management Structure Program Advisory Committee
Technical CommitteeDecision-making Processes and Orientation
Challenges and Accomplishments
3
DEER UpdateProject Implementation Structure
and Consultant Team Roles
Presenters:Gary Cullen – Itron
Floyd Keneipp – Summit BlueMeasure Savings Team Itron, J. J. Hirsch Associates, Quantum Inc, SynergyMeasure Cost TeamSummit Blue Consulting, Heschong-Mahone Group
4
Project Advisory Team Shahana Samiullah, SCE (Project Manager) Ingrid Bran, PG&E (MCS Project Manager) Tim Drew, Energy Division, CPUC Adriana Merlino, Energy Division, CPUC Christine Tam, ORA, CPUC Sylvia Bender, CEC Mike Messenger, CEC Andrew Sickels, SDG&E (Project Manager 2002-03 phase) Jennifer Barnes, PG&E Leonel Campoy, SCE Craig Tyler, Tyler Associates (PG&E representative 2002-03 phase) Jay Luboff (former ED representative 2002-03 phase) Eli Kollman (former ED representative 2002-03 phase) Others
5
Role of Project Advisory Team
Provide feedback and direction to the initial work plan
Provide unified and consistent advice and direction as issues appeared
Review methodological methods and assumptions
Review and provide comments on study results
6
Measure Savings ProjectConsultant Team Roles
ITRON Gary Cullen (Project Manager), Bob Ramirez, Ulrike
Mengelberg
Coordinate the activities of the consultant and advisory teams
Coordinate with the measure cost team
Develop the non-weather sensitive residential and commercial sector measure savings
Develop the agricultural sector measure savings
Coordinate, consolidate, and format the measure savings, cost, and EUL data for uploading
In consultation with Synergy, help design the web interface
7
Measure Savings ProjectConsultant Team Roles
JJ Hirsch & Assoc.Jeff Hirsch, Scott Criswell, Paul Reeves, Kevin Madison
Develop the analysis software based on the DOE-2 model for weather sensitive measures
Suggest methodological directions and solutions
Develop the building prototype and conservation measure characteristics
Develop the weather sensitive residential and commercial sector measure savings
Coordinate data transfer format with Itron and deliver data to Itron for uploading
8
Measure Savings ProjectConsultant Team Roles
Quantum Consulting
Mike Rufo
Interview potential DEER users
Create DEER Periodic Update Plan
Identify linkages to EM&V studies
Identify new measures to potentially include in future DEER updates
9
Measure Savings ProjectConsultant Team Roles
Synergy
Christine Chin-Ryan
Develop web interface
Populate web interface with data
Debug web interface
10
Measure Savings ProjectConsultant Team Roles
Measure costs developed under separate contract by Summit Blue
Measure cost team and roles will be discussed later
11
What is DEER?
A collection of data for Residential and Non-Residential energy efficiency measures.
It provides a common set of: Ex ante Savings values: kW, kWh, kBtu; Measure Costs; and Effective Measure Life (a.k.a EUL)
12
Previous DEER Database
Savings estimates and cost estimates were never integrated
Database on hard copy and soft copy Commercial measures savings had not been
updated since 1994 Residential measures savings more recently
in 2001 No information on EULs
13
DEER Update
First Phase of DEER Update began in 2003 and included: Updating savings for non-weather sensitive
measures Updating weather-sensitive models and the
software –Measure Analysis Software Creating a searchable, on-line database
14
DEER Update
Second Phase of DEER began in 2004 and included: Revised non weather sensitive lighting measures savings
estimates Completed the Measure Analysis Software for weather
sensitive analysis Developed a limited number of “High Priority” weather
sensitive measure savings estimates Integrated measure cost into the database
Partial release Milestone completed on March 2005 Frozen to support June 1st EE filing
15
DEER Update
Final DEER milestone
Completed on-line DEER version 2.0 on August 31, 2005 Supercedes March 2005 DEER version 1.0 Revised non-weather sensitive data Added new and updated weather sensitive measures Added Agricultural measures Integrated new effective useful life estimates Completed integration of cost data Updated the website with the new information
16
DEER Update
Final Report Milestones Draft Final Report - Sept 30th for PAC
Final Report - October 31st
17
DEER Update
TOU Profiler– Currently TBD Too many other issues; other items with higher priority Definition of kW Calibration Unification of kW definition across all measures and end
uses Agreed initially:
Create a Time of use Profiler Will utilize the DEER eQuest model The model will be available for download Preliminary estimate of amount of data
More discussions needed
18
Measure Cost Study (MCS) Project Team
Marshall Keneipp, Summit Blue Consulting (Project Manager)
Floyd Keneipp, Summit Blue Consulting Joshua Radoff, Summit Blue Consulting Cathy Chappell, Heschong Mahone Group, Inc. Cynthia Austin, Heschong Mahone Group, Inc.
