### ERNEST ORLANDO LAWRENCE BERKELEY NATIONAL LABORATORY ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT DIVISION, ENERGY ANALYSIS PROGRAM I CYCLOTRON ROAD, MS 90-4000 BERKELEY, CA 94720



### To: Kyle Pitsor and Lake Coulson, NEMA From: Barbara Atkinson, Diane Fisher, Jiang Lin and Isaac Turiel, LBNL Re: Response to questions from NEMA 

### Date: May 20, 1996 Question 1: The data in Tables B.4 through B.6 represent the system shares for three fixture types for existing buildings in 1992. Note that system shares are weighted by lamp lumen output and luminaire CU. They are derived from Xenergy audits performed in the years 1990 - 1995, as described in the draft report on page B-19. These audits are assumed to represent the existing stock in the COMMEND base year (1992). The existing building stock changes each year as old equipment is retired,system conversions are performed,new buildings are added and old buildings are demolished

.Tables I and 2 show the resulting system shares for existing commercial and industrial sector buildings,respectively, for the period 1995 - 2030 in five year intervals. The data in Tables B.8 through B. 10 represent the system shares for three fixture types in new buildings in 1993. These system shares change each year until the year 2000, after which they remain constant. (LBNL does not have predictions of the ballast or lamp market mix after the year 2000.) The system shares for 1993 and 2000 are derived from the ballast and lamp market shares analyzed by the Lighting Research Institute for those years; see page B-22. The COMMEND model is then calibrated so that the system shares projected for the year 2000 match those calculated from the LRI data. The equations used in that calibration also produce shares for the years between 1993 and 2000. The resulting system shares for the years 1993, 1995 and 2000 are shown in Table 3. Question 2: Throughout the analysis period, when a fluorescent ballast reaches the end of its useful life, the model assumes that it is replaced by a ballast of the same type (following typical practice). The exception is when that ballast type is no longer available on the market. This occurs in the base case in 1991 when the standard magnetic ballast is no longer permitted by the NAECA standards; when this ballast dies it is replaced by an energy-efficient magnetic ballast. In the efficiency scenarios, certain ballasts are no longer available; when a ballast of this type dies it is replaced by the ballast with the next-highest efficiency level. Question 3: The conversion rates are 5.5 % per year for 4-foot systems, 2.5 % per year for 8- foot systems, and 7.5 % per year for 8-foot HO systems. These rates remain the same throughout the analysis period, and they apply to the remaining stock. In other words, in the first year (1993), 5.5 % of 4-foot magnetic ballasts with T12 lamps are converted to electronic ballasts with

### T8 lamps, the next year 5.5 % of the remaining T12/magnetic systems are converted, etc.

The system conversion rates were developed during calibration of the model. Using 1992 as the base year, a forecast for 1993 was performed. Then system conversion rates were used so that the 1993 predicted ballast shipment data agreed reasonably well with NEMA's estimates for 1993 ballast shipments. Question 4: One does not expect total shipments to track floor space because shipments are a result of three factors; they are replacements, system conversions and new construction. What is expected however (and does occur), is that shipments for new construction should follow floor space projections. Figure 1 shows ballast sales follow floor space projections for new construction. Although floor space growth tends to increase the number of ballasts installed, the shift from magnetic to electronic ballasts reduces the number of ballasts needed for the same space due to two factors. The primary effect occurs because the number of lamps per ballast changes: in 3- and 4-lamp fixtures, two magnetic ballasts are replaced by a single 3- or 4-lamp electronic ballast. Secondarily, in new buildings, the electronic ballasts are more efficacious, allowing fewer system to provide the same illuminance. The model assumes that fixture spacing in new buildings is, on average, flexible enough to accommodate this.
The effectfrom conversions described in the paragraph above is greater in the early years, when a larger absolute number of magnetic ballasts are available for conversion. This causes fewer ballast shipments in these years. It is also worth noting that the ballast installations reported in Table 5.8 are secondary outputs of the COMMEND model.They do not directly affect the energy consumption results of the model. Note that the lighting central energy equation in section B.3.2 does not contain equipment counts; the number of systems of each type is calculated by COMMEND in the following manner. Given the other model inputs in the lighting central energy equation (section B.3.2), and the delivered lumen shares for each system, the model calculates the number of systems necessary to produce the annual kWh energy consumption from the Annual Energy Outlook 1995 used in the calibration. The number of ballasts in each system is then used to calculate the overall number of ballasts reported in Table B.8. Question 5: Tables 4 and 5 show market shares for ballast shipments in 1994, 1995 and 2000. Table 4 shows the market shares in the same format as in Table 4.22. Table 5 shows market shares separately for 4 foot, 8 foot and 8 foot HO systems. Question 6: Installed ballasts are not obtained through sampling or a survey. We have calculated installed ballasts in two ways: one is through COMMEND output and the other is through use of the Xenergy database. The COMMEND estimation gives 568 million ballasts ( 485 commercial and