19
MCS Project Overview
Undertaken to update measure cost estimates within DEER
Previous update conducted in 2001 Parallel completion schedule to DEER
Update High priority measures complete in March 2005 Full update completed in August 2005
20
814 separate costs were collected on 287 measure IDs• Many measure IDs have one cost• Some measure IDs have costs for multiple bins (i.e. capacities,
purchase volumes, etc.). For example measure D03-410, residential condensing 90 AFUE furnace, has 10 costs - one cost for each of 10 Btu capacities
625 separate base costs were collected• Some measures were full cost only and did not require base cost
estimates 574 measure labor cost were collected
• Some measures were incremental equipment costs only and did not require a labor cost estimate
A total of over 12,100 individual cost observations were collected
Measure Cost Study (MCS) Project Scope of effort
21
Questions/Comments?
22
Development of DEER Products
Non-Weather Sensitive Energy Savings
Presenter:
Gary Cullen – Itron
23
Non-Weather Sensitive Measures Residential Measures
CFL Lighting
Refrigerators
Clothes Washers & Dryers
Dishwashers
Water Heating
Swimming Pool Pumps
24
Non-Weather Sensitive Measures Residential Measures
CFL Lighting
Measure Impact = (delta watts/unit * hours/day * days/year * In Service Rate) / 1000 watts/kWh
Demand Impact = delta watts/unit * In Service Rate * Peak Hour Load Share
The “In Service Factor” is an estimate of the percentage of lamps that are actually used. It is a rough estimate based on utility experience.
“Hours of Operation/Day” and “Peak Hour Load Share” from KEMA CFL Metering Study
25
Non-Weather Sensitive Measures Residential Measures
CFL Lighting – Example (14W CFL replace 60W Inc)
Measure Impact = (46W * 2.34 hours/day * 365 days/year * 0.9) / 1000 watts/kWh= 35.4 kWh
Demand Impact = 46W * 0.9 * 0.081 = 3.35 W
26
Non-Weather Sensitive Measures Residential Measures
Refrigerators
Used the Energy Star calculator available on-line at:http://www.energystar.gov
Key Input values for the calculator:Refrigerator Type (top, side, or bottom mount freezer)Ice through the door (yes or no)Refrigerator fresh volume (cubic feet)Refrigerator freezer volume (cubic feet)
27
Non-Weather Sensitive Measures Residential Measures
Clothes Washers
Utilized the three recommended Consortium for Energy Efficiency (CEE) Tiers forModified Energy Factor:
Used the Energy Star calculator (that utilizes an EF rather than MEF) on-line at:http://www.energystar.govEstimated the equivalent EF value for CEE MEF values from Energy Star list of approved washers
Other key Energy Star variables include:Number of wash cycles/year (E Star value is 392 cycles)Washer capacity (three sizes – 1.5, 2.65, and 3.5 cubic feet)
Further disaggregated impacts by water heat and clothes dryer fuel typesFuel impact disagreegations based on ‘Efficiency Vermont” estimates
Demand impact based on a energy/peak factor of 0.417. This is carryoverfrom previous 2001 DEER
28
Non-Weather Sensitive Measures Residential Measures
Clothes Washer – Example (Tier 3 2.65 cu.ft)
Measure Impact = (cycles/year * capacity / base EF) – (cycles/year * capacity / measure EF) = (392 * 2.65 / 1.58) – (392 * 2.65 / 4.94) = 447 kWh
Demand Impact = Measure Impact * energy/peak factor = 447 kWh * 0.417 = 186.4 W
29
Non-Weather Sensitive Measures Residential Measures
Clothes Dryer
1993 National Appliance Energy Conservation Act (NAECA) minimum efficiency used for base technology:
EF = 3.01 for electric dryersEF = 2.67 for gas dryers
Used DOE test procedure guidelines for:Drying cycles per year = 416UEC of 2.33 kWh/cycle for electric (969 kWh/year)UEC of 8.95 kBtu/cycle for gas (37.2 therms/year)
Assumed 416 cycles represented Single Family Assumed 250 cycles for Multi-Family (CEC estimate of 60% less use by MF)
Energy savings 5% of energy use. This is a carryover from previous 2001 DEER
Demand impact based on a energy/peak factor of 0.371. This is carryoverfrom previous 2001 DEER
30
Non-Weather Sensitive Measures Residential Measures
Clothes Dryer – Example (SF electric)
Measure Impact = Electric base use * Savings Percentage = 969 kWh * 0.05 = 48 kWh
Demand Impact = Measure Impact * energy/peak factor = 48 kWh * 0.371 = 17.8 W
31
Non-Weather Sensitive Measures Residential Measures
Dishwasher
Used the Energy Star calculator available on-line at:http://www.energystar.gov
Key Input values for the calculator:Base Energy Factor (EF) = 0.46Measure Energy Factor = 0.58Annual wash cycle (DOE test procedure) = 215 (assume SF)MF wash cycles (assumed to be ~75% of SF) = 160
Demand impact based on a energy/peak factor of 0.371. This is carryover from previous 2001 DEER
32
Non-Weather Sensitive Measures Residential Measures
Water Heating
Measures:High efficiency water heater (electric EF=0.93, gas EF=0.63)Heat pump water heater (EF=2.9)Point of use water heaterlow flow showerhead (from 2.5 to 2.0 gallons per minute)Pipe wrapFaucet aerators
Savings expressed as % of base use Base use varied by utility service area (same method as 2001)
Demand impact based on a energy/peak factor of 0.22. This is carryoverfrom previous 2001 DEER
33
Non-Weather Sensitive Measures Residential Measures
Water Heating Measure Saving %:
High efficiency water heater – electric - 5.4%High efficiency water heater – gas - 5.0% Heat pump water heater – 69.7%Point of use water heater – 15.0%low flow showerhead – 4.0%Pipe wrap – 4.0%Faucet aerators – 3.0%
34
Non-Weather Sensitive Measures Residential Measures
Pool Pumps
Single speed and two speed included
Relied on PG&E and SCE engineers for calculating impacts:
General assumptions:Average pool size of 25,000 gallonsAverage water turnover rate of 6-8 hours Average pump motor demand of 1.75 kVATypical filtration time of 4 to 6 hours
For single speed motors, motor downsizing and runtime reductions assumed
35
Non-Weather Sensitive Measures Non-Residential Measures
Interior Lighting
Exterior Lighting
Cooking
Copy Machine
Water Heating
Vending Machine Controls
High Efficiency Motors
Agriculture
36
Non-Weather Sensitive Measures Non-Residential Measures
Interior Lighting Measures:CFL screw-in lampsCFL hardwire fixturesHigh intensity discharge (HID) lampsPremium T8 lampsDimming BallastsDe-lamping fluorescent 4 ft and 8 ft fixtures
37
Non-Weather Sensitive Measures Non-Residential Measures
Interior Lighting – Basic Methodology
Measure Impact = (delta watts/unit * hours/day * days/year * In Service Rate) / 1000 watts/kWh
Demand Impact = delta watts/unit * In Service Rate * Peak Hour Load Share
38
Non-Weather Sensitive Measures Non-Residential Measures
Exterior Lighting & Exit Signs High intensity discharge (HID) lampsExit SignsTimeclocksPhotocells
39
Non-Weather Sensitive Measures Non-Residential Measures
Exterior Lighting & Exit Signs Methodology
HID lamps: delta watts saved * hours of use (4,100 hours) no peak impacts
Exit Signs: delta watts saved * 8760 hours * Interactive Effects peak = delta watts * Interactive effects * 1.0 (coincidence factor)
Timeclocks & Photocells: watts controlled * hours of control no peak impacts
40
Non-Weather Sensitive Measures Non-Residential Measures
Cooking High efficiency fryers (gas & electric)High efficiency griddle (gas)Hot food holding cabinetConnectionless steamer
41
Non-Weather Sensitive Measures Non-Residential Measures
Cooking - Methodology Relied primarily on the PG&E technology briefs
For each of these measures, the energy savings calculationmethodology is of the form:
Savings = (APECRBase – APECREfficient) * Daily Hours * Days
Where:
APECR = The Average Production Energy Consumption Rate/hourDaily Hours = 12Days = 365
42
Non-Weather Sensitive Measures Non-Residential Measures
Copy Machines – three sizes 0-20 copies/minute21-44 copies/minute over 45 copies/minute
Methodology assumptions from Energy Star calculator
43
Non-Weather Sensitive Measures Non-Residential Measures
Vending Machine Controls Characterized in two measures by being installed in:
Cold drink vending machinesUncooled snack vending machines
Measure savings and characterization from the Pacific Northwest Regional Technical Forum database
Methodology assumes operated during off-peak hours, thereforeno demand savings
44
Non-Weather Sensitive Measures Non-Residential Measures
Water Heating Savings expressed as % of base use
Base use varies by building type. Come from the 1994 DEER study
Measures:High efficiency gas water heater (7.1% savings)Point of use water heater (10% savings)Water circulation pump time clock (6% savings)
45
Non-Weather Sensitive Measures Non-Residential Measures
High Efficiency Motors Meet premium efficiency standards established by the Consortium for Energy Efficiency (CEE)
Base efficiency meets Energy Policy Act (EPACT) minimum
Motor sizes range from 1 HP to 200 HP
Motor hours of operation vary by industry sector
Motor loading from US DOE Motor Master software
Peak demand based on a coincidence factor of 0.75
46
Non-Weather Sensitive Measures Non-Residential Measures
High Efficiency Motors - Calculation Energy savings (kWh) = (Motor HP / EPACT motor efficiency)
* kW/HP * hours of operation * motor loading – (motor HP / premium motor efficiency) * kW/HP * hours of operation * motor loading
Peak (kW) = (motor HP * kW/HP * coincidence factor / EPACT motor efficiency) - (motor HP * kW/HP *
coincidence factor / premium motor efficiency)
47
Non-Weather Sensitive Measures Non-Residential Measures
Agricultural Measures Low pressure irrigation sprinkler nozzle
Sprinkler irrigation to micro irrigation conversion
Infrared film for greenhouses
Greenhouse heat curtain
Variable frequency drive for dairy pumps
Ventilation fans or box fans
High volume, low speed fans
48
Non-Weather Sensitive Measures Non-Residential Measures
Agricultural Measures Methodology taken from Express Agricultural
Working Papers
Irrigation savings varied by crop type
49
Questions/Comments?