### 83 industrial) in the building stock in 1992. Figure 2 shows total ballast stock over the period

1992-2030. Note that ballast stock is not an input in COMMEND and does not directly affect energy use estimates. Using the Xenergy database, we estimated that there are 651 million ballasts installed ( 558 commercial and 93 industrial) in 1992. These results were not used as input to the COMMEND model. Question 7: We are investigating a question that was added to the original list on May 17th during a conversation between Isaac Turiel and Bob Wisbey. It concerns Table 5.6 which shows EUIs for the commercial and industrial sectors. For the commercial sector, EUIs are seen to increase slightly in later years. This is unexpected. It should be noted that EUIs are not an input to COMMEND.TABLE 1.



### system Shares within Fixture Type: Average Share M
Commercial Sector1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030
4-Foot Fixture SMAG/F40T12 20.7 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 SMAG/F40T12/ES 21.1 6.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 EMAG/F40T12 12.8 1.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 CCUT/F40T12 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 ELEC/F40T12 1.4 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 EMAG/F40T12/ES 13.1 15.1 5.3 3.1 2.5 2.2 2.0 1.8 CCUT/F40T12/ES 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 ELEC/F40T12/ES 1.5 2.5 1.6 1.0 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 EMAG/F40T12/ES/RE 0.0 24.8 32.8 31.5 28.2 1 25.3 22.8 20.7 CCUT/F40T12/ES/RE 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 ELEC/F40T12/ES/RE 0.0 1.9 4.2 5.6 6.5 7.1 7.6 8.0 EMAG/F32T8 0.6 1.0 1.3 1.6 1.8 2.1 2.3 2.4 CCUT/F32T8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 ELEC/F32T8/RS 4.3 6.9 8.0 8.6 9.0 9.4 9.7 9.9 ELEC/F32T8/IS 24.1 39.1 45.2 48.3 50.8 52.9 54.6 56.1 Total FL4 100.0 100.0 98.7 99.9 99.9 99.9 100.0 100.0 8-FootFixture SMAG8/2F96T12 35.2 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 SMAG8/2F96T12/ES 21.3 17.3 3.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 EMAG8/2F96T12 17.7 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 EMAG8/2F96T12/ES 14.5 50.8 53.0 46.6 40.7 35.4 31.3 28.1 EMAG8/2F96T12/RE 2.1 8.7 8.9 7.8 6.7 5.8 5.1 4.6 ELEC8/2F96T12 1.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 ELEC8/2F96T12/ES 7.9 20.6 30.6 39.1 46.1 51.5 55.8 59.1 ELEC8/2F96T12/RE 0.3 1.9 3.9 5.4 6.3 7.1 7.7 8.1 Total FL8 100.0100.0100.0 98.8 99.8 99.9 99.9 99.9 8-Foot HighOutput Fixture SMAG8/2F96T12/HO 27.7 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 SMAG8/2F96T12/HO/ES 25.2 9.9 2.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 EMAG8/2F96T12/HO 11.8 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 EMAG8/2F96T12/HO/ES 4.5 19.5 24.9 26.2 19.7 15.4 12.3 10.3 EMAG8/2F96T12/HO/RE 7.3 26.4 17.5 6.0 4.6 3.3 2.5 2.1 CCUT8/2F96T12/HO 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 CCUT8/2F96T12/HO/ES 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 CCUT8/2F96T12/HO/RE 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 ELEC8/2F96T12/HO 1.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 ELEC8/2F96T12/HO/ES 21.3 41.7 51.6 62.1 69.6 74.1 77.0 78.9 ELEC8/2F96T12/HO/RE 0.6 1.7 3.3 4.7 5.8 7.0 7.9 8.6 Total FL8 HO 100.0100.0100.0 99.1 99.8 99.9 99.9 100.0

SMAG=Standard Magnetic EMAG=Energy-Efficient Magnetic CCUT = Cathode Cutout ELEC=ElectronicTABLE 2.