50
Development of DEER Products
Weather Sensitive Energy Savings
Presenter:
Jeff Hirsch – JJ Hirsch & Associates
51
Weather Sensitive MeasuresOverview
I. Methods Used
II. Sources of Information
III. Calibration
IV. Simulation Cases
V. Results Available
52
Weather Sensitive MeasuresMethods Used
Using up-to-date DOE-2/eQUEST for simulation
Improving engineering accuracy of prototypes
Explicit simulations replace previous simplifications
16 Title 24 climate zones not CEC planning zones
Complete analysis tool published
53
Weather Sensitive MeasuresMethods Used
Using up-to-date DOE-2/eQUEST for simulation
• Hourly simulation of all elements
• Includes details of configurations
• Allows easy review and update
• Well understood and open tool
54
Weather Sensitive MeasuresMethods Used
Improving engineering accuracy of prototypes
• More complete “activity area” definitions
• More complete HVAC definitions
• Coordination with IOU program methods
• eQUEST “wizard” definitions for flexibility
55
Weather Sensitive MeasuresMethods Used
Explicit simulations replace previous simplifications
• Residential:
evap cooler, whole house fan, SEER perf., PStat, …
• Non- Residential:
refrigeration systems, HVAC loops/ducts w/losses, …
56
Weather Sensitive MeasuresMethods Used
16 Title 24 climate zones not CEC planning zones
• Sizing:
Peak load based on design day for each zone
• Peak demand:
Super critical peak days chosen for each zone
57
Weather Sensitive MeasuresMethods Used
Complete analysis tool published
• Allows examination of assumptions (prototypes/measures)
• Eases updating (EM&V, research, new codes/standards)
58
Weather Sensitive MeasuresSources of Information
Previous DEER studies
Potential Studies
RASS/CUES surveys
EM&V studies
Published research
Laboratory and field test work
59
Weather Sensitive MeasuresCalibration
Residential
• RASS used to update previous studies
Non-residential
• Adjustments both at “activity area” and whole building level
• CEUS and EM&V
60
Weather Sensitive MeasuresSimulation cases
Base case
• Vintage typical base on survey data
Code base Case
• Minimally compliant or standard practice
Measure Case
• Most common program tier's
61
Weather Sensitive MeasuresResults Available
Customer Savings
• energy and demand
Above Code Savings
• Energy and demand
Baselines and Normalizations
• Baseline and enduse• Common units allow scaling
62
Questions/Comments?
63
DEER UpdateMeasure Cost Study
Presenter:
Floyd Keneipp – Summit Blue Consulting
64
Defining Cost ParametersMeasure Cost Specifications
Measure lists provided by Itron Developed cost specifications for each
measure Includes more delineation in terms of sizes,
efficiencies and features Measure cost specifications reflect product
availability and common installation practices Measure cost team included best judgment
regarding size and efficiency breakdowns and “bracketing” of energy analysis specs
65
Defining Cost ParametersMeasure Cost Specifications (Cont.)
Measure costs specifications encompass the sizes and technical specs of measures used in the energy analysis, but reflect availability of products on the market Consistent with and indexed to Itron measure specs, but
some specifications require a range of values to allow for adequate sample
Cost team discerned between a wide range of product options and narrowing pricing to “representative” products options Example – A 90% AFUE single stage furnace was priced but
a 90% AFUE furnace with a variable speed fan was not because the costs are very different
66
Defining Cost ParametersMeasure Cost Specifications (Cont.)
Cost data is first cost only -- life cycle or O&M costs/cost savings not included
Pricing reflects commonly available “standard” products and excludes specialty, high-end items
Some price observations (outliers) were excluded to assume a rational purchasing policy would be used (“who would pay THAT?”)