### industrial Sector1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030
4-Foot Fixture SMAG/F4OT12 23.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 SMAG/F40T12/ES 24.5 9.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 EMAG/F40T12 12.8 1.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 CCUT/F40T12 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 ELEC/F40T12 1.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 EMAG/F40T12/ES 17.8 19.3 7.6 4.2 3.7 3.8 3.4 3.4 CCUT/F40T12/ES 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 ELEC/F40T12/ES 1.7 1.9 0.5 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.4 EMAG/F40T12/ES/RE 0.0 30.9 46.7 47.2 44.9 42.2 39.9 37.4 CCUT/F40T12/ES/RE 0.0 0.1 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 ELEC/F40T12/ES/RE 0.0 1.1 2.7 3.2 3.5 3.8 4.1 4.4 EMAG/F32T8 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.6 0.8 0.9 CCUT/F32T8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 ELEC/F32T8/RS 2.8 5.4 6.3 6.7 7.0 7.3 7.7 8.0 ELEC/F32T8/IS 15.9 30.5 35.3 37.6 39.6 41.5 43.4 45.2 Total FL4 100.0100.0 99.7 99.7 99.8 99.9 99.9 99.9
8-Foot Fixture SMAG8/2F96T12 39.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 SMAG8/2F96T12/ES 21.4 22.3 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 EMAG8/2F96T12 16.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 EMAG8/2F96T12/ES 12.9 49.8 57.8 49.0 41.8 36.2 31.8 28.3 E4AG8/2196T12/RE 1.6 9.3 11.2 9.1 7.7 6.6 5.8 5.1 ELEC8/2F96T12 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 ELEC8/2F96T12/ES 6.7 17.2 27.0 35.9 43.5 49.5 54.2 57.8 ELEC8/2F96T12/RE 0.1 1.4 3.6 5.6 6.7 7.4 8.0 8.5 Total FL8 100.0100.0100.0 99.6 99.6 99.7 99.7 99.7 8-Foot High output Fixture SMAG8/2F96T12/HO 21.6 0 . 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 SMAG8/2F96T12/HO/ES 28.4 4.7 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 EMAG8/2F96T12/HO 12.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 EMA38/2F96T12/HO/ES 6.4 24.0 28.3 29.2 21.3 16.6 13.6 11.7 EMAG8/2F96T12/H0/RE 7.4 28.2 17.4 4.5 3.6 2.7 2.3 1.9 CCUT8/2F96T12/HO 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 CCUT8/2F96T12/HO/ES 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 CCUT8/2F96T12/HO/RE 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 ELEC8/2F96T12/HO 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 ELEC8/2F96T12/HO/ES 22.7 42.0 50.3 61.3 69.3 739
. 76.7 78.5 ELEC8/2F96T12/HO/RE 0.2 1.1 3.3 4.6 5.5 6.5 7.2 7.7 Total FL8 HO 100.0100.0 100.0 99.6 99.8 99.9 99.9 99.9TABLE 3.

mt re within Fixture Tylpe: New Construction Sherew1993 1995 2000
4-Foot Fixture SMAG/F40T12 0.0 0.0 0.0 SMAG/F40T12/ES 0.0 0.0 0.0 EMAG/F40T12 32.3 12.8 0.0 CCUT/F40T12 0.7 0.3 0.0 ELEC/F40T12 11.0 4.6 0.0 EMAG/F40T12/ES 17.6 16.7 1.0 CCUT/F40T12/ES 0.4 0.3 0.0 ELEC/F40T12/ES 6.0 5.9 1.0 EMAG/F40T12/ES/RE 0.0 0.0 7.8 CCUT/F40T12/ES/RE 0.0 0.0 0.2 ELEC/F40T12/ES/RE 0.0 0.0 10.9 EMAG/F32T8 3.9 5.1 3.9 CCUT/F32T8 0.1 0.1 0.1 ELEC/F32T8/RS 4.2 8.1 11.3 ELEC/F32T8/YS 23.8 46.0 64.0 Total FL4 100.0 100.0 100.0
8-Foot Fixture SMAG8/2F96T12 0.0 0.0 0.0 SMAGB/2F96T12/ES 0.0 0.0 0.0 EMAG8/2F96T12 78.0 0.0 0.0 EMAG8/2F96T12/ES 5.0 40.8 35.4 EMAG8/2F96T12/RE 1.0 6.4 5.1 ELEC8/2F96T12 15.0 0.0 0.0 ELEC8/2F96T12/ES 1.0 47.6 53.5 ELEC8/2F96T12/RE 0.0 5.2 6.1 Total FL8 100.0 100.0 100.0 8-Foot High Output Fixture SMAG8/2F96T12/HO 0.0 0.0 0.0 SMAG8/2F96T12/HO/ES 0.0 0.0 0.0 EMAGS/2F96T12/HO 75.0 0.0 0.0 EMAG8/2F96T12/HO/ES 0.0 8.3 36.7 EMAG8/2F96T12/HO/RE 0.0 58.9 4.0 CCUTS/2F96T12/HO 0.0 0.0 0.0 CCUT8/2F96T12/HO/ES 0.0 0.2 0.7 CCUT8/2F96T12/HO/RE 0.0 1.2 0.1 ELEC8/2F96T12/HO 25.0 0.0 0.0 ELEC8/2F96T12/HO/ES 0.0 11.9 52.6 ELEC8/2F96T12/HO/RE 0.0 19.6 6.0 Total FL8 HO 100.0 100.0 100.0TABLE 4-