Equipment and labor prices are specific to California to extent possible but average across state
67
Defining Cost Parameters Key Cost Definitions
Cost Observation – a single price point for an individual measure or measure configuration• Cost values are what a program participant would pay to
implement the measure consistent with definitions in the CA Standard Practice Manual (initial capital cost)
Cost units ($ / ton, $ / HP, $ / square foot, etc.)• Mostly the same although different for some measures• Distinct field in detailed cost data; appended to Cost Basis
designator in measure detail
68
Defining Cost Parameters Key Cost Definitions (cont.)
• Application – indicates if the cost is for:• Retrofit (RET) - replacing a working system with a new
technology or installing a technology that was not there before.
• Replace-on-burnout (ROB) - replacing a technology at the end of its useful life.
• New construction or major renovation (NEW) - installing a technology in a new construction or major renovation project.
• Cost Basis – indicates if the cost is:• Incremental (INCR) - the differential cost between a base
technology and an energy efficient technology. • Installed (FULL) - the full or installed cost of the measure
including equipment, labor, overhead & profit (OH&P).
69
Data Collection and Analysis ProcessOverview
Created and implemented systematic data collection processes and instruments
Clarified measure lists and specifications through series of communications with Itron and members of Advisory Group
Used 4 analytic methods in determining costs Labor cost estimates generally base on the following
equation; • Manhours x Appropriate wage rate
Used multiple data sources to collect cost data Organized data in Cost Analysis Workbooks
70
Data Collection and Analysis ProcessAnalytic Methods
1. Simple average – Average of all cost observations discarding outliers in some cases where a particular observation appeared out of line
2. Weighted average – Uses one or more observed market variables to weight raw cost data
3. Regression cost model – Regression models using relevant performance factors as independent variables
4. Custom cost estimates – Typical of “engineered” and/or technically complex types of measure where a unique equipment or system configuration needed to be defined and a cost estimate “built up” for the specific technical details of the measure
71
Data Collection and Analysis ProcessLabor Cost Estimates
1.101.10Fresno
1.101.10Statewide average
1.081.11Sacramento
1.041.04San Diego
1.071.06Los Angeles
1.221.21San Francisco
Non-residentialResidentialCity
1.101.10Fresno
1.101.10Statewide average
1.081.11Sacramento
1.041.04San Diego
1.071.06Los Angeles
1.221.21San Francisco
Non-residentialResidentialCity
Labor cost estimates generally base on manhours required to complete task times appropriate wage rate Wage rate based on trade (electrician, plumber, etc.) and geographic location of activity RS Means used to provide wage rate and location adjustment multipliers
72
1. Website and on-site cost surveys of retailers2. Cost quotes from manufacturers, manufacturers
sales representatives, and distributors3. Cost surveys of contractors and design
professionals.4. Cost data from in California DSM program files,
particularly local programs5. Secondary sources and reports
Data Collection and Analysis Process Cost Data Sources
73
Data Collection and Analysis Process Cost Analysis Workbooks
Contact Log Data sources and contact information
Raw Data Raw cost data supplied by data sources
Data for Analysis Raw cost data organized for analysis purposes
Cost Analysis Measure cost analysis and modeling
Cost Results Final incremental and installed cost data for each measure and measure variation
Statistical Summary Summary of statistical variables for each measure including range, confidence and standard deviation.
Excel based cost analysis workbook developed for each measure.
Each workbook has 5 sections:
74
Data Collection and Analysis Process Cost Analysis Workbooks – Raw Data
Example of the ‘Raw Data’ section of the High Efficiency Electric Clothes Dryer workbook
Log IDMeasure ID Measure Description Mfr Model No. Size
Size Units Eff Eff Units Volts
Base or Measure Cost Type
Cost Basis (Eq., Incr. Eq., Inst. or Incr. Inst.)
Equipment Cost (per unit)
RF_34 D03-941 High Efficiency Electric Clothes Dryer with Moisture Sensor. Maytag MDE6400A 6.0 Cu Ft 924 kWh/year 240 Base MSRP equipment $565.00
RF_34 D03-941 High Efficiency Electric Clothes Dryer with Moisture Sensor. Maytag MDE2400A 6.0 Cu Ft 924 kWh/year 240 Base MSRP equipment $565.00
RF_34 D03-941 High Efficiency Electric Clothes Dryer with Moisture Sensor. Maytag SDE3606A 7.1 Cu Ft 924 kWh/year 240 Base MSRP equipment $442.00
RF_29 D03-941 High Efficiency Electric Clothes Dryer with Moisture Sensor. Whirlpool GEW9868K 7.4 Cu Ft 950 kWh/year 120 Measure MSRP equipment $699.00
RF_29 D03-941 High Efficiency Electric Clothes Dryer with Moisture Sensor. Whirlpool GEW9868P 7.4 Cu Ft 950 kWh/year 240 Measure MSRP equipment $649.00
RF_29 D03-941 High Efficiency Electric Clothes Dryer with Moisture Sensor. Whirlpool GEQ9800P 7.4 Cu Ft 950 kWh/year 240 Measure MSRP equipment $499.00
Tech Specs
75
Data Collection and Analysis Process Cost Analysis Workbooks – Cost Results
Example of the ‘Results’ section of the High Efficiency Electric Clothes Dryer workbook
Measure IDMeasure Name
Measure Description
Base Description
Delivery Channel Application
Energy Star?
Purchase Volume Cost Basis
Base Equipment Cost
Measure Equipment Cost
Incremental Equipment Cost
Cost Unit
D03-941
Efficient Clothes Dryer
High Efficiency Electric Clothes Dryer with Moisture Sensor.
Electric Clothes Dryer EF=3.01. Single Family, 416 dry cycles Retail ROB/NEW No low INCR/INCR $319 $557 $238 Dryer
76
Data Collection and Analysis Process Cost Analysis Workbooks – Statistical Summary
Example of the ‘Statistical Summary’ section of the High Efficiency Electric Clothes Dryer workbook
Measure IDAnalysis Method # Obs Mean Median Min Max # Obs Mean Median Min Max
D03-941 Average 40 $557 $525 $261 $869 38 $319 $296 $224 $509
BaseMeasure
77
Overview of Cost Data Changes from 2001 to 2005
The scope of some measures has been expanded• CFL size categories expanded• More evaporative cooler options• Windows expanded to include non-res. high performance
glazing
Several measures eliminated or reduced in scope• Most T8 systems eliminated with the exception of premium
efficiency and dimming T8 ballasts• Eliminated coin-operated high efficiency clothes washers
and hot water heater tank wrap
78
Overview of Cost Data Changes from 2001 to 2005
New measures and measure categories have been added• Vending machine occupancy sensor controls• High-efficiency office copiers• High-efficiency commercial cooking equipment• Premium-efficiency motors • Heat pump water heaters, point-of-use water heaters,
water circulation pump timeclocks• Swimming pool pumps• Room AC and PTAC broken out as distinct measures
Types and sizes of some applications has been expanded
79
High-Efficiency Refrigerators Example
Overview of Cost Data Changes from 2001 to 2005
Capacity (cubic feet)
Type
15.5 Top
Side
Bottom
23 Top
Side
Bottom
Energy Analysis Spec Capacity (cubic feet)
Type
15 Top
Side
20 Top
Side
25 Top
Side
30 Top
Side
2001 Cost Spec
2005 Cost Spec
Capacity (cubic feet)
Type
15.5 Top
Side
Bottom
20 Top
Side
Bottom
23 Top
Side
Bottom
25 Top
Side
Bottom
30 Top
Side
Bottom
80
Overview of Cost Data Changes from 2001 to 2005
Examples of cost adjustments• Average CFL prices decreasing• Installed (full) cost of furnaces up by factor of 2;
equipment up about 30%; installation cost estimate up by factor of 4
• Energy Star refrigerator prices down over 30% on average
81
Changes in Cost Data Some Examples: CFLs
Market trends changes: CFLs • Changes in the manufacturing base -- increase in scale of
imports resulting in lower cost products• Increasing product availability -- only 10% of CFLs purchased in
2002 were from big 3 mfrs (Philips, Osram, GE) with smaller mfrs getting shelf placement with lower prices
• Changes in distribution -- web sales increasing, B2C sales increased from $59B in 2000 to $428B in 2004
• Prices trending down: • NWEEA estimates avg. price down from $14-$28 in 1997 to $5-$10 in
2002• Compared to 2001 DEER, average CFL prices for low volume
purchases down by 29%; high volume down by 48%
82
Changes in Cost Data Some Examples: CFL
Retail Price Spread of Integral CFL Lamps
$0.00
$5.00
$10.00
$15.00
$20.00
$25.00
7 9 11 13 14 15 16 18 19 20 23 25 26 28 32 36 50
Lamp Wattage
Ob
serv
ed R
etai
l C
ost
($)
Average
Retail price spread for integral CFL lamps
83
Cost Data Collection and Analysis Process
Cost data available in four formats1. Cost data included in measure details from website
for each run ID2. More detailed ‘Cost Data’ file available under
Supporting Documents as a downloadable file• Organized by measure category• More details and measure variations
3. Cost Analysis Workbooks – most detailed4. In hard copy in the final project report
84
How to find the most applicable cost information?• Measure detail pages for each run ID - the per unit
equipment measure cost of $13.65 for all 90% residential furnaces• This provides an average cost based on a 100,000 Btu furnace
• The ‘Cost Data’ file under ‘Supporting Documents’ provides prices on a range of furnace sizes • This provides a range of costs for 90% AFUE furnaces from
60,000 Btu to 140,000 Btu. Per unit costs ($/KBtu) ranges from $21.53 to $12.13, respectively
• The cost workbook section – Can use either statistical summary or individual price observations• For example, the per unit equipment measure cost for 90%
AFUE 100,000 furnaces ranges from to $12.31 to $16.52 based on 9 observations
Cost Data Defining Cost Parameters
85
Itron developed a consolidated list of all measures Common units were identified and where possible,
made consistent between energy impacts and cost Summit Blue developed point estimates for each
measure in the consolidated list and populated the “Consolidated Measure” spreadsheet
Itron utilized this “Consolidated Measure” spreadsheet as a series of look-up tables for populating DEER
Integration of Costs and Savings Data
86
Questions/Comments?