### Ballast MarketShare by Lamp/BallastSystem (ref: Table 4.22)

19941 1995 

### 2000 MagneticElectronic MagneticElectronic MagneticElectroni 1 Lamp F40T12 4.3% 

### 0.4% 4.3% 0.3% 3.8% 0.4% 2 Lamp F40T12 

### 20.9% 1.5% 21.3%I 1.3% 20.1% 1.0% 3 Lamp F40T12 

### 3.8% 0.6% 3.6% 0.5% 3.0% 0.6% 

### 4 Lamp F40T12 13.8% 

### 1.2% 3.8%I 1.0% 13.1% 

### 1.0%1. 2 Lamp F96T12 9.9% 

### 2.3% 11.8%1 2.8% 11.8% 

### 3.7% 2 Lames F96T121HO 1.3% 

### 1.2% 1.4% 1.2% 1.6% 

### 0.7% I Lamp F32T8 0.3% 18.7% 

### 0.3% 18.7% 0.3% 18.3% 

### 2 Lamp F32T8 0,4-/.F 3.8% 0.4%I 3.9% 0.5% 

### 4.2% 3 Lamp F32T8 0.1% 4.2% 0.2%1 4. 0.2% 5.5% 4 Lamp F32T8 

# 0.1% 11.1% 0.1% 11.0% 0.1% 

### 9.9%0TABLE 5.



## BallastMarket Share by [.a allast System ref: Table 4.22)

M eticElectronic MagneticIElectronic Mastic

### Electronic 4-Foot T12 1 La F40T12 

### 5.0% 0.5% 5.0°/®1 0.4%1 4.6% 0.4% 2 Lamp F40T12 24.5% 1.8% 25.0%1 1.5% 24.5% 1.3% 3 Lamp F40T12 4.4% 0.7% 4.2%1 0.6% 

### 3.7% 0.7% 4 Lam F40T12 16.2% 1.5% 16.2%1 

### 1.2% 16.0% 

### 1.3% 4-Foot T8 1 Lamp F32T8 0.3% 21.9% 0.3% 21.9% 0.4% 22.3% 2 Lamp F32T8 0.4% 4.4% 0.5%1 4.6% 0.6°/a 

### 5.1% 3 Lamp F32T8 0.2% 5.0% 0.2%1 5.4% 0.2% 6.7% 4 Lamp F32T8 0.1% 13.0% 0.1%) 12.9% 0.2% 12.1% 

### 8-Foot 2 Lamp F96T12 80.9% 19.1% 76.3% 23.3% 76.3% 23.7% 8-Foot/HO 2 Later F96T12/HO{ 51.0%1 49.0%1 

### 55.0%1 45.0% 68.8% 31.2%

# IFIGURE 1.

New Building Floor Space . and Now Construction Ballast Sales

140 30

120

100

I E
w 80

60

40 +

20 -P +25

$ 20

+10

+5

0 Saftstsabs i

Floor Space

6ry ^fl P C') N P 0o£oZ 6ZOZ 9ZOZ LZOZ 9zoz szoz Vzoz Ezw Zzoz tzoz
ozoz 61OZ 9tOZ LtOZ 9tOZ SLOZ btoz Etoz Ztoz

otoz 6Ooz 9ooz LOOZ 90oo Soot tool Eooz
zooz loot o0oz 6661