87
Guide to DEER and Some Results
Website and Test Drive
Presenters:
Gary Cullen – Itron
Jeff Hirsch – JJ Hirsch & Associates
Floyd Keneipp – Summit Blue
88
Website Considerations
Two Levels of Savings Customer savings - for system savings and early
replacement savings. “Above Code” Savings - for all measures affected
by an energy code or standard (reportable savings for replace on burnout.)
Common Units The energy and cost common units are distinct Over 90% of cases, they are the same When different, distinctly identified
89
Website Considerations
Application – indicates if the cost is for:• Retrofit (RET) - replacing a working system with a new
technology or adding a technology.• Replace-on-burnout (ROB) - replacing a technology at the
end of its useful life • New construction or major renovation (NEW) - installing a
technology in a new construction or major renovation Cost Basis – indicates if the cost is:
• Incremental (INCR) - the differential cost between a base technology and an energy efficient technology
• Installed (FULL) - the full or installed cost of the measure including equipment, labor, overhead & profit (OH&P)
90
Website Navigation – Opening Screen
91
Website Navigation – Browse Measures
92
Website Navigation – Select Subcategory
93
Website Navigation – Review Summary Page - Top
94
Website Navigation –Summary Page Information
Area #1 - Summary Identification of 13 variables
Area #2 – Further Filtering Options Climate Zone, Building Type, Vintage, Savings
Unit Area #3 – Sorting Order Area #4 – Download Measure Detain in
Excel There are Excel spreadsheet limitations
95
Website Navigation – Review Summary Page - Bottom
96
Website Navigation –Summary Page Information
At bottom is listing of how many measures are included in this summary A large number would indicate a need for further
filtering in order to do the download
97
Website Navigation – Detailed Measure Information
98
Website Navigation – Detailed Measure information - Top
99
Website Navigation – Detailed Measure information - Bottom
100
Supporting Documents Section
Website Users Guide Net-to-Gross Ratios Table Access Tables Glossary Cost Data Cost Data User’s Guide New EUL Estimates 7-14-05 (SERA Report) Consolidated Measure Data
101
Supporting Documents Section – Consolidated Measure Data
102
Questions/Comments?
103
DEER UPDATE PLAN
Presenter:Mike Rufo, Quantum Inc.
Measure Savings Team Itron, J. J. Hirsch Associates, Quantum Inc, SynergyMeasure Cost TeamSummit Blue Consulting, Heschong-Mahone Group
104
Planning for DEER Updates and Linkages to EM&V Objectives
ID and discuss DEER-related Issues ID and discuss DEER-related EM&V needs Recommendations for future DEER updates Recommendations for improved EM&V-DEER linkages
Approach Interviews with Joint Staff, IOUs, others Review of EM&V studies and plans Lessons learned from current and past studies
Deliverables Report/chapter on issues and recommendations Prioritized list of detailed measurement needs
105
Key Update Issues
Guidelines/Requirements for DEER Use DEER Update Process Energy Savings Methods and Sources Baseline Calibration and Load Shapes Segmentation and Averaging Costing Issues Types of Data to Include Measure Coverage and Allocation of Resources Measure-specific and EM&V Linkage Issues Documentation
106
DEER Update Process Most suggest DEER be preferred (default) source of
program planning data, some JS prefer mandatory Deviations permitted if data not available in DEER If data in DEER, demonstrate why alternate data superior If not in DEER, increased regulatory review, higher likelihood of
ex post measurement of savings Comprehensively updated at least every three years
Process put in place to allow updates to specific values to occur more often (every year or half year) – Start Jan. ‘06
Next comprehensive update should be completed by end of ‘07 Update based on availability of superior information Strive for expected value orientation
Neither conservative nor optimistic… But lean conservative in face of great uncertainty and risk
Involve diverse group of experts
107
Savings Methods and Calibration Three primary methods:
Engineering calcs, building simulations, eval/field/lab data
All methods should be calibrated Calibration has several elements
General baseline (e.g., EUIs/UECs, EFLH) Specific baseline (e.g., duct leakage, thermostat behavior) Savings (e.g., evaluation results) Load shapes (not a primary focus of current DEER)
Key sources RASS, CEUS, tracking and billing data, eval/field/lab data
Tradeoffs among accuracy, simplicity, transparency
108
Segmentation and Averaging
General/default approach - reflect market average Extensive segmentation for weather sensitive
Btype, vintage, CZ – 1,680 combos
Program managers desire data for sub-segments Less efficient portion of pop Groups with specific characteristics
Inclusion of sub-segment data should be considered But with caution, can backfire (e.g., t-stats in ’01 DEER) PMs must have plausible approach to targeting
For both segments and sub-segments Need to include market weights Default average results across segments
109
Costing Issues
Clearer measure specs and better/earlier integration w. savings task
Systematize the pricing process to extent possible Index certain costing elements to industry recognized pricing
methods and resources Conduct more frequent, targeted and less expansive updates Integrate cost data collection and reporting into program
delivery (and evaluation) if possible Increase importance and resources for cost analysis
Historically, costs are step-child to savings As important to TRC B-C ratio as savings
110
Types of Data to Include
Interviewees asked which of following to include: energy savings, peak savings, load shape, cost, effective
useful life (EUL), net to gross ratio (NTGR), penetration and saturation information, potential study results
Most responded that all of above should be included, several said with exception of NTGRs
Additional elements suggested included carbon, total source BTU, and water impacts
We recommend including, at a minimum: Energy & peak savings, load shapes (could be reduced
form), costs, EULs, market weights tied to segments
NTGR incorporation needs more consideration
111
Measure Coverage and Allocation of Resources DEER has never included all measures
Focus on prescriptive-type measures Focus on prototypical measures Scope/resource tradeoffs
Limited criteria-based allocation of resources Small impact measures sometimes absorb
disproportionate resources
Future efforts should prioritize based on Contribution to program areas and portfolio, potential Cost-effectiveness and associated uncertainty
List of measures to add compiled More effort needed on custom (EM&V and DEER)
112
Measure-specific and EM&V Linkage Issues Many difficult measure issues Lack of appropriate and reliable evaluation data List developed of measure-specific evaluation needs Need evaluations to produce measure-, segment-,
and parameter-level results (Pre-98 impact evals focused on program realization rates)
Importance of pre-measurement Some issues beg for controlled experiments
Integration between DEER and Protocols teams DEER team need for direct access to eval data
113
Measure-Level Issues
Primary Sector Category IssueAll General Better Alignment Between EM&V Results and DEER InputsAll General Better Characterization of Uncertainty Around DEER EstimatesAll General Further Effort to Calibrate and Segment Base ConsumptionAll General Inclusion of Load Shape DataAll General Inclusion of Measure Packages/InteractionsResidential HVAC High Efficiency Equipment - Energy and Peak Savings (EER/SEER issue)Residential HVAC Room A/C - Hours of Operation and SavingsResidential HVAC Duct Sealing - Parameters and SavingsResidential HVAC HVAC Practices - Parameters and Savings (e.g., refrigerant charging)Residential HVAC Programmable Thermostats - Behavior and SavingsResidential HVAC Evaporative Coolers Impacts (including comfort)Residential Lighting CFL Average Hours of OperationResidential Lighting CFL Other Issues (e.g., in-service rates, base wattages, replacement, etc.)Residential Appliances Clothes Washers - SavingsResidential Pool Pump Pool Pumps - Operation Hours, Wattages, and Savings Non-Residential HVAC Documentation and Calibration of Equivalent Full Load Hours of OperationNon-Residential HVAC Definitions and Baselines for AC and Chillers Non-Residential Lighting CFL Average Hours of Operation (e.g., larger samples, more segments)Non-Residential Lighting CFL Other Issues (e.g., screw-in vs. hard wired, re-install behavior/re-rebates)
Non-Residential Lighting Other Non-residential Lighting Issues (e.g., EFLH by tech and segment)Non-Residential Refrigeration Refrigeration - Savings & Costs (integration, expanded analysis)Non-Residential Motors Motors - Parameters and Base Case Assumptions (e.g., rewind vs. new motors)
Non-Residential All Custom Measure Savings and Costs (e.g., calculators, prototypical cases, eval)Non-Residential Lighting New Construction Savings and Costs Linkage (e.g., design features to beat 05 T24)
Non-Residential Windows New Construction Savings and Costs Linkage (e.g., daylight/HVAC)
114
Documentation
Strong desire for highly detailed documentation Parameters, assumptions, and sources
Electronically-linked documentation also desired Explanations of database fields Appropriate warnings or caveats
Quality of documentation tied to decision to use Given DEER’s importance, level of documentation
needed greater than for many other projects Adequate resources must be allocated Documentation must be timely Database preferred to website views due to volume
of data and need for analysis
115
Questions/Comments